Cop shows up at house, draws gun or gun drawn, and shoots dog. Department defends shooting, but doesn't explain why a citizen is held at gunpoint for no apparent reason. Guy is pissed about his dog, I'm pissed about cops displaying the intent to use deadly force before making contact of any kind, you know like, "Hello, I'm offficer gak with AustinPD."
Reports of an Austin police officer shooting a dog while responding to the wrong address on a domestic disturbance call have gone viral, thanks to Facebook.
Austin officials, who have apologized to the dog's owner, said Monday that the officer was defending himself. But a Facebook page titled Justice For Cisco had more than 26,000 "likes" as of Monday evening.
Created by Michael Paxton, the page said an Austin police officer came to Paxton's home in the 2600 block of East Fifth Street at 4:42 p.m. Saturday as Paxton was playing Frisbee in the yard with his blue heeler, Cisco. Paxton went to grab something from his truck, when the officer drew his gun and told him to freeze, the Web page said. Cisco then ran at the officer, who fatally shot the dog.
Paxton did not immediately return emails for comment Monday. Attempts to reach him at home and by phone were unsuccessful.
At an afternoon news conference attended by nearly 20 local media representatives, Sgt. David Daniels said that the officer, Thomas Griffin, was dispatched to handle a disturbance involving an intoxicated couple at the address of Paxton's triplex. Griffin saw Paxton, drew his weapon and told him, "Show me your hands," Daniels said.
"As soon as he did that," Daniels said, "a dog charged him quickly and aggressively."
Daniels said Griffin was upset about the incident but Griffin was "basically in retreat when he fired."
An Austin Police Department supervisor later apologized to Paxton, Griffin said.
Neither Griffin nor Paxton were hurt in the incident. It was unclear Monday whether an investigation into the shooting was ongoing.
Paxton's Facebook page has received comments from as far away as Australia.
I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
the guy should have had his dog on a leash.
Twas on his private property.
Also, the dog could just be looking for attention. You know, like most dogs.
He should be penalized. Perhaps no bonus this year, or some vacation days cut. He should not be fired.
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
the guy should have had his dog on a leash.
Twas on his private property.
Also, the dog could just be looking for attention. You know, like most dogs.
He should be penalized. Perhaps no bonus this year, or some vacation days cut. He should not be fired.
it was a triplex, to me that's 3 houses joined together with a common yard. If his dog likes running up on people the owner should have it on a leash so it doesn't scare people that may walk by.
The cop shouldn't get penalized for this, the owner should get a ticket for not having his dog on a leash.
Depending on the 911 call, the cop might have had good cause to go there with his gun ready.
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
the guy should have had his dog on a leash.
Twas on his private property.
Also, the dog could just be looking for attention. You know, like most dogs.
He should be penalized. Perhaps no bonus this year, or some vacation days cut. He should not be fired.
it was a triplex, to me that's 3 houses joined together with a common yard. If his dog likes running up on people the owner should have it on a leash so it doesn't scare people that may walk by.
The cop shouldn't get penalized for this, the owner should get a ticket for not having his dog on a leash.
Depending on the 911 call, the cop might have had good cause to go there with his gun ready.
The cop went to the wrong house to respond to the 911 call. He showed up, a 50 cm dog ran at him after the officer saw him playing frisbee with his owner, and the cop shot the dog, and scared the gak out the man.
Also, he shouldn't get a ticket for having his dog off a leash on private property.
Cop shot a dog who he didn't need to shoot. Simple as that.
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
the guy should have had his dog on a leash.
Twas on his private property.
Also, the dog could just be looking for attention. You know, like most dogs.
He should be penalized. Perhaps no bonus this year, or some vacation days cut. He should not be fired.
it was a triplex, to me that's 3 houses joined together with a common yard. If his dog likes running up on people the owner should have it on a leash so it doesn't scare people that may walk by.
The cop shouldn't get penalized for this, the owner should get a ticket for not having his dog on a leash.
Depending on the 911 call, the cop might have had good cause to go there with his gun ready.
The cop went to the wrong house to respond to the 911 call. He showed up, a 50 cm dog ran at him after the officer saw him playing frisbee with his owner, and the cop shot the dog, and scared the gak out the man.
Also, he shouldn't get a ticket for having his dog off a leash on private property.
Cop shot a dog who he didn't need to shoot. Simple as that.
dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs. no where in the reports does it say the cop saw the dog playing frisbee. Cop got sent to this house responding to a drunken domestic violence situation. see's a man getting into his truck, where most texans keep their guns. Dog comes charging at him, in that situation shoot the dog.
He came out of his car with his goddamn gun drawn. He went to the wrong adress. I can see no possible way that the man had enough time to grab his fast dog before it got to the officer. To put it bluntly, The officer went in with the intent to stop a violent crime with possible violence, and he shot a innocent dog instead.
Also, in the OP, it says that they were playing Frisbee.
dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs. no where in the reports does it say the cop saw the dog playing frisbee. Cop got sent to this house responding to a drunken domestic violence situation. see's a man getting into his truck, where most texans keep their guns. Dog comes charging at him, in that situation shoot the dog.
Shut up and answer my questions. You don't see the contradiction there, or the lack of introduction.
They probably removed the part where he yells "don't hurt my dog he just wants to play."
Chowderhead wrote:He came out of his car with his goddamn gun drawn. He went to the wrong adress. I can see no possible way that the man had enough time to grab his fast dog before it got to the officer. To put it bluntly, The officer went in with the intent to stop a violent crime with possible violence, and he shot a innocent dog instead.
Also, in the OP, it says that they were playing Frisbee.
He didn't know it was the wrong address. He thought he was at the correct address. the link I posted had the video from his car, he did not walk up on the dog playing frisbee. That's what the owner said they were doing prior to the cop arriving.
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn. You see this dog charging at you barking while the owner is looking in the truck for something. what do you do?
Its always easy to play monday morning quarterback but I can't fault the cop in that situation for shooting the dog.
There had been no issues (at least that have been brought up so far) regarding the dog in question. No late night barking, no terrorizing the mail man, nada. Cop rolls up, rushes in, and when the dog investigates he get a face full of lead for his troubles. Also, this wouldn't have happened had the cop gone to the correct place.
I'm in favor of the dog owner than I am the cop. Cops make mistakes and cover them up frequently.
As for punishment I don't know. He seems a little trigger happy. Psyche evaluation and 6 months suspension without pay.
Krellnus wrote:I don't even know what to say, other than he should probably lose his job, how can AustinPD beleive an apology will make it all better, its not like the cop has accidentally been pushed over, you shot his fething dog!
the guy should have had his dog on a leash.
Twas on his private property.
Also, the dog could just be looking for attention. You know, like most dogs.
He should be penalized. Perhaps no bonus this year, or some vacation days cut. He should not be fired.
A sad day. There would have been gunplay on the Frazzled homestead.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrDwhitey wrote:Frankly, I feel the dog owner should be charged for the policemans time.
And the bullets.
What I think of you and your statement would get me banned.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Chowderhead wrote:He came out of his car with his goddamn gun drawn. He went to the wrong adress. I can see no possible way that the man had enough time to grab his fast dog before it got to the officer. To put it bluntly, The officer went in with the intent to stop a violent crime with possible violence, and he shot a innocent dog instead.
Also, in the OP, it says that they were playing Frisbee.
He didn't know it was the wrong address. He thought he was at the correct address. the link I posted had the video from his car, he did not walk up on the dog playing frisbee. That's what the owner said they were doing prior to the cop arriving.
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn. You see this dog charging at you barking while the owner is looking in the truck for something. what do you do?
Its always easy to play monday morning quarterback but I can't fault the cop in that situation for shooting the dog.
I'll put myself in his boss's shoes. i don't want a gun crazy loser mouthbreather as a cop.
sirlynchmob wrote:
dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs.
Standard Poodles can weigh up to 75-80 pounds, and are much more dangerous than any Heeler.
sirlynchmob wrote:
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn.
Still stupid. Going in with your gun drawn is just as likely to escalate as calm the situation. This wasn't a SWAT team on a raid, it was a beat cop responding to a routine incident in which his best protection is the uniform he's wearing.
Frazzled wrote:
I'll put myself in his boss's shoes. i don't want a gun crazy loser mouthbreather as a cop.
Yep.
I wouldn't fire him on the spot, but he would definitely find himself under great scrutiny that may lead to his firing.
Chowderhead wrote:He came out of his car with his goddamn gun drawn. He went to the wrong adress. I can see no possible way that the man had enough time to grab his fast dog before it got to the officer. To put it bluntly, The officer went in with the intent to stop a violent crime with possible violence, and he shot a innocent dog instead.
Also, in the OP, it says that they were playing Frisbee.
He didn't know it was the wrong address. He thought he was at the correct address.
That's a problem right there.
the link I posted had the video from his car, he did not walk up on the dog playing frisbee. That's what the owner said they were doing prior to the cop arriving.
Yes, because you can definitely "see" Via audio Recording.
Show me where exactly the dog is. Oh wait, you can't. So everything we're saying is heresay.
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn. You see this dog charging at you barking while the owner is looking in the truck for something. what do you do?
Well, draw my tazer and stun the dog. Duh. It's not like I had to shoot a small dog. OH WAIT.
Its always easy to play monday morning quarterback but I can't fault the cop in that situation for shooting the dog.
sirlynchmob wrote:
dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs.
Standard Poodles can weigh up to 75-80 pounds, and are much more dangerous than any Heeler.
sirlynchmob wrote:
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn.
Still stupid. Going in with your gun drawn is just as likely to escalate as calm the situation. This wasn't a SWAT team on a raid, it was a beat cop responding to a routine incident in which his best protection is the uniform he's wearing.
Frazzled wrote:
I'll put myself in his boss's shoes. i don't want a gun crazy loser mouthbreather as a cop.
Yep.
I wouldn't fire him on the spot, but he would definitely find himself under great scrutiny that may lead to his firing.
We often disagree, but Dogma has the way of it.
Why is a cop drawing a gun on the first person he sees? Where did they get this guy, Rambo Academy?
sirlynchmob wrote:
dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs.
Standard Poodles can weigh up to 75-80 pounds, and are much more dangerous than any Heeler.
sirlynchmob wrote:
But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn.
Still stupid. Going in with your gun drawn is just as likely to escalate as calm the situation. This wasn't a SWAT team on a raid, it was a beat cop responding to a routine incident in which his best protection is the uniform he's wearing.
Frazzled wrote:
I'll put myself in his boss's shoes. i don't want a gun crazy loser mouthbreather as a cop.
Yep.
I wouldn't fire him on the spot, but he would definitely find himself under great scrutiny that may lead to his firing.
Routine nothing. ask any cop the worst calls to respond to and they'll tell you domestic violence calls. its not just the one being violent to the spouse you have to worry about, cops have been stabbed in the back by the "victim" during those situations.
regardless though, when a cop tells you to put your hands up and control your dog, you better control your dog. the cop didn't go there with his gun drawn he drew his gun "Paxton went to grab something from his truck, when the officer drew his gun and told him to freeze, the Web page said. Cisco then ran at the officer, who fatally shot the dog. "
sirlynchmob wrote: dog needed shooting, its not some poodle, they get up to 35 lbs.
Standard Poodles can weigh up to 75-80 pounds, and are much more dangerous than any Heeler.
sirlynchmob wrote: But put yourself in the cops shoes, as you point out he went to stop a violent crime, hence his gun was drawn.
Still stupid. Going in with your gun drawn is just as likely to escalate as calm the situation. This wasn't a SWAT team on a raid, it was a beat cop responding to a routine incident in which his best protection is the uniform he's wearing.
Frazzled wrote: I'll put myself in his boss's shoes. i don't want a gun crazy loser mouthbreather as a cop.
Yep.
I wouldn't fire him on the spot, but he would definitely find himself under great scrutiny that may lead to his firing.
Routine nothing. ask any cop the worst calls to respond to and they'll tell you domestic violence calls. its not just the one being violent to the spouse you have to worry about, cops have been stabbed in the back by the "victim" during those situations.
regardless though, when a cop tells you to put your hands up and control your dog, you better control your dog. the cop didn't go there with his gun drawn he drew his gun "Paxton went to grab something from his truck, when the officer drew his gun and told him to freeze, the Web page said. Cisco then ran at the officer, who fatally shot the dog. "
I think I have an image for my emotions right now...
Ah yes. Here it is.
Spoiler:
I'm going to bow out and head to bed, as I don't want to get into trouble when I snap and start going all Phryxis up in here.
sirlynchmob wrote:
Routine nothing. ask any cop the worst calls to respond to and they'll tell you domestic violence calls. its not just the one being violent to the spouse you have to worry about, cops have been stabbed in the back by the "victim" during those situations.
Of course it was routine, being difficult doesn't make it not routine. This wasn't some kind of specially planned operation, as is the case with things like SWAT, and stings, it was an average cop (hopefully below average) that responded to a call.
And drawing your gun in that situation isn't going to protect you. Anyone that's sufficiently irrational to stab a person external to the dispute, who is also wearing a police uniform, is probably not going to be deterred by a gun. Indeed, they may well feel threatened enough to be more aggressive.
sirlynchmob wrote:
regardless though, when a cop tells you to put your hands up and control your dog, you better control your dog. the cop didn't go there with his gun drawn he drew his gun "Paxton went to grab something from his truck, when the officer drew his gun and told him to freeze, the Web page said. Cisco then ran at the officer, who fatally shot the dog. "
How does one control one's dog with his hands in the air?
Either way, I don't place any faith in the cop's word. Police departments have a long history of covering up the errors of their employees.
sirlynchmob wrote:
Routine nothing. ask any cop the worst calls to respond to and they'll tell you domestic violence calls. its not just the one being violent to the spouse you have to worry about, cops have been stabbed in the back by the "victim" during those situations.
Of course it was routine, being difficult doesn't make it not routine. This wasn't some kind of specially planned operation, as is the case with things like SWAT, and stings, it was an average cop (hopefully below average) that responded to a call.
And drawing your gun in that situation isn't going to protect you. Anyone that's sufficiently irrational to stab a person external to the dispute, who is also wearing a police uniform, is probably not going to be deterred by a gun. Indeed, they may well feel threatened enough to be more aggressive.
sirlynchmob wrote:
regardless though, when a cop tells you to put your hands up and control your dog, you better control your dog. the cop didn't go there with his gun drawn he drew his gun "Paxton went to grab something from his truck, when the officer drew his gun and told him to freeze, the Web page said. Cisco then ran at the officer, who fatally shot the dog. "
How does one control one's dog with his hands in the air?
Either way, I don't place any faith in the cop's word. Police departments have a long history of covering up the errors of their employees.
I'm also wondering why there was only 1 cop.
His partner went to the bathroom but when he went to wipe…
Frazzled wrote:On what planet do cops pull a gun on the first guy they see?
East Austin, Texas. And apparently Canada where I have recently called the RCMP to come to sirlynchmob's nieghbors's house, they got off thier horses with guns (politely) drawn and shot his pet moose to death after telling him to put his hands up and control his dog. When the moose meandered towards them chewing aquatic plant life the Mounties responded with deadly force, eh.
The owner is reported to have said:
sirlynchmob wrote:Put yourself in the cops shoes, he did absolutely the right thing. I invited him inside to have relations with my wife and offered him some fries and mayonnaise for going out of his way, to my house instead of the one with loud drunken shenanigans going on.
Samus_aran115 wrote:Frazzled beat me to it, but was the dog eating Skittles and drinking an Arizona?
Really? Thats like walking up to my Yellow Lab who whines like a cat. And Shots him.
That is a horribely stupid case for defending him. He is defending himself from a 1 foot tall canine animal that was just minutes before playing frisibee with his owner.
Yes because it is right to walk onto someone's property (might I add the wrong address), and tells someone to freeze gun drawn. Yes that is perfectly acceptable!
Frazzled wrote:On what planet do cops pull a gun on the first guy they see?
East Austin, Texas. And apparently Canada where I have recently called the RCMP to come to sirlynchmob's nieghbors's house, they got off thier horses with guns (politely) drawn and shot his pet moose to death after telling him to put his hands up and control his dog. When the moose meandered towards them chewing aquatic plant life the Mounties responded with deadly force, eh.
The owner is reported to have said:
sirlynchmob wrote:Put yourself in the cops shoes, he did absolutely the right thing. I invited him inside to have relations with my wife and offered him some fries and mayonnaise for going out of his way, to my house instead of the one with loud drunken shenanigans going on.
Samus_aran115 wrote:Frazzled beat me to it, but was the dog eating Skittles and drinking an Arizona?
Just a heads up: I'm not Frazzled.
@frazzled, if you go to an address thinking a domestic violence (DV) problem is going on, and you see a texan reaching into his truck, there are good odds he's going for a gun. so you draw just to be sure until you can figure out what is going on.
@austinT fries and mayo? Please, we put gravy on dem fries and cheese. Then we invite the cops over for the moose BBQ. Everyone apologizes, we hug, we send xmas cards and keep in touch. donchaknow.
@dogma really? you can't CALL your dog off because your hands are in the air? what is your dog deaf and you only use sign language?
@asherian, yes it is right for the cop to walk onto the property, he had probably cause. The person who reported the DV gave that address, so the cop went to that address to check it out. He tells the owner to call off his dog while backing up, owner does nothing, dog gets shot.
sirlynchmob wrote:
@dogma really? you can't CALL your dog off because your hands are in the air? what is your dog deaf and you only use sign language?
The vast, vast majority of dogs don't respond immediately to verbal commands, sort of like people really.
Also, there is a gun pointed at you, which has a tendency to stop the whole thinking process and replace it with "Oh feth, that guy is pointing a gun at me!"
sirlynchmob wrote:
@dogma really? you can't CALL your dog off because your hands are in the air? what is your dog deaf and you only use sign language?
The vast, vast majority of dogs don't respond immediately to verbal commands, sort of like people really.
Also, there is a gun pointed at you, which has a tendency to stop the whole thinking process and replace it with "Oh feth, that guy is pointing a gun at me!"
Mine do, he just need one moment to say "HEAL" and the dog should have went and sat down next to him.
sirlynchmob wrote:
Mine do, he just need one moment to say "HEAL" and the dog should have went and sat down next to him.
Your dogs are apparently trained to a professional level. Only a few dogs I've encountered will instantly respond to a command that is drastically our of sync with its current activity, which is what "heel" is when its prefaced by playing.
And, even if that's expected, pulling a gun on the first person you see is stupid, as is responding to a call alone.
I've seen a well behaved dog that was professionally trained go nuts when someone walked into the house with one of bright orange but large Nerf rifle. If the dog felt the master was threatened it might act differently than normal, and even take longer to respond to commands. Just because a pet is quick to react while someone is watching TV doesn't mean they may act differently in a situation where they think you are threatened, even if it is as simple as not responding instantly.
Depends on the call. DV situations can be bad, but as you said before, they're also common calls. If they dispatched one officer, they probably didn't think it sounded too bad.
We have too little info to judge, really. From the info given it sounds to me like the officer had his gun out too quickly. But we don't know exactly what he saw in that yard.
sirlynchmob wrote:
Mine do, he just need one moment to say "HEAL" and the dog should have went and sat down next to him.
Your dogs are apparently trained to a professional level. Only a few dogs I've encountered will instantly respond to a command that is drastically our of sync with its current activity, which is what "heel" is when its prefaced by playing.
And, even if that's expected, pulling a gun on the first person you see is stupid, as is responding to a call alone.
I wouldn't say I was a professional trainer, My dad was though, he worked with german sheppards since viet nam. I grew up with them, we always had at least one. The one thing he taught me was to control your dogs. If you own a dog, you need to train it so it understands some word that means sit down and shut up. Because its not just the cops that come to your door, its the mail men, the girl scouts, those damn witnesses, the neighborhood kids who jump your fence. If your dog bites someone, it dies, and you get fined or sued. Letting your dog charge up and challenge people is just bad, you can encourage them to bark at strangers, but they don't need to get it in their head its ok to rush them.
Then when a cop says, control your dog, you better be shouting HEAL or HEEL . (I should really stop typing after my nightcap) Then if they don't immediately respond you better keep saying it til it does, or in that situation it could get shot.
sirlynchmob wrote:Letting your dog charge up and challenge people is just bad, you can encourage them to bark at strangers, but they don't need to get it in their head its ok to rush them.
There's more to it than that, though. You have to factor in the size of the dog, the dog's outward demeanor, the type of dog it is, and realistically the type of neighborhood you're in. The dog in this case was not a real threat, a 35 pound, non-poisonous animal isn't a major threat on its own. Had it been say, a St. Bernard, a German Shepherd, or even a Poodle yeah that dog running at you is threatening because it could realistically prevent you from doing anything other than not letting it kill you if it latches on.
That being said, this isn't the worst case of excessive force I've seen as regards dogs. Back in the day I was spending the night at my grandma's house, and at around 4 pm there was a lot of noise next door due to loud music out back (they were having a bbq), so she called in a noise complaint. Now this house was wholly fenced in, it had the white picket fence up front, and a taller privacy fence out back. So, when the cops came, 2 of them, they saw very clearly the Schnauzer that was frolicking through the front yard. They then, rather than walk up the drive, decided to open the gate and proceed to the front door. The Schnauzer, being friendly and essentially unsupervised (but contained on private property) ran up the cop and started dancing around him playfully, the cop drew his gun and shot it twice.
I very clearly remember my grandmother not only cursing the cop up and down (she doesn't curse) but slapping the living gak out of him (she's afraid of driving on highways).
sirlynchmob wrote:
Mine do, he just need one moment to say "HEAL" and the dog should have went and sat down next to him.
Your dogs are apparently trained to a professional level. Only a few dogs I've encountered will instantly respond to a command that is drastically our of sync with its current activity, which is what "heel" is when its prefaced by playing.
And, even if that's expected, pulling a gun on the first person you see is stupid, as is responding to a call alone.
I wouldn't say I was a professional trainer, My dad was though, he worked with german sheppards since viet nam. I grew up with them, we always had at least one. The one thing he taught me was to control your dogs. If you own a dog, you need to train it so it understands some word that means sit down and shut up. Because its not just the cops that come to your door, its the mail men, the girl scouts, those damn witnesses, the neighborhood kids who jump your fence. If your dog bites someone, it dies, and you get fined or sued. Letting your dog charge up and challenge people is just bad, you can encourage them to bark at strangers, but they don't need to get it in their head its ok to rush them.
Then when a cop says, control your dog, you better be shouting HEAL or HEEL . (I should really stop typing after my nightcap) Then if they don't immediately respond you better keep saying it til it does, or in that situation it could get shot.
"show me your hands! Get your dog." bang.
With literally no pauses of any kind. You keep defending this guy all you want. Failure to identify yourself as a police officer with weapon in hand, the cops lucky he didn't get shot. And why the feth does it sound like he is on Yahoo IM in his cruiser? Do cops use mIRC or YIM officially?
If there is one thing I can't stand, its the sheer bias that dog owners have when they insist their Doberman/Rottweiler/Pitbull/Husky/AnyDog is a 'harmless' animal when they purposefully allow the animal to run upto strangers. What the officer did was regrettable but he certainly should not be punished for the owners mistake in being unable to control their animal. The majority of dog owners disgust me.
Mr Hyena wrote:If there is one thing I can't stand, its the sheer bias that dog owners have when they insist their Doberman/Rottweiler/Pitbull/Husky/AnyDog is a 'harmless' animal when they purposefully allow the animal to run upto strangers.
If you are sufficiently threatened by a 35 pound dog, that doesn't appear rabid, to open fire then you shouldn't be in a dangerous occupation; like police work.
Mr Hyena wrote:
What the officer did was regrettable but he certainly should not be punished for the owners mistake in being unable to control their animal.
He made several errors, or at least seems to have given the information available, not the least of which is subjecting the department to public scrutiny. For that alone he should be investigated and reprimanded.
If you are sufficiently threatened by a 35 pound dog, that doesn't appear rabid, to open fire then you shouldn't be in a dangerous occupation; like police work.
So...getting mauled is ok?
He made several errors, or at least seems to have given the information available, not the least of which is subjecting the department to public scrutiny. For that alone he should be investigated and reprimanded.
The only mistake is that he didn't declare himself as a police officer properly. Thats about it.
If you don't want incidents like this, don't arm your police.
Unarmed police are jokes. They aren't taken seriously enough.
Mr Hyena wrote:If there is one thing I can't stand, its the sheer bias that dog owners have when they insist their Doberman/Rottweiler/Pitbull/Husky/AnyDog is a 'harmless' animal when they purposefully allow the animal to run upto strangers. What the officer did was regrettable but he certainly should not be punished for the owners mistake in being unable to control their animal. The majority of dog owners disgust me.
As a counterpart, I think its fair to say you disgust the majority of dog owners. How does it feel to find a substantial portion of the human race finds you disgusting? Tell me all about it. Pay no attention to the young wiener dog ambling up to your ankle...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote:This sort of thing is bound to happen occasionally in such a tooled-up society as the US.
It's just a mistake. While there should be an investigation, no amount of reprimands, etc will stop something like this from happening again.
If you don't want incidents like this, don't arm your police.
Then you have to accept that unarmed police will get into incidents like this one instead.
Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
Stay classy Dakka.
Seriously, I remember the thread, and its not like many people were saying the kid deserved to get slotted. I think your reading what you want to read and disregarding the rest.
Way more people said that the incident needed to be resolved properly, than "feth it the kid deserved it!"
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Cop draws gun Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object shoots and dog runs towards him. Blatantly lies to supervisor. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid that is potentially attacking him.. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Cop draws gun Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object shoots and dog runs towards him. Blatantly lies to supervisor. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid that is potentially attacking him.. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
Stay classy Dakka.
Made subtle changes or "fixed tha for you"
sirlynchmob wrote:
Nice, well said.
At least now we know you are trolling.
so where did any report say he lied to his superior? you still forgot, the warning "hands up and control your dog"
If the owner had controlled his dog, his dog would still be alive.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Cop draws gun Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object shoots and dog runs towards him. Blatantly lies to supervisor. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid that is potentially attacking him.. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
Stay classy Dakka.
Made subtle changes or "fixed tha for you"
sirlynchmob wrote:
Nice, well said.
At least now we know you are trolling.
so where did any report say he lied to his superior? you still forgot, the warning "hands up and control your dog"
If the owner had controlled his dog, his dog would still be alive.
hard to control your dog with your hands in the air. AND WHY DID THE COP GO IN WITH HIS PISTOL DRAWN?
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
Stay classy Dakka.
Nice, well said.
Only if you have a keen grasp of nothing.
You keep demonizing the cop while ignoring what was actually going on there. from the article you linked:
""I was in my back yard with my dog and came out to get something from my truck. When I came into my driveway there was an officer who pulled his gun and told me to put my hands in the air. Cisco was behind me coming out of the yard and started barking and ran towards the officer. The officer shot and killed him. I couldn't stop the dog because the officer was pointing a gun at me.""
Now we add in from the audio, the officer said "put your hands up and control your dog"
Judging from the owners own account of the situation, he had plenty of time to control his dog.
The officer did not go in with his gun drawn, he drew it when he saw the suspect going into his truck. I'd like to see a picture of the truck, how much do you want to bet he had a gun rack in the back?
There is always an investigation when shots are fired and I'm sure the cops history on the force will be taken into account. He'll not be fired for this, he probably will get a reprimand, but only to appease the public.
Because he was responding to a domestic abuse call, and you never know what to expect on a domestic abuse call?
I never did police work, but I have worked both EMS and spend 5 years volunteering with the fire department. And one thing every agency had in common is that if we respond to any domestic abuse call, we would not enter unless the cops have secured the scene. Domestic abuse calls are just too damn unpredictable, you don't know who the victim is, emotions are high, and people could easily turn on you.
I'm no criminal, but the basic rules I have learned from my parents when it comes to dealing with cops are pretty simple:
1) Address by rank if able, Sir/Ma'am otherwise.
2) No sudden movements, and don't reach for anything anywhere unless specifically told to do so.
3) Don't admit to anything.
Frazzled, usually you're the one accused of trolling. This time, you'rethe one beiing trolled, it's working probably due to you being a dog owner/lover, but sirlynch is clearly trolling you.
I'd say click the yellow triangle of friendship and ignore him.
MrDwhitey wrote:Frazzled, usually you're the one accused of trolling. This time, you'rethe one beiing trolled, it's working probably due to you being a dog owner/lover, but sirlynch is clearly trolling you.
I'd say click the yellow triangle of friendship and ignore him.
just because I disagree with him on this topic, does not mean I'm trolling him.
I gotta say as someone who normally is on the police's side due to the extremely hard job a lot of them have to put up with that this is insane. He got the wrong guy in the wrong portion of the complex and shot his dog for probably coming up to say hi. A 35lb dog isn't a threat.
That said, was this a suitably medium to large dog, then I would be on the side of the cop. But we're not. We're talking about a small herding dog.....
MrDwhitey wrote:It's more that you're sharing the viewpoint with Hyena, a born troll.
Am I? I'm new here, i'm not really sure who is who, and who is serious or not, so I just go with the assumption people mean what they type.
What I find myself wondering this morning though is what happened to the people involved in the fight that got the cops called in the first place? did the cops ever get to the right house?
They should have gotten the information from the person who originally called, but did they call her back to try to get the right address?
While all this was going on somewhere there was a domestic violence issue going on that it seems no one responded to.
A dog that size would have problems breaking the clothing and skin of most uniforms. Maybe the cop is a cat person. Since I can't imagine anyone who knows anything about dogs at all considering that dog a threat.
As for the cop suing if he's bitten by a dog. Hell yes. He's a citizen isn't he. I'd have no problem with that.
sirlynchmob wrote:
There is always an investigation when shots are fired and I'm sure the cops history on the force will be taken into account. He'll not be fired for this, he probably will get a reprimand, but only to appease the public.
Well, he might be, he is expendable after all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:Its pretty amazing how many people are ok with a cop getting bitten by a dog, regardless of its size.
I suppose that can work...as long as cops are allowed to sue the bastards to hell.
They took a dangerous job, so I'm fine with them suffering the likely consequences.
A dog that size would have problems breaking the clothing and skin of most uniforms
Theres a host of problems it can cause if it does break the skin however. Thats why its not cool at all to let your dog run upto random people. In fact, its something an asshat does.
As for the cop suing if he's bitten by a dog. Hell yes. He's a citizen isn't he. I'd have no problem with that.
Sure, so long as its 4-5 digit number minimum for the owner to pay.
A dog that size would have problems breaking the clothing and skin of most uniforms
Theres a host of problems it can cause if it does break the skin however. Thats why its not cool at all to let your dog run upto random people. In fact, its something an asshat does.
You are right he should have totally lunged to grab his dog, that way the headline could have been. "Man shot saving dog from rabid cop"
These police departments shouldn't let their cops run up to random people with their guns out, In fact it is something an asshat does.
These police departments shouldn't let their cops run up to random people with their guns out, In fact it is something an asshat does.
1) Its a domestic violence situation, where tempers are usually flared. The police have been called so it must be significant.
2) The man was going for some item into his truck.
Caution is the best thing to do in a situation like that. Not walking into a situation that could get you shot, unarmed.
That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
MrDwhitey wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
The officer did not go in with his gun drawn, he drew it when he saw the suspect going into his truck.
Just noticed in one of the news articles:
Austin police confirmed Monday that Officer Griffin got out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn.
“He did challenge him. He came out of the yard barking, running towards him, as he probably would for anybody,” said Paxton.
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
d-usa wrote:That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
That curb is in clear need of a bullet hole, that toddler too.
d-usa wrote:That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
That curb is in clear need of a bullet hole, that toddler too.
I get what your saying but I disagree that what I would consider a small dog is a reasonable threat to the safety of the officer.
Like I said earlier I'm on the side of the police 90% of the time. This is just part of that 10% where I feel the officer did things wrong from the get go.
I'd also like to point out that no cop I know gets out of his car with his weapon drawn when there isn't a weapon in sight and no sounds of voilence nearby.
d-usa wrote:
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
Domestic Disturbance != domestic abuse
Probably someone called the cops because they heard the neighbours shouting at each other really loud. If the dispatch had any reason to believe that violence of any kind was occurring I really doubt that they would only send a single car with a single cop in it...
Even before shooting the dog, the guy pointed a gun at an unarmed civilian without any provocation whatsoever, I have two comments to this:
1st - The cop should be fired for this reason alone, he is clearly unstable if his first reaction is to point a gun at some innocent civilian without even assessing the situation first, I have very little doubt in my mind that if the guy had tried to grab his dog, the cop would have shot him for making a sudden move...
2nd - I'm so happy to live in PIG country sometimes... other times, not so much.
d-usa wrote:
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
Domestic Disturbance != domestic abuse
Probably someone called the cops because they heard the neighbours shouting at each other really loud. If the dispatch had any reason to believe that violence of any kind was occurring I really doubt that they would only send a single car with a single cop in it...
Even before shooting the dog, the guy pointed a gun at an unarmed civilian without any provocation whatsoever, I have two comments to this:
1st - The cop should be fired for this reason alone, he is clearly unstable if his first reaction is to point a gun at some innocent civilian without even assessing the situation first, I have very little doubt in my mind that if the guy had tried to grab his dog, the cop would have shot him for making a sudden move...
2nd - I'm so happy to live in PIG country sometimes... other times, not so much.
You know now that the civilian is innocent, good for you.
The cop knew he was responding to a domestic call, and that a person was making a move to a truck to get something. That could have easily been a weapon, and the cop has to act accordingly. If the cop had shot the civilian, then you would have a point. But if you are facing a cop, you don't make any moves for anything. It is as simple as that.
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you. Cops don't survive with a "everything will always be alright" mindset, especially in a big city like Austin.
d-usa wrote:
You know now that the civilian is innocent, good for you.
The cop knew he was responding to a domestic call, and that a person was making a move to a truck to get something. That could have easily been a weapon, and the cop has to act accordingly. If the cop had shot the civilian, then you would have a point. But if you are facing a cop, you don't make any moves for anything. It is as simple as that.
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you. Cops don't survive with a "everything will always be alright" mindset, especially in a big city like Austin.
The guy was walking towards his truck, he wasn't there yet (from what I've read of several news articles), which means that the cop didn't have any reason to pull out his gun and point it at him just yet. Now I don't know allot about US police procedures (other than watching COPS), but walking towards a closed car isn't reason enough to be threatened at gun point even before being addressed by the police around here...
Isn't there a law of some kind preventing the cops from waving their guns around before even assessing a situation? Can a normal US citizen just have a gun pointed at his head just because the cop felt like it?
And you said it yourself, "But if you are facing a cop, you don't make any moves for anything.", so how was he supposed to restrain the dog without getting himself shot?
Police in america seem way too triggerhappy to me. I mean, I know they have to be armed, but they don't have to USE the gun so damn much.
My dad was an unarmed policeman in Ireland for years. You say people don't respect the police, but they respected him, well enough. Sometimes he got beaten up, but that was part of the job. He once had to arrest a fella in a house. He came in by the back door while some others went in around the front to get him. Unluckily for my dad, the guy had a kerry blue- a sort of large, muscular and particularly tenacious terrier. I've seen one lugging a deer carcass by the throat happily through a flooded river. This ball of muscular territorial rage attacked my dad, who thanks to a rough rural upbringing was well versed at handling vicious dogs, and chucked it out the back door without too much fuss. As he was moving into the next room, the little bastard came through the glass door (smashing it with his head) and sank his teeth into the back of Dad's leg. He had to beat the gak out of the dog and lock it in the back room!
He doesn't look on that as a "Oh, I should have had a gun to shoot that dog, the danger was unacceptable" issue. He looks on it as "Don't feth with a Kerry Blue, they'll come at you through plate glass." story. He's had to break up huge mobs of rioting travellers with nothing but a truncheon and a hi vis jacket. And he did it too. Never start on an old irish copper, is my advice. I tried it once when drunk (jokingly) and was promptly floored by a fifty year old with bad feet and lower back pain.
d-usa wrote:
You know now that the civilian is innocent, good for you.
The cop knew he was responding to a domestic call, and that a person was making a move to a truck to get something. That could have easily been a weapon, and the cop has to act accordingly. If the cop had shot the civilian, then you would have a point. But if you are facing a cop, you don't make any moves for anything. It is as simple as that.
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you. Cops don't survive with a "everything will always be alright" mindset, especially in a big city like Austin.
The guy was walking towards his truck, he wasn't there yet (from what I've read of several news articles), which means that the cop didn't have any reason to pull out his gun and point it at him just yet. Now I don't know allot about US police procedures (other than watching COPS), but walking towards a closed car isn't reason enough to be threatened at gun point even before being addressed by the police around here...
Isn't there a law of some kind preventing the cops from waving their guns around before even assessing a situation? Can a normal US citizen just have a gun pointed at his head just because the cop felt like it?
Rule #4 for dealing with cops: If you think that anything the cop is doing is wrong or unlawful, then you fight it afterwards. The time the cop is giving you an unlawful order is not the time to fight it.
PhantomViper wrote:
And you said it yourself, "But if you are facing a cop, you don't make any moves for anything.", so how was he supposed to restrain the dog without getting himself shot?
The thing is that if the cop had handled it properly (i.e. not drawing on a an unarmed civilian in plain sight) then the civilian (not even the one the cop was there for) would have been able to restrain his dog.
The cop was in the wrong. In so many ways. And I have to say that if someone shot my friendly dog (on my property) I'd be through the roof pissed.
A dog that size would have problems breaking the clothing and skin of most uniforms
Theres a host of problems it can cause if it does break the skin however. Thats why its not cool at all to let your dog run upto random people. In fact, its something an asshat does.
You are right he should have totally lunged to grab his dog, that way the headline could have been. "Man shot saving dog from rabid cop"
These police departments shouldn't let their cops run up to random people with their guns out, In fact it is something an asshat does.
And thats the essential problem. You don't just draw down on the first citizen you see.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:
These police departments shouldn't let their cops run up to random people with their guns out, In fact it is something an asshat does.
1) Its a domestic violence situation, where tempers are usually flared. The police have been called so it must be significant.
2) The man was going for some item into his truck.
Caution is the best thing to do in a situation like that. Not walking into a situation that could get you shot, unarmed.
WHAT NONSENSE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Police don't roll up to domestic violence situaitons with their guns drawn. You've been watching too many hollywood movies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
MrDwhitey wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
The officer did not go in with his gun drawn, he drew it when he saw the suspect going into his truck.
Just noticed in one of the news articles:
Austin police confirmed Monday that Officer Griffin got out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn.
“He did challenge him. He came out of the yard barking, running towards him, as he probably would for anybody,” said Paxton.
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
Thats not a legal shoot. Can he cap a crying baby too?
d-usa wrote:That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
MrDwhitey wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
The officer did not go in with his gun drawn, he drew it when he saw the suspect going into his truck.
Just noticed in one of the news articles:
Austin police confirmed Monday that Officer Griffin got out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn.
“He did challenge him. He came out of the yard barking, running towards him, as he probably would for anybody,” said Paxton.
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
Thats not a legal shoot. Can he cap a crying baby too?
Yep, legal shoot
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
Its based on a judgement call from the officer, under the circumstances the dog posed an imminent threat.
I know you think of your dogs as your children, but come on. How do you go from shooting a dog charging at you, to a crying baby?
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
d-usa wrote:That dog doesn't even have to bite the cop to be a thread. If that dog causes a distraction, causes him to trip over it, stumble, or do anything else that would take his attention away from the other guy, then the cop is at danger.
MrDwhitey wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
The officer did not go in with his gun drawn, he drew it when he saw the suspect going into his truck.
Just noticed in one of the news articles:
Austin police confirmed Monday that Officer Griffin got out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn.
“He did challenge him. He came out of the yard barking, running towards him, as he probably would for anybody,” said Paxton.
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
As far as the officer coming out of his patrol car with his weapon drawn. In order to make any kind of judgement on that I would have to know what sort of information was given to 911, and what information was relayed to the officer.
If the person that called 911 indicated that one of the people had a weapon (bat/knife/gun/whatever) or that one of the people was actively punching the snot out the other, then I have absolutely zero problem with an officer advancing into a dangerous information with his weapon drawn.
At the time of the event the only thing the officer knew was that he was responding to an address where a domestic abuse was in progress (we don't know the extend of the information provided to 911 as to what exactly was happening), he encountered a person going towards his truck to get something, and a dog that is charging him.
Thats not a legal shoot. Can he cap a crying baby too?
Yep, legal shoot
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
Its based on a judgement call from the officer, under the circumstances the dog posed an imminent threat.
I know you think of your dogs as your children, but come on. How do you go from shooting a dog charging at you, to a crying baby?
Protip don't practice law.
reasonable
imminent
safety
All these words are where the lawyer suing them gets money from the city.
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
If you consider a cop not knowing why the person he pulled over is making a reach for the glove compartment to pull who knows what out of it and protecting himself incompetent, then please go ahead.
I had a cop draw his gun on my while he was walking towards the car. He didn't point it at me, but he had it in his hand and out of his holster. I don't know what I did that made him suspicious, for all I know there was a report that a car matching mine did something. Oklahoma City is a big freaking place. Instead of thinking about how to ruin this incompetent officers life I just stuck my hands out of the window to show him I was not armed.
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
If you consider a cop not knowing why the person he pulled over is making a reach for the glove compartment to pull who knows what out of it and protecting himself incompetent, then please go ahead.
I had a cop draw his gun on my while he was walking towards the car. He didn't point it at me, but he had it in his hand and out of his holster. I don't know what I did that made him suspicious, for all I know there was a report that a car matching mine did something. Oklahoma City is a big freaking place. Instead of thinking about how to ruin this incompetent officers life I just stuck my hands out of the window to show him I was not armed.
d-usa wrote:
If you consider a cop not knowing why the person he pulled over is making a reach for the glove compartment to pull who knows what out of it and protecting himself incompetent, then please go ahead.
At that point drawing a gun should just be SOP because I can just as easily have one holstered as in the glove box, and you're not going to see me pull that while walking up.
At the end of the day its a dangerous, and often gakky, job. If you're not willing to accept that, then do something else.
d-usa wrote:
I guess I should have been morally outraged.
Its not even a matter of moral outrage. I am amoral at the best of times, and often deliberately immoral. Its a matter of the cop not doing his job, which doesn't hinge on protecting himself first.
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
Oddly I like 99% of Americans keep my mandated insurance and registration in my glovebox. If you saying 9/10 traffic stops have guns drawn you are delusional.
And I usually keep my insurance and license in my wallet. But I still don't reach for it without the cop seeing what I am doing. I let him come to the window,, and when he asks me for my license I let him know that it is in my wallet in my right front pocket. I keep one hand on the steering wheel and make sure that he can watch me slowly reach for my wallet.
I don't know, maybe I just have a different feeling for what it is like since I spend quite some time as a first responder and never knowing what you are going to run into.
I still think that plenty of cops are bastards who get a huge power drip from the shiny badge on their chest. But I usually don't fault them for trying to protect themselves.
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
Oddly I like 99% of Americans keep my mandated insurance and registration in my glovebox. If you saying 9/10 traffic stops have guns drawn you are delusional.
The best thing to do if pulled over, is turn put your car in park, roll down your front windows, turn it off, and put your hands on the wheel in plain site. Wait for the officer to approach the car.
If you have a gun on you the first thing you should tell the cop is you have a gun and its location.
After that comply with the cops instructions, take the ticket, if you disagree with the reasons for the ticket wait for your day in court.
d-usa wrote:
I still think that plenty of cops are bastards who get a huge power drip from the shiny badge on their chest. But I usually don't fault them for trying to protect themselves.
I should be clear, I don't fault them for trying to protect themselves, that would be ridiculous. I fault them for trying to protect themselves when doing so directly interferes with the job they're supposed to be doing. Part of being a cop is putting yourself at risk (Myself, average Joe, isn't going to break up that DV incident.), and many of them accept that, its the guys that don't that are a problem.
Full props to good cops, full scorn to bad. They get the same sort of raw deal as politicians and teachers.
d-usa wrote:
Trust me, if you are in your car and stopped by a cop ,and while the cop is walking towards your car he sees you reach for your glove compartment, 9 times out of 10 you will have a gun pointed at you.
If that happens I'm not only thinking about how to not be shot, I'm considering how best to ensure that officer's life is ruined due to his incompetence.
Oddly I like 99% of Americans keep my mandated insurance and registration in my glovebox. If you saying 9/10 traffic stops have guns drawn you are delusional.
Agreed. Its the sudden movement part that will get their attention, but slowly opening the box while they are behind you, getting the insurance out, and holding it and your license on the wheel will not draw such.
Unless of course you have a screaming baby or the police officer trips on a curb, then evidently its blast away time.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Protip don't practice law.
reasonable
imminent
safety
All these words are where the lawyer suing them gets money from the city.
Protip, if you can't control your dog without manhandling it, be prepared for it to takew revenge on the cop if he tries to shoot your dog. .
So dead baby isn't....dead? Thats some pretty good necromancy right there.
What bs are you on about? 1. we're talking cops not babies. 2. cops outweigh babies by what 20x. 3. ants can kill babies. Are you advocating cops be able to open up their Glocks on ant nests? 4. no one but you have said anything about small dogs killing babies. Its as nonsensical as it is besides the point.
The officer exited the vehicle with his gun drawn without a threat and put the bead on the first person that appeared.
sirlynchmob wrote:
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
So if it was his own dog he would of shot it then?
Mr Hyena wrote:
No, but clearly small dogs can be dangerous too.
And so can peanuts, but they aren't relevant to this situation.
in Stalinst Russia you don't crack peanuts, peanuts crack YOU!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:
dogma wrote:
Mr Hyena wrote:
No, but clearly small dogs can be dangerous too.
And so can peanuts, but they aren't relevant to this situation.
I didn't say it was relevant. But claiming a small dog is about as threatening as a baby is blatantly false.
I don't remember the last time a baby killed anything.
I don't remember the last time a small dog killed anything either. Ok in truth Rodney is indeed the wiener dog's answer to Dexter when it comes to snake serial murder, but the best he's done against humans is redden an ankle. Thats not harm, thats just bad tanning.
sirlynchmob wrote:
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
So if it was his own dog he would of shot it then?
I guess if the cop stumbled upon a clutch of rabbits he'd have to call in the national guard under this standard.
sirlynchmob wrote:
APD's policy regarding discharging a firearm due to an animal is as follows:
"1. In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears, under the circumstances, to pose and imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.
So if it was his own dog he would of shot it then?
Mr Hyena wrote:
So we've never had a case of a small dog killing a baby...right?
Babies are now being admitted to the police force?
They specialize in breaking up the vaunted pre-K racqueteering cartels.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:
dogma wrote:
Mr Hyena wrote:
So we've never had a case of a small dog killing a baby...right?
Babies are now being admitted to the police force?
No, but clearly small dogs can't be dangerous too.
Corrected your typo.
Ok so if what you are claiming is true, how big does a dog need to be before it is dangerous?
It depends. Are you a man or a nattering nancy boy?
50 lbs. or an adult pit bull if you are a man. Thats the level that requires more than a firm leg shake. Multiple dogs especially.
Its the same standard I apply for myself. if its small enough that I can drop kick it through the field goal of life its not a threat to anyone with a brain.
Evidently a teacup chihuahua is a lethal threat to others.
d-usa wrote:Cop responds to a domestic violence call, arrives to a location where he does not know what is really happening. Person goes to the truck to get an unknown object and dog runs towards him. Cop draws gun to stop a potentially dangerous situation and shoots a dog that is potentially attacking him. Dakka is outraged.
Vigilante Neighborhood Watchman shoots black kid. Dakka things the thug black kid had it coming.
Stay classy Dakka.
In all fairness, that dog had been previously put in the crate for being a bad dog; once possibly smoked weed, and was known to own a screwdriver.
d-usa wrote:Rule #4 for dealing with cops: If you think that anything the cop is doing is wrong or unlawful, then you fight it afterwards. The time the cop is giving you an unlawful order is not the time to fight it.
I get why you're saying what you're saying, but what I'm hearing is, "Pick up the can, citizen."
Frazzled wrote:Incorrect he's pulling as he steps on to the curb.
Flag on the field, TD is no good!
You know, there's a curb there. It was a threat. he showed excellent restraint in not shooting it.
An iron will indeed. Were I in his shoes I would have emptied my entire magazine into the car door, those things can break a set a fingers with little to no provocation. To make it as far as he did without resorting to CoD is truly commendable.
AustonT wrote:
There's only one person in that car...or are you referring to the cop that shows up later?
I hear four voices. The shooter, the dog owner, the female dispatcher, and one other guy. I'm assuming that guy is in the car, could be wrong though.
You may be mistaking the cops voice on the radio which sounds Mildly different. I'm in class so I can't confirm there isn't a second dispatcher. I would probably say it's the cops voice on the radio. He is wearing a shirt mike(which is probably just his radio mike that is always on), that is overridden by the radio when he makes a call.
AustonT wrote:
You may be mistaking the cops voice on the radio which sounds Mildly different. I'm in class so I can't confirm there isn't a second dispatcher. I would probably say it's the cops voice on the radio. He is wearing a shirt mike(which is probably just his radio mike that is always on), that is overridden by the radio when he makes a call.
I haven't gotten a real answer yet but I asked on a forum that is more populated by LEOs if they use AIM,YIM, or mIRC officially. The only answer I got was that the voices I heard were from the radio. Changed my life...
d-usa wrote:The car with the flashy light, the word police on the side, and the shiny badge usually give it away.
I have never had a police officer say "police" after they exited the car.
The guy was in his backyard, chances are that he couldn't see the police car, in fact he says several times that he didn't notice the cop until he pointed a gun at his face. And I've heard them identify themselves plenty of times when they are entering private property.
Also, at around 16:00, when the cops go out to the right address, he doesn't have his gun drawn... funny...
Also, he mentions that the call they got was because of a male and female arguing, guess I was right on that. Is it SOP for police officers to wave their guns around when responding to a call about someone arguing (I'm guessing no, because he didn't draw it a second time when investigating the right address)?
It must surely suck to live in constant fear and be bullied around like that by the very people that are supposed to protect you.
d-usa wrote:The car with the flashy light, the word police on the side, and the shiny badge usually give it away.
I have never had a police officer say "police" after they exited the car.
The guy was in his backyard, chances are that he couldn't see the police car, in fact he says several times that he didn't notice the cop until he pointed a gun at his face. And I've heard them identify themselves plenty of times when they are entering private property.
Also, at around 16:00, when the cops go out to the right address, he doesn't have his gun drawn... funny...
Also, he mentions that the call they got was because of a male and female arguing, guess I was right on that. Is it SOP for police officers to wave their guns around when responding to a call about someone arguing (I'm guessing no, because he didn't draw it a second time when investigating the right address)?
It must surely suck to live in constant fear and be bullied around like that by the very people that are supposed to protect you.
It was a call about a Drunk man and a Female who looked scared.
That's called possible Rape, bro. I'd go in there with my gun unbuttoned, but not drawn. Drunk men are more improbable than a roulette wheel.
PhantomViper wrote:The cop doesn't even identifies himself as a police officer... WTF... is that even legal?
From my cursory reading, it appears police are really only required to orally identify themselves before knocking and entering a home. Some states require more.
Of course, if they fail to do so, that doesn't mean anything they find is inadmissible, so thanks current Supreme Court!
PhantomViper wrote:The cop doesn't even identifies himself as a police officer... WTF... is that even legal?
From my cursory reading, it appears police are really only required to orally identify themselves before knocking and entering a home. Some states require more.
Of course, if they fail to do so, that doesn't mean anything they find is inadmissible, so thanks current Supreme Court!
I was told after asking that courts have ruled that uniformed officers in marked cars have no requirement to identify themselves based on the obviousness of their position in the pursuit of their duties. There's still the issue of basic courtesy and community interaction; but those aren't legal requirements.
How old are these claims? What was the situation in which these incidents occurred? Was the complainer informed the dog may have been irritable?
Important questions to consider. If it was a puppy, I'd say they are completely irrelevant to the matter at hand.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, Ouze, there is a very substantial difference between nip and bite. The way you phrase it is misleading and biased.
Hey man, I'm a dog lover and don't think he should have shot the dog (or had his gun out at all unless there was an imminent danger to someone's life; which I don't think there was). That being said I don't really make a distinction between a nip and a bite, really. So far as the other details, I don't know any more than is in the article. However it does say that one incident was in 2007 and one was last month, so the dog definitely wasn't a puppy for at least one of those incidents.
Also, are cops trained to handle situations like these? Because there are plenty of better ways to handle a situation like getting run at by a dog than starting to shoot like a moron.
I'm not digging through posts, so if this has already been said then I apologize. This is inexcusable. The man was on private property, the officer mistakenly accosted Paxton, and the officer immediately jumped to the most lethal option available. I'm also skeptical of any statements issued by the police department, given that it is the inclination of any large collective of people to protect their own members and cast them in the most positive light (at least in my personal experience).
I'm not entirely sure that I would advocate firing for the officer, but at the very least he should suffer harsh disciplinary action.
. (I should really stop typing after my nightcap) 
