http://existenz.se/out.php?id=71056

 

MODERATOR NOTICE
!WARNING!, video presented in the article that is linked is graphic, shows blood and a animal being hurt/killed by a NYPD Police Officer shooting it, you have been warned. -JAM

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by JAM-Justin35

It's called Excessive Force.

It's called Excessive Force.

 

yep I do not think the police acted wrong,,  :P

THere's no excessive force, the dog just attempted to bite a citizen, then went after one of the cops. The cops did the correct thing as the dog presented a threat to the safety of themselves and the public.

yep I do not think the police acted wrong,,  :P

 

Excessive force means that the police DID act wrong... It means they used more force than what was needed to resolve the situation.

 

In regards to this video, I'm not quite sure if excessive force is the proper term. The dog did run at the officer, but I'm really not sure if the officer was justified to shoot it. I guess that's up for the courts to decide!

 

But props to the officer, he pulled and fired quite quickly. Good reflexes imo 

Cops shoot whatever and whoever they want and call it "self defense" 

 

 

Just look at long beach last year. Shot I guy over 20 times for holding a garden hose nozel.

 

Shot a guy on the interstate over 50 times.

 

Trigger happy unprofessional people in many many cases. 

 

 

And in others they act very brave and professional.

Take newtown for example. 

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by Beckugan1

The incident at hand is filmed on the article.

No

as some1 who is heading into law enforcement and in the process of getting hired,

I defend cops all the time but that was def excessive force

Taser maybe? Why shoot a dog PROTECTING his owner? R.I.P. Innocent dog.

I want to make it clear that I never defend cops when they are in the wrong. However, I can see why the shooting is justified. For one thing, the owner should've kept control of the dog, and failed to do so when the dog bit the person on the sidewalk. I didn't even see a leash on it. The dog already bit someone, proving it was violent, and attempted to charge at a bystander and then at the cop. The only alternative I could've seen was tazing the dog or using a baton, but the dog would've probably been euthanized anyways because of the danger it has already shown. My only issue with this is that a civilian wouldn't of been able to legally shoot a charging dog most of the time (especially in NY), but the cop was able to.

 

EDIT: I read more of the story. I take back some of what I said about the owner controlling the dog. However, I would rather see the dog shot than see someone die on the sidewalk because their dog prevented their help.

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by c13

I think the actions were justified. You've got to remember that the officers have to make split second decisions. He's got an agitated dog running towards him, I know i'd most likely shoot it. 

 

Of course, this is just my opinion, you may or may not disagree and that's fair enough.

Taser maybe? Why shoot a dog PROTECTING his owner? R.I.P. Innocent dog.

Because what the dog thinks it's doing doesn't matter. Unless the dog is a trained paramedic, it isn't helping its owner by keeping people away.

Also, *can* you really tase a dog? I don't think they've been generally tested against dogs. Tasing a person only actually stops them for a few seconds. Past that point, it is only effective because of 2 things: the person who is tased doesn't want it to happen again, and knows what to do to stop that (i.e. stop moving), and the police can move in and physically restrain them. Handcuffs don't really work on a dog, and it probably doesn't know how to avoid being tased again. So, you'd most likely result in the dog going down, getting up, and attacking again.

EDIT: Also, remember that you don't have to minimize force against animals to anywhere NEAR what you have to do against people. Protecting human life and welfare trumps protecting animal life and welfare in all cases. One thing they teach us in driver's ed is that, if a (small) animal runs on to the road in front of us and there's traffic, to try to avoid swerving wildly or slamming on the brakes. The reason is that swerving wildly can easily lead to a crash, which can hurt people. The risk of hurting people is worse than hitting the animal. (obviously, you don't *want* to run an animal over, but crashing a car is worse)

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by cp702

Added Moderator Notice to OPs main post just in case any younger members come to this article, you've all been warned that this is indeed graphic/possibly offensive material. This site is designed around a Rated M for Mature (Over 17 Years Old) game, thus I see no reason to take such content down, especially since it is related to our main view which is Police Work.

 

Side note: This does not give the right to post content such as abuse towards animals/people or other content that is meant to cause shock/digust to users (Such as Gore .gifs) on this site. The only reason why this certain article is allowed is to open people up to discussion on the Officers decision, as well as it is related to Police Work, which is clearly one of our main discussions on this site.

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by JAM-Justin35

These are the people that are supposed to protect me and the city I live in, I believe the NYPD is one of the most trigger happy and excessive force police departments in the United States, I have lived here for my entire life and I am not surprised when I hear or see something like this anymore. Like Tom said above, it is my opinion and if you disagree, that is your opinion. 

Pardon my language but this stuff pisses me right off, it's alright for a cop to shoot a dog that was CLEARLY protecting it's owner and letting the cop know to back off, but yet if i shot a Police Dog, i'd go to jail for the rest of my life, this stuff, is not alright in my book's he could have tazed it at the very least.. they may have a job to do, but someone tell me where it makes sense to shoot a dog when it's duty is to protect it's master against stuff like this, a dog doesn't see a cop, he see's aggression toward's his master, yet the fucker shot it anyway, my dog is scared shitless of police, he cower's at the site of them, no idea why..

Pardon my language but this stuff pisses me right off, it's alright for a cop to shoot a dog that was CLEARLY protecting it's owner and letting the cop know to back off, but yet if i shot a Police Dog, i'd go to jail for the rest of my life, this stuff, is not alright in my book's he could have tazed it at the very least.. they may have a job to do, but someone tell me where it makes sense to shoot a dog when it's duty is to protect it's master against stuff like this, a dog doesn't see a cop, he see's aggression toward's his master, yet the fucker shot it anyway, my dog is scared shitless of police, he cower's at the site of them, no idea why..

It's the cop's duty to help the person. What the dog thinks doesn't matter, because what the dog is actually doing is harming its owner by not letting people approach them.

Also, I don't think tasing a dog works. Dogs aren't necessarily smart enough to stop when tased.

He had every signal right to shoot that dog, it tried to hurt the officer when the officer was going to try to help its owner. 

It's the cop's duty to help the person. What the dog thinks doesn't matter, because what the dog is actually doing is harming its owner by not letting people approach them.

Also, I don't think tasing a dog works. Dogs aren't necessarily smart enough to stop when tased.

 

And none of us know if the police put him on the ground in the first place, so both of our arguement's don't really matter, there is no reason whatsoever for an officer of the law to not be able to handle a situation without causing harm or not be repromanded for shooting a dog they had no business shooting, pretty sure if a dog was being hit with 30,000 volt's of electricity, it's gonna go down.

And none of us know if the police put him on the ground in the first place, so both of our arguement's don't really matter, there is no reason whatsoever for an officer of the law to not be able to handle a situation without causing harm or not be repromanded for shooting a dog they had no business shooting, pretty sure if a dog was being hit with 30,000 volt's of electricity, it's gonna go down.

 

1st off if you would read the man had a seizure, also tazing the dog? 1st off tasers are alot slower there not good at hitting moving targets, you have to have a good point of aim to hit the person. Also he was moving it more then likely would of missed....

1st off if you would read the man had a seizure, also tazing the dog? 1st off tasers are alot slower there not good at hitting moving targets, you have to have a good point of aim to hit the person. Also he was moving it more then likely would of missed....

 

Yes, tazing the dog, it's not unheard of either, woop's sorry i missed the reading when there was a video right in front of me, my mistake..

Dog being tazered, get's scared and run's off: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Itfr_V424

Edited January 1, 201313 yr by Slimory