This video is disturbing. I don't really want to focus on the police shooting the dog because to my eyes the events that lead to the shooting should not have happened. The individual they arrested was one of at least 3 filming the raid. He was in no way disrupting the police's ability to do their job. 2 officers carrying submachine guns march up and arrest him for no apparent reason (he complies). I can't think of a dog that would not have had the same reaction to their owner being surrounded.
A sad event because of stupididy by all involved. Once the dog jumped at the cops it was over, but why they felt compelled to arrest him , causing the dog to attack, I can't fathom. On the other hand, it sounded like he was antagonizing the cops in a stressful situation, causing them to come at him and that dog was clearly trained to attack if he seemed to it in danger.
Larger breeds need little training if their owner/master/best friend apears to be under threat.
I can't completely fault the officer who shot the dog no matter how much the act discusts me, the bottom line is it should have never come to that. Had these thugs simply left the dog owner alone this would not have occured.
Wow, that was.....hard man. The guy was trying antagonize the cops, it isnt about the video taping at all, they didnt care about the others video taping at all. The poor dog though man. It just had an idiot owner.
Y'know it is funny, my chihuahua ran after a cop once, they cop put his arms out to hug and pet it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crablezworth wrote: Larger breeds need little training if their owner/master/best friend apears to be under threat.
I can't completely fault the officer who shot the dog no matter how much the act discusts me, the bottom line is it should have never come to that. Had these thugs simply left the dog owner alone this would not have occured.
If the owner didnt atagonize the cops, then leave the window down so the dog could get out, it would not have occured.
If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
Other than harassing the officers and agitating the situation even more, Especially in tense situation like a raid?
The guy deserved to get cuffed, the shooting was warranted, but the dog deserved much better than this.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
They were trying to respond to a call of an armed robbery, a dangerous situation, and the man was causing a disturbance, distracting the officers. When bullets can go flying any second, a jack ass on the side of the road yelling at them is only going to get people hurt.
A crap situation to be sure. While the owner was being a nuisance, I hardly see that as a reason to have arrested him. Had the cops not come over and screwed with him, a guy who wasn't getting close to any cop nor to the scene of what was going on, none of this would happen, but they did. Also, the dog was keeping it's distance until the cop lunged at it. What was trying to do? Grab it? Smart cop right there.
I like how this cop handles an aggressive dog.
Now let's see some real police work in action! NSFW, brutal stuff.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
What do you think a bystander should be able to do during something like this? What is your personal line for when it's okay to arrest someone in this situation?
When they break some sort of law, that' usually a good start. You'll notice the individual was certainly not alone in recording the police...
There are indivduals already cuffed sitting on the curb that the officeres carrying the submachine guns go and stand next to. I'm not quite sure how the dog owner distrupted their ability to stand around the cuffed individuals sitting on the sidewalk. Individuals in this thread are acting like the dog owner rushed over and started pushing a camera into the faces of a swat team breaching a door and that's just sad. The whole police can do no wrong thing is pathetic at best. If you don't think this warrants even a basic look at what could be done better from a precdural standpoint then there is no hope in convincing you of anything.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
Kan is absolutely right. If what was said about the guy shouting things at the police is true (I won't watch this video), then unlike in situations where police are actually being heavy handed thugs, it would seem as though this was just a bid at antagonizing police that backfired.
I actually feel more bad about the dog being shot than if the guy would have been shot. The dog was just trying to be a good dog, and do what dogs do. Humans should know better.
Crablezworth wrote: When they break some sort of law, that' usually a good start. You'll notice the individual was certainly not alone in recording the police...
I don't think it was just the recording. something about loud music and harassing the officers (at work, no sound)
People should be free to film though but at there own risk and should keep there mouths shut.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
Kan is absolutely right. If what was said about the guy shouting things at the police is true (I won't watch this video), then unlike in situations where police are actually being heavy handed thugs, it would seem as though this was just a bid at antagonizing police that backfired.
I actually feel more bad about the dog being shot than if the guy would have been shot. The dog was just trying to be a good dog, and do what dogs do. Humans should know better.
How it's even possible to comment one way or another without watching the video is beyond me.
I'm trying to be pragmatic, I'm trying not to let emotion cloud my perspective on this. I can understand being afraid of a dog and shooting it when it comes at you. However this would simply not have occured if the two officers simply continued to stand around the cuffed individuals.
Crablezworth wrote: When they break some sort of law, that' usually a good start. You'll notice the individual was certainly not alone in recording the police...
It isnt about the recording, It is about him deliberately antagonizing the police, in a tense situation, the cops had no idea if there was maybe another gunmen there. They dont want some idiot yelling obcenities at them. Why is everyone trying to make this about recordings? It isnt, it is about him doing something stupid and suffering for it.
Crablezworth wrote: When they break some sort of law, that' usually a good start. You'll notice the individual was certainly not alone in recording the police...
It isnt about the recording, It is about him deliberately antagonizing the police, in a tense situation, the cops had no idea if there was maybe another gunmen there. They dont want some idiot yelling obcenities at them. Why is everyone trying to make this about recordings? It isnt, it is about him doing something stupid and suffering for it.
The cops seemed fairly calm, as did the overall situation. Seeing as there were already individuals cuffed and sitting on the curb... if this situation was as tense as you say, why were the cuffed individuals not even being guarded by an officer in proximity/in the back of a car? The two officers casually saunter over to them and stand around them casually talking. This isn't Jack Bauer on 24 level tense.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
Kan is absolutely right. If what was said about the guy shouting things at the police is true (I won't watch this video), then unlike in situations where police are actually being heavy handed thugs, it would seem as though this was just a bid at antagonizing police that backfired.
I actually feel more bad about the dog being shot than if the guy would have been shot. The dog was just trying to be a good dog, and do what dogs do. Humans should know better.
How it's even possible to comment one way or another without watching the video is beyond me.
Did YOU watch the videos you post or read the article?
The man in question, who was "arrested for filming" has a record of domestic violence and civil suits against the Hawthorne police department.
The man in question had also apparently stopped his car and gotten his dog out SPECIFICALLY to film the raid in progress and in the process started questioning "Why there was no black cops" and shouting about the raid being a "civil rights violation".
Still want to say that this was all just the police at fault, or are you willing to wise up and realize that he was trying to stir the pot?
Crablezworth wrote: When they break some sort of law, that' usually a good start. You'll notice the individual was certainly not alone in recording the police...
It isnt about the recording, It is about him deliberately antagonizing the police, in a tense situation, the cops had no idea if there was maybe another gunmen there. They dont want some idiot yelling obcenities at them. Why is everyone trying to make this about recordings? It isnt, it is about him doing something stupid and suffering for it.
The more I looked into this situation, I found the man that got arrested had a fair record of his own, so he was out to push buttons.
Its the police officers job to stay calm and collected. im fairly sure as well that the people cuffed on the streets are ether other bistanderds making business, or people cleared from the house that showed no credible threat, only in cuffs from future questioning later.
besides that it seems that the actual raid was occurring on the other side of the street with multiple squad cars and a large swat van. and most of that commotion was blocked from view so we wont really know
Purple Saturday wrote: You should be able to shout anything you want to at the police, anytime, without fear that they will shoot your dog.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
Purple Saturday wrote: You should be able to shout anything you want to at the police, anytime, without fear that they will shoot your dog.
You can shout whatever you want at the police.
You should however be aware that if you have a Rottweiler or other "scary dog" that makes aggressive moves towards police, it is likely going to get shot.
And had the police simply continued chatting amongst themselves nothing would have happened. Perhaps they were dicussing how dangerous it is to casually stand around a suburban neighbourhood with only submachine guns to protect themselves with...
Purple Saturday wrote: You should be able to shout anything you want to at the police, anytime, without fear that they will shoot your dog.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
Well, actually, it ran at them then stopped. Only when the officer lunged at it did it jump up and snap at him. I'm not saying it wasn't an aggressive posture, but still, for reasons beyond my understanding, he tried to grab a large dog. When he didn't like how the dog reacted, he shot it.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
I did watch the video. Pretty standard treatment of bystanders by police. I know police apologists abound, and wealthy white men are their most likely champions, but they really mishandled the situation. The police DO deal with this sort of thing all the time, so you think they'd be better at it. They had no right to arrest that man.
Crablezworth wrote: And had the police simply continued chatting amongst themselves nothing would have happened. Perhaps they were dicussing how dangerous it is to casually stand around a suburban neighbourhood with only submachine guns to protect themselves with...
Perhaps they where discussing possible points of attack where gang members could of popped out with illegal guns.
or maybe there where deciding whether or not to go to subway or quiz-nos afterwards.
Hate the cops or not he should of made sure that his dog couldn't escape then this whole event would of been a non issue.
Crablezworth wrote: And had the police simply continued chatting amongst themselves nothing would have happened. Perhaps they were dicussing how dangerous it is to casually stand around a suburban neighbourhood with only submachine guns to protect themselves with...
And had the man not been shouting "WHY ARE THERE NO BLACK COPS" or "THIS IS A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION" in an area where a raid was in progress, he would probably have not drawn any attention to himself.
Had the man not been known to the department with a criminal record and multiple civil suits against the department, including a claim of a "broken rib" after his arrest during a domestic dispute and had the man not seemingly stopped and gotten out of his rental car with his dog at a police gathering point near a raid to shout "WHY ARE THERE NO BLACK COPS" or "THIS IS A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION" there would have been no issue.
With those facts in play though? This guy was trying to fish for a response from the police, and he got it.
Sucks for his dog, but it is great for him as now he gets to go for another civil suit against the police who will probably settle.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
I did watch the video. Pretty standard treatment of bystanders by police. I know police apologists abound, and Law abiding citizens are their most likely champions, but they really mishandled the situation. The police DO deal with this sort of thing all the time, so you think they'd be better at it. They had no right to arrest that man.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
I did watch the video. Pretty standard treatment of bystanders by police. I know police apologists abound, and wealthy white men are their most likely champions, but they really mishandled the situation. The police DO deal with this sort of thing all the time, so you think they'd be better at it. They had no right to arrest that man.
Actually, most of the people who are "police apologists" are people who y'know...do not behave like morons to the police.
In all honesty, is it at all possible for any of you to realize that making the case that this individual was disrupting the police's ability to do their job is just plain horsegak? Do you really think that's gonna work in court?
If you can't, we'll try a different approach, say this individual wins his lawsuit, how much is it going to cost the tax payers? How much is too much? How much $ is it worth spending before you change your minds on the whole thing and start to think, maybe next time police can put on some big boy pants and actually understand the message behind the whole sticks and stones thing.
Understand, he did not approach police, they approached him. That says a lot.
If you cannot actually present a legitimate argument Crab without thinly veiled insults, why did you even bother posting this video?
You clearly did not even read your own article or the links contained within it.
Even a cursory reading should have made it clear that your title is misleading and that you would be exhibiting a serious lack of understanding about the situation.
Kanluwen wrote: If you cannot actually present a legitimate argument Crab without thinly veiled insults, why did you even bother posting this video?
You clearly did not even read your own article or the links contained within it.
Even a cursory reading should have made it clear that your title is misleading and that you would be exhibiting a serious lack of understanding about the situation.
In all honesty, is it at all possible for any of you to realize that making the case that this individual was disrupting the police's ability to do their job is just plain horsegak? Do you really think that's gonna work in court?
If you can't, we'll try a different approach, say this individual wins his lawsuit, how much is it going to cost the tax payers? How much is too much? How much $ is it worth spending before you change your minds on the whole thing and start to think, maybe next time police can put on some big boy pants and actually understand the message behind the whole sticks and stones thing.
Understand, he did not approach police, they approached him. That says a lot.
Crab, let's look at this another way, what would have happened if one of the cops had been killed because this guy distracted him at a crucial time in the raid? It was horrible that the dog got shot, but his owner was putting himself in a fairly dangerous situation. It wasn't that he was just yelling at the cops, but that he was walking around the police vehicles, practically into the middle of the action where an officer could potentially get killed trying to protect him from any gunfire that might have happened.
There were other people on the scene, filming, but they were no where near as close as this guy was.
In all honesty, is it at all possible for any of you to realize that making the case that this individual was disrupting the police's ability to do their job is just plain horsegak? Do you really think that's gonna work in court?
If you can't, we'll try a different approach, say this individual wins his lawsuit, how much is it going to cost the tax payers? How much is too much? How much $ is it worth spending before you change your minds on the whole thing and start to think, maybe next time police can put on some big boy pants and actually understand the message behind the whole sticks and stones thing.
Understand, he did not approach police, they approached him. That says a lot.
Crab, let's look at this another way, what would have happened if one of the cops had been killed because this guy distracted him at a crucial time in the raid?
By that logic one officer should have arrested the other for talking to him and distracting his ability to shoulder his rifle and keep overwatch of the situation. But his submachine gun was not pressed against his shoulder and his attention was on his fellow officer engaging him in conversation.
These were uniform officers casually walking around the perimeter and the dog owner kept the same distance that the other individual to the left did, the officers approached him, he did not approach the officers.
The situation looked fairly under control, enough for officers to leave cuffed individuals to sit on a curb, any of whom could have certainly attempted to flee. They were alone sitting on the curb at the start of the video without the two officers in close proximity to them. The officers later casually walk over and stood next to the cuffed individuals sitting on the curb and engage eachother in conversation.
The whole "him yelling stuff" could have done something, if it had caused an issue, something that affected the officers ability to do their jobs and as such breaking the law I would understand.
Guy walked out behind the unoccupied police vehicles and back to the corner. Sorry to hurt your gentle feeling but his ass be zipped cuffed. You do not walk around behind vehicles on a raid. The possibility of distracting a cop on the raid is high. Basically you making someone look out the box instead of keeping eye's in the box. As for the dog. Cop tried twice to determined the attitude of the dog. Three shots into the Rottweiler. Even the bystanders knew what was going to happen. You know quite a few Rotts have somewhat a nasty temper right?
I've a feeling though your convinced US LEO, US Military, and US Gov't probably are jack booted thugs eh
I've no feeling towards the dog being I killed enough feral dogs in Afghanistan
Jihadin wrote: Guy walked out behind the unoccupied police vehicles and back to the corner. Sorry to hurt your gentle feeling but his ass be zipped cuffed. You do not walk around behind vehicles on a raid. The possibility of distracting a cop on the raid is high. Basically you making someone look out the box instead of keeping eye's in the box. As for the dog. Cop tried twice to determined the attitude of the dog. Three shots into the Rottweiler. Even the bystanders knew what was going to happen. You know quite a few Rotts have somewhat a nasty temper right?
I've a feeling though your convinced US LEO, US Military, and US Gov't probably are jack booted thugs eh
I've no feeling towards the dog being I killed enough feral dogs in Afghanistan
Feral dogs are dangerous, i wouldnt either.
Also, the first two might not be bullies, but the last one definitely is.
Think the cop got nailed by the rott on his non firing hand though. It was real close and freaking fast. Still though that was good discipline. Just three shots and not a "pray n spray"
I admit I would have "jack booted" him. Except I be aiming at him down my barrel along with a couple more troops. Made him get on his knee's and have both hands on top of his head fingers lace and leg crossed. Stick an ankle between his ankles to prevent him uncrossing his leg and grasped all fingers maintaining a tight control. Mind you I will not get between my Shooter(s) and the "suspect". He would forever consider me gay because I nor my troops are not afraid to feel up guy butt crack and his "Mr. Happy". If I feel he is being...say....angry towards me...I just squeeze the fingers till he comply and continue the body search. Then we get him lay flat and then zip cuff x 3 his ankle (he can shuffle) and zip cuff if hands behind his back and then place a sandbag over his head
BTW anyone else notice none of the cops aimed their Sub-auto at the guy....
So do not forget to pick up that empty water bottle, silence is guilt, and I am always correct in Force Protection
edit
The third officer did. The one that walked between the police vehicles. The Shooter of the dog. He was the guard on the vehicles.
Jihadin wrote: I've a feeling though your convinced US LEO, US Military, and US Gov't probably are jack booted thugs eh
I'm convinced that anyone acting accordingly can fit that description.
Are you ignoring the fact he was putting himself in harms way and forcing the officers to act by walking around the police vehicles?
Seeing as neither officer even seemed to notice him doing that I can't see that being a justification.
How do you know he wasn't noticed? The fact is he was yelling before he went over by the cars, but it was only after he went by them that the police came over.
Is that how th military deal with situations like that?
What situation? The one I describe above? Its how I would handle the situation. Being that I have troops looking in and out on a cordon and search. Why are you or for Gawdsake any of you all want to walk into my AO (Area of Operation).
Mind you have chemo drugs (treatment this morning) and pain meds running through me right now. I've no idea what your talking about
Hoping that no one from Canada calls the cops on me.....
Purple Saturday wrote: You should be able to shout anything you want to at the police, anytime, without fear that they will shoot your dog.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
Well, actually, it ran at them then stopped. Only when the officer lunged at it did it jump up and snap at him. I'm not saying it wasn't an aggressive posture, but still, for reasons beyond my understanding, he tried to grab a large dog. When he didn't like how the dog reacted, he shot it.
And this is exactly my viewpoint. The dog was warning the officers about them manhandling his alpha. Dogs protect packmates, it's what they do.
Look, I'm not gonna apologize for the guy or anything but when a law enforcement feels that he can shoot MY dog for attempting to defend me you can bet your ass that I will be extremy distraught.
Besides, what's next LEO's believing they can shoot anyone who has a threatening tone or posture?
If the guy had properly secured his dog in the vehicle it wouldn't have happened. We don't even know if the police were arresting the guy, all we know is that they were cuffing him.
Purple Saturday wrote: You should be able to shout anything you want to at the police, anytime, without fear that they will shoot your dog.
A rottweiler was charging at them... They didn't just say "Hey, lets go arrest that guy and shoot his dog."
There was a lot of things going on here. Why not examine all of the facts, instead of building your own picture off of the misleading title of the thread.
Well, actually, it ran at them then stopped. Only when the officer lunged at it did it jump up and snap at him. I'm not saying it wasn't an aggressive posture, but still, for reasons beyond my understanding, he tried to grab a large dog. When he didn't like how the dog reacted, he shot it.
And this is exactly my viewpoint. The dog was warning the officers about them manhandling his alpha. Dogs protect packmates, it's what they do.
Look, I'm not gonna apologize for the guy or anything but when a law enforcement feels that he can shoot MY dog for attempting to defend me you can bet your ass that I will be extremy distraught.
Besides, what's next LEO's believing they can shoot anyone who has a threatening tone or posture?
It was a tense situation made worse by the idiocy of the owner, who had previous run ins, walking around by police vehicles during the course of a raid while trying to push the buttons of the officers on the scene while putting himself in danger. Rather than risk him getting hurt or killed or worse, an officer, they decided to arrest him so they didn't have to worry about what stupid thing he would next do. At that point, his dog threatened, then attacked, forcing the police to shoot it. A sad and wasteful end for what seemes like a good and loyal dog, but the owner set events in motion by intruding into a danger zone, putting the police at risk.
You notice everyone else was across the street...except the bald headed white guy that was on Imadummy left by the house...he kept a good distance. Imadummy just had to go near LEO vehicles on a raid. Granted the two LEO officers didn't see him but one thing a cop is not without...is comms. Cannot outrun a radio signal
Jihadin wrote: You notice everyone else was across the street...except the bald headed white guy that was on Imadummy left by the house...he kept a good distance. Imadummy just had to go near LEO vehicles on a raid. Granted the two LEO officers didn't see him but one thing a cop is not without...is comms. Cannot outrun a radio signal
Yup, I don't imagine in a situation like that, they would leave any blind spots. Just because those two were focused on some other area in the situation doesn't mean they didn't have someone covering the area the dog owner intruded into. My guess is he was looking for a law suit from reading about his past with the police.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
Kan is absolutely right. If what was said about the guy shouting things at the police is true (I won't watch this video), then unlike in situations where police are actually being heavy handed thugs, it would seem as though this was just a bid at antagonizing police that backfired.
I actually feel more bad about the dog being shot than if the guy would have been shot. The dog was just trying to be a good dog, and do what dogs do. Humans should know better.
How it's even possible to comment one way or another without watching the video is beyond me.
Did YOU watch the videos you post or read the article?
The man in question, who was "arrested for filming" has a record of domestic violence and civil suits against the Hawthorne police department.
The man in question had also apparently stopped his car and gotten his dog out SPECIFICALLY to film the raid in progress and in the process started questioning "Why there was no black cops" and shouting about the raid being a "civil rights violation".
Still want to say that this was all just the police at fault, or are you willing to wise up and realize that he was trying to stir the pot?
Have you ever been to Hawthorne? I have. Police should not entertain such things as this guy was doing, especially in that area, in a region with a history of very clear racial tensions. The guy with the dog should have been ignored. Police behaving like it was an upperclass or other quiet suburb was the problem. That they tried to overstep their authority got a dog killed. The owner put the dog in the car when the police approached. The police did absolutely NOTHING to defuse the situation. Instead, they escalated it, in a way that they should KNOW would provoke an animal known to be a defensive animal.
That dog was perfectly fine and cheerful the whole time until his owner was threatened. It doesn't take a dog whisperer to think about the threats in a situation, and defuse it to prevent damage to property, which a dog is under law, sad to say. Based on the video, the police were wrong because they escalated a non-threat into a threat.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If you listened you can hear him yelling things at the cops. Such as "why are there no black cops here?" or(before he got arrested) "This is a civil rights violation"
And that had what affect on the two officers doing their job>?
If you were not so obviously invested in your viewpoint of police as "heavy handed thugs", you would understand that the individual in question is doing something very common when police raid areas with significant populations of one ethnicity or another. The goal of the guy filming it is to provoke a confrontation between himself and the police, usually in the hopes of inciting something more from the populace.
It is the intent of the individual to start something up, and police are usually very aware of it during situations such as raids.
Kan is absolutely right. If what was said about the guy shouting things at the police is true (I won't watch this video), then unlike in situations where police are actually being heavy handed thugs, it would seem as though this was just a bid at antagonizing police that backfired.
I actually feel more bad about the dog being shot than if the guy would have been shot. The dog was just trying to be a good dog, and do what dogs do. Humans should know better.
How it's even possible to comment one way or another without watching the video is beyond me.
Did YOU watch the videos you post or read the article?
The man in question, who was "arrested for filming" has a record of domestic violence and civil suits against the Hawthorne police department.
The man in question had also apparently stopped his car and gotten his dog out SPECIFICALLY to film the raid in progress and in the process started questioning "Why there was no black cops" and shouting about the raid being a "civil rights violation".
Still want to say that this was all just the police at fault, or are you willing to wise up and realize that he was trying to stir the pot?
Have you ever been to Hawthorne? I have. Police should not entertain such things as this guy was doing, especially in that area, in a region with a history of very clear racial tensions. The guy with the dog should have been ignored. Police behaving like it was an upperclass or other quiet suburb was the problem. That they tried to overstep their authority got a dog killed. The owner put the dog in the car when the police approached. The police did absolutely NOTHING to defuse the situation. Instead, they escalated it, in a way that they should KNOW would provoke an animal known to be a defensive animal.
That dog was perfectly fine and cheerful the whole time until his owner was threatened. It doesn't take a dog whisperer to think about the threats in a situation, and defuse it to prevent damage to property, which a dog is under law, sad to say. Based on the video, the police were wrong because they escalated a non-threat into a threat.
edit- clarify
I don't call a guy with a police history, going in around police cars during a raid, a non threat.
Hold Relapse. He just stayed behind the police vehicles. So Imadummy head was visual but not the rest of his body. The third officer I'm getting the vibe he's been "Down Range" by the way he moved towards Imadummy. He stayed behind cover (LEO vehicles) till he needed to go into the open...notice he always stayed to the side of the other two when the rott came out. I think he also bumped the chubby officer on his right to keep out of his LoS. . The other good thing was the two coming down the side walk didn't do so covering Imadummy under muzzle. To those who think LEO are the "Bad" guys here you cannot judge the situation unless you been in similar situations.
Jihadin wrote: Hold Relapse. He just stayed behind the police vehicles. So Imadummy head was visual but not the rest of his body. The third officer I'm getting the vibe he's been "Down Range" by the way he moved towards Imadummy. He stayed behind cover (LEO vehicles) till he needed to go into the open...notice he always stayed to the side of the other two when the rott came out. I think he also bumped the chubby officer on his right to keep out of his LoS. . The other good thing was the two coming down the side walk didn't do so covering Imadummy under muzzle. To those who think LEO are the "Bad" guys here you cannot judge the situation unless you been in similar situations.
With him by the cars, how were the police to know he wasn't scoping for weapons? Like you say, there was a lot happening there. The last thing the police needed was one more jackass to keep track of in a potentialy dangerous circumstance.
I think we can all agree it's terribly sad to watch the dog die like that. I have a pretty extensive background in policing, including having served as a police officer and getting an undergraduate degree in policing. I'd like to put in my two-cents on the way this was handled, but I don't know if it is out of line because I'm not American.
masterdoobie wrote: I think we can all agree it's terribly sad to watch the dog die like that. I have a pretty extensive background in policing, including having served as a police officer and getting an undergraduate degree in policing. I'd like to put in my two-cents on the way this was handled, but I don't know if it is out of line because I'm not American.
Go for it. It won't be the worst thing that happened on this forum.
LOL thanks for reminding me on the time that someone jumped me for wanting to be on the water cannon during OWS protest.
Yes I know US Troops cannot be used against US Citizens unless a US Citizen becomes a threat and starts shooting at troops . How many of you all off the bat caught that? Him walking behind the LEO vehicles in their AO that started it off. Imadummy would have been alright if he stayed on his corner. Imadummy got stupid, went into "Lost my frame of mind" by walking behind the LEO vehicles and back to his corner, he knew what his dog was going to do that. Hate to say it if he owned that dog puppy on up. Its fun to me to see how many people assume those that wear uniforms are evil
from the article: "The Hawthorne Police Department paid One Million Dollars to a Settle Lawsuit in which it was alleged a man was kicked in the face while handcuffed and then falsely prosecuted along with his wife to cover up the brutality. Evidence the plaintiffs were prepared to present at trial included a photograph of an officer appearing to kick the handcuffed plaintiff in the face and a surveillance video allegedly depicting officers high-fiving each other as the injured plaintiff suffered from a broken jaw.
After approval by the City Council, Hawthorne paid $1,000,000, (one million dollars) to settle Goodrow v. Hawthorne Police Department, Case No. CV- 07-5253 (VBV), on the eve of trial in United States District Court, Central District of California, the Honorable Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank presiding."
Jihadin wrote: LOL thanks for reminding me on the time that someone jumped me for wanting to be on the water cannon during OWS protest.
Yes I know US Troops cannot be used against US Citizens unless a US Citizen becomes a threat and starts shooting at troops . How many of you all off the bat caught that? Him walking behind the LEO vehicles in their AO that started it off. Imadummy would have been alright if he stayed on his corner. Imadummy got stupid, went into "Lost my frame of mind" by walking behind the LEO vehicles and back to his corner, he knew what his dog was going to do that. Hate to say it if he owned that dog puppy on up. Its fun to me to see how many people assume those that wear uniforms are evil
I never understand why people blame the police right away.
Think Crab expanding his "attack"(?) against the Hawthorne PD. Poor word usage Crab I know. At the moment I'm a bit fudged in mind.
edit
Hawthorne Police Department Pays $1,000,000 To Settle Police Brutality & Corruption Lawsuit
The Hawthorne Police Department paid One Million Dollars to a Settle Lawsuit in which it was alleged a man was kicked in the face while handcuffed and then falsely prosecuted along with his wife to cover up the brutality. Evidence the plaintiffs were prepared to present at trial included a photograph of an officer appearing to kick the handcuffed plaintiff in the face and a surveillance video allegedly depicting officers high-fiving each other as the injured plaintiff suffered from a broken jaw.
King sued the city and a jury awarded him $3.8 million as well as $1.7 million in attorney's fees.[
After approval by the City Council, Hawthorne paid $1,000,000, (one million dollars) to settle Goodrow v. Hawthorne Police Department, Case No. CV- 07-5253 (VBV), on the eve of trial in United States District Court, Central District of California, the Honorable Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank presiding.
Officers Ian Elliot, Thomas Heffner, Melanie Newenham, Renee Descant, Jeffrey Salmon, David Gregor and Jailer Darnell Wallace were among defendants named in the lawsuit. The plaintiffs Anthony Goodrow and Karla Henriquez Goodrow sued the Hawthorne Police Officers for alleged deprivation of their civil rights resulting from excessive force, denial of medical treatment and malicious prosecution, stemming from an incident that occurred at a party on July 21, 2006.
Google the cops name. They're still serving on the force. In fact the one that shot the dog is Jeffrey Salmon
On July 21, 2006, the Hawthorne Police Department received a loud noise complaint. Plaintiffs contend that in shutting down the party, officers beat plaintiff Anthony Goodrow, handcuffed him and then continued to beat him. It was further alleged that while Mr. Goodrow was handcuffed and face down on the cement, an Officer kicked Mr. Goodrow in the face breaking his jaw. Mr. Goodrow alleged he was arrested and taken to the jail instead of the hospital causing a delay in medical treatment. The wife of Mr. Goodrow, Karla Henriquez Goodrow, alleged she witnessed part of the beating and screamed for officers to stop. She alleged they arrested her and falsely charged her with public intoxication.
The Goodrows were then prosecuted in criminal court. Ultimately the criminal charges against Mr. Goodrow were dismissed. The case against Mrs. Goodrow proceeded to trial and she was acquitted. After the acquittal the Goodrows filed a federal lawsuit against the officers for deprivation of civil rights, excessive force, malicious prosecution and denial of medical treatment.
WTF....just one million dollars?
Attorney's Glen Jonas and Christopher Driscoll (from the law firm of Jonas & Driscoll L.L.P.) litigated the civil action to its successful conclusion. Todd Melnik was the attorney who successfully defended the plaintiffs in the original criminal matters, enabling the firm of Jonas & Driscoll to litigate the civil rights action against the defendant police officers.
In April 2008, the law firm of Jonas & Driscoll L.L.P. attained a $4.5 million dollar jury verdict against Bell Gardens Police Officers. In July 2009, Jonas & Driscoll L.L.P. will bring to trial L.A. County Sheriff's Deputies accused of viciously beating Deon Dirks.
Why is this law firm not nailing the PD and City Counsel to the wall?
Little hard to pick apart. Video are much better. How loud was Imadummy music was playing from his vehicle? Bass on a open mic a pain in the ass to deal with.
Relapse wrote: What's this have to do with what this thread is originally about?
One of the officers involved was the one that shot the dog.
That and it's the same police department.
The video we have here, though, shows it was the dog owner at fault for going over by the police cars and general harrasment and distraction of police in the performance of a dangerous assignment. He brought it on himself.
Relapse wrote: What's this have to do with what this thread is originally about?
One of the officers involved was the one that shot the dog.
That and it's the same police department.
The video we have here, though, shows it was the dog owner at fault for going over by the police cars and general harrasment and distraction of police in the performance of a dangerous assignment. He brought it on himself.
I dissagree with that assesment. Had the two officers simply continued talking to eachother this would not have happened.
Relapse wrote: What's this have to do with what this thread is originally about?
One of the officers involved was the one that shot the dog.
That and it's the same police department.
The video we have here, though, shows it was the dog owner at fault for going over by the police cars and general harrasment and distraction of police in the performance of a dangerous assignment. He brought it on himself.
I dissagree with that assesment. Had the two officers simply continued talking to eachother this would not have happened.
Think about this, we have a man yelling at police when they are in the middle of a situation where they may be shot. He' s acting in a distracting and hostile manner, getting over by the cars where he might be scoping for loose weapons and he has a big dog with him. Definatly not someone I'd want behind me running loose if there was potentially going to be a fire fight.
Relapse wrote: What's this have to do with what this thread is originally about?
One of the officers involved was the one that shot the dog.
That and it's the same police department.
The video we have here, though, shows it was the dog owner at fault for going over by the police cars and general harrasment and distraction of police in the performance of a dangerous assignment. He brought it on himself.
I dissagree with that assesment. Had the two officers simply continued talking to eachother this would not have happened.
Think about the situation, we have a man yelling at police when they are in the middle of a situation where they may be shot. He' s acting in a distracting manner, getting over by the cars where he might potentially be scoping for loose weapons and he has a big dog with him. Definatly not someone I'd want behind me running loose if there was potentially going to be a fire fight.
They didn't seem to notice him walking across the street and back, they were in conversation from the look of it. If the area was as hostile and chaotic as it's being made out to be, why did it look so calm? Why were officers casually waking around? Why were individuals handcuffed and left to sit on the sidewalk if the situation was so dangerous?
Relapse wrote: Think about this, we have a man yelling at police when they are in the middle of a situation where they may be shot. He' s acting in a distracting and hostile manner, getting over by the cars where he might be scoping for loose weapons and he has a big dog with him. Definatly not someone I'd want behind me running loose if there was potentially going to be a fire fight.
The arrest is likely fine. The shooting is likely fine, legally, for that matter. I'll continue to believe it wasn't necessary, though, having seen the video a few times.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I never understand why people blame the police right away.
Honestly, it sounds like you have very little experience dealing with police officers. I've traveled around the states quite a bit, and it's pretty much the same everywhere you go.
Outside of a a couple speeding tickets, I've never had any confrontations with the police directly. However, I've seen them abuse their station more than a few times, and that's more than a few times too much. I get that you love cops and all that they do, but if you honestly don't see why some people dislike and outright hate cops, and for damn legitimate reasons, then you either need to get out more or start facing the facts.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Why do you not have to have a special license to have a rottweiler?
Why would you need one?
A breed that was bred specifically for fighting and viciousness. On that is notoriously hard to train(My aunt breeds dogs for a living/hobby. Her dog behavioral specialist just refuses to reform rotts and pitbulls because how dangerous they can be)
They are a dangerous breed.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I never understand why people blame the police right away.
Honestly, it sounds like you have very little experience dealing with police officers. I've traveled around the states quite a bit, and it's pretty much the same everywhere you go.
Outside of a a couple speeding tickets, I've never had any confrontations with the police directly. However, I've seen them abuse their station more than a few times, and that's more than a few times too much. I get that you love cops and all that they do, but if you honestly don't see why some people dislike and outright hate cops, and for damn legitimate reasons, then you either need to get out more or start facing the facts.
I can see, but to lump all cops into the bully category is just stupid. And most of my experiance have been on the good side of the law. Cops nearly stopped some drunk women from stabbing me. I rode around with some and saw how cop do their jobs. My scout troop leader was a cop who almost got shot as was one of my professors, cops have a job where they can die any second in our own backyard. I respect them for that.
I didn't want you to think I was going after you Crab
Besides your throwing in the articles but not understanding why his actions landed him in trouble and dog getting opted out. Those two cops talking didn't move until he walked back to his corner after his little walk over to LEO vehicles. Which he was seen by the third officer (Salmon) who was in front of the vehicles. One radio call to them and they all moved to him.
Would you walk over to LEO vehicles while their engage in a possible firefight that might break out? Would you play your music on max near them having "bass" echoing over the net everytime a mic gets open? Are you prepared to accept responsibility if a fire fight did break out and a cop, bystander, you and possible kids watching got hit? Being that you are part of the equation now. Making LEO looking out instead of in to ensure no one gets trigger happy.
All that freaking evidence from that article and they settle for a mil....whats the lawyer cut? before or after taxes on it?
edit
US troops are not allowed to have or bring over Rottweillers in Germany because how vicious they can be. Think Akita another one. We had one US Army NCO get demoted to buck private, sent back to the States, and spent time at Leavenworth. His dog got loose and like bit a kid face off damn near I think....like 2002-03.
110% blame Goering though for bringing American Raccoons to Germany. Think you can apply and purchase a fire arm to hunt those little critters down.
Relapse wrote: What's this have to do with what this thread is originally about?
One of the officers involved was the one that shot the dog.
That and it's the same police department.
The video we have here, though, shows it was the dog owner at fault for going over by the police cars and general harrasment and distraction of police in the performance of a dangerous assignment. He brought it on himself.
I dissagree with that assesment. Had the two officers simply continued talking to eachother this would not have happened.
Think about the situation, we have a man yelling at police when they are in the middle of a situation where they may be shot. He' s acting in a distracting manner, getting over by the cars where he might potentially be scoping for loose weapons and he has a big dog with him. Definatly not someone I'd want behind me running loose if there was potentially going to be a fire fight.
They didn't seem to notice him walking across the street and back, they were in conversation from the look of it. If the area was as hostile and chaotic as it's being made out to be, why did it look so calm? Why were officers casually waking around? Why were individuals handcuffed and left to sit on the sidewalk if the situation was so dangerous?
They did notice him by the cars, though and that's when they moved on him. I think more than a few people here that have been in similar situations can tell you everything seems calm one second, then all hell breaks loose the next. The guy was in the wrong. My initial post, if you look at it was blaming the cops also, but as I looked at the video more and thought about it, it was just about all on the owner.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I never understand why people blame the police right away.
Honestly, it sounds like you have very little experience dealing with police officers. I've traveled around the states quite a bit, and it's pretty much the same everywhere you go.
Outside of a a couple speeding tickets, I've never had any confrontations with the police directly. However, I've seen them abuse their station more than a few times, and that's more than a few times too much. I get that you love cops and all that they do, but if you honestly don't see why some people dislike and outright hate cops, and for damn legitimate reasons, then you either need to get out more or start facing the facts.
In my experiences, I've seen and encountered a mixture of incredibly professional police officers and individuals who probably should find a different career path, I have certainly witnessed abuses of power by many individuals with a varied aray of chosen professions. I'm very pro union but there are always two sides of the coin, I respect all that organized labor has done for the betterment of society but there are some situations like with education and policing as examples (I'm sure there are others) where a union can make it difficult to get rid of underperforming/dysfunctional individuals. I don't really understand characterizing anyone as anti-police or a "cop hater", you can disapprove of any individual’s actions without having it negatively effect your perception of that individual's chosen profession. That's basically saying anyone can feth up.
Machiavelli was kind of a douche but I agree with him to an extent on this point
"It is not titles that honor men, but men that honor titles."
I once was assaulted walking to the corner store, I had a beer bottle broken over my head and was subsequently stabbed in the neck with what was left. It didn't nick any arteries but it was a deep laceration and I lost a lot of blood and a chunk of my right scalp.The police response time was incredible and they caught every individual involved in the attack within minutes of it's occurence, one of the officers even managed to recover the top of the beer bottle with prints. Believe me when I say I've witnessed professional police and paramedic work first hand and have the utmost respect for it.
I'm pretty sure that filming is NOT legitimate grounds for arrest. Police who act outside of the boundaries of the law need to be held to the same standard as ordinary citizens. Bad shoot? Catch a murder charge. Shoot a dog when it could have been avoided? Should be no different than if I decide to waste some lady's purse dog for no reason at all.
Think what screwed the Rottweiller mind up. During the video watch the dog near that spot on the ground. Kept sniffing the same spot and marked it. Think another female dog in heat pee'd there. Dog still has his nuts. Can see them flapping as the dog does the kick chicken
I've a feeling the ones walking out the building saw how close Imadummy was to the vehicles
At the 3:00 mark you can see that Salmon was possibly checking vehicles. Looking through the driver windows for the upper barrel of the shotguns.
At the 2:53 mark you see two officers looking to have come out the building. Salmon heading towards suspect.
At the 2:25 mark you see the officer closest to the road visualy glance check if Salmon was abreast of them
At the 2:10 mark you can see the two Officers reacting to verbal. They looked at the suspect, looked back towards the building that was being secured, and then moved towards the suspect.
At the 1:52 mark one of the officers started heading towards him but went back to his battle buddy
Why was there no LEO on that end of the street....
It's unclear if the dog even snapped, though he definitely lunged. Mine would likely do the same if I was shouting with a bunch of dudes around me, and one of them tried to grab for his leash. And he's not a Rottweiler, just a standard bear-fighting boxer.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Legal shot when the dog lunged, bad arrest though. Should have just let dumb ass be.
Yep.
I feel bad for the dog. Its owner was a dumb ass that pushed the cops when he just didn't need to. And the cops showed poor judgement in reacting to this guy's nonsense. Only one that did as it ought to was the dog, and it got shot for its troubles.
Frankly the only being in this whole video that had the moral upper hand was the dog.
The man had the right to yell random nonsense at the police. Despite what some posters believe, "distracting the police" is not actually illegal. However the police have a lot of vaguely written laws that their disposal to arrest just about anyone ("Disturbing the peace" is a perennial favorite, my NYPD aunt & uncle agreed on); and they can always drop the charge later after deciding you sat in holding long enough for not respecting their authoritah (which was the real offense, of course). So, while you can do it, just like you can walk up to the biggest guy you know and opine that all his muscles make him look stupid, in practice both of these ideas are ill-advised.
The police, of course, could have just walked the hell away. Was there a real crime being committed here? From the way they casually sauntered over it didn't exactly look like he was actively obstructing justice despite their claim. I can't imagine that a big-city cop could have either the time or the logistics to hold every person who yells comments at them (especially when those comments didn't appear to be obscene, from the portion of tape I saw, but again it was only a partial tape). This whole thing about how he had priors is just laughable tomfoolery and after the fact smearing to try and get a little dirt everywhere. His prior lawsuits were laughable irrelevant to the situation at hand and only the most hardcore apologist could believe otherwise - trust me, you don't want to walk down that path of arguing that if someone sues the state they somehow have less protection under law. Similarly, the idea they recognized him as a domestic batterer is both unlikely, for a population of 90,000, and most saliently not germane as he wasn't currently battering anyone.
Once the police and that guy worked hand in hand to escalate the situation, yes, it was OK to shoot the dog in the technical sense and I do not think the officer should face any punishment other than the standard review.
I'm smart enough to know not to give a cop a hard time. They deal with a lot of crap as it is.
I'm sure some abuse their authority and I"m sure some are good people but labelling them all as one or the other would just be silly.
In this situation, I think it was lawful to arrest the man, and lawful to shoot the dog. Obviously I don't think it was the best way things could have happened, but if I were to be judged by how I act compared to how I could have acted, i would be in a lot of trouble indeed.
hotsauceman1 wrote: So if I i yell at a police officer when a robbery is being committed, im perfectly ok?
It depends on what you're yelling, how loud you're yelling it, and if the office in question believes, in his subjective opinion, if it has risen to the level of disturbing the peace or obstructing an investigation. So the correct answer is "maybe, but maybe not".
As always the best policy when dealing with the police is "Don't, voluntarily". There are a lot of good cops, a lot of bad ones, and plenty in between, but at the end of the day as a private citizen if they decide to beat the living hell out of you because shup up, that's why; chances are the worst punishment they will have is a (paid) suspension while they investigate and then find the officer was justified because you looked threatening. Treat them accordingly, and give them a wide berth. You see them doing something unlawful? Take video and post it on youtube send it to the media.
Hey if it's worth any value at all to you Hotsauce. I don't hate -all- cops. You know the ones that actually do their job. The ones that protect the people instead of fething tazering people to death. Beating people to the ground for video taping them on phones. Those guys are my friends. Not these asshats.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Those sound like a reason not to trust those cops, not to distrust all cops in general.
Well, how do you determine the bad ones from the good ones? Especially when the bad ones are protected by the department? I mean, the Blue Code of Silence didn't start getting called that for no reason.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Those sound like a reason not to trust those cops, not to distrust all cops in general.
I'll trust cops when they actually show up to a call.
I was once threated with deadly force by a Sheriff. So I ran inside a Rite-Aid and called the cops.
4 hours later they showed up. Despite the fact that I told them only that "A man with a gun is threating people at the Elm St. Rite-Aid."
When they did show up... the Sheriff was gone. But I know my cops... he was hiding in the area waiting for me to leave.
I asked the cops if they could follow me out of the parking lot and make sure that I left without being harassed.
Sure enough they spotted him in the parking lot of the Hippo paper. I was able to leave.
However I took out my rage on the Police and State police who actually did quite a bit of work trying to figure out what had happened.
Turned out the Sheriff was off duty... in the wrong county and had "borrowed" the vehicle he was in without permission.
Needless to say he got in a bit of trouble over it. Filing the report was great as the officers there with me while filling out my formal complain were telling me more stories about this guy.
Monster Rain wrote: Daedalus, It seems like you are saying to trust none of them since you can't trust some of them.
Well, what does it mean to "trust" them, anyway?
If I'm calling them, then I have little choice but to "trust" them. If I'm not calling them, then I best not be interacting with them, because I'm doing nothing wrong. Ergo, if I'm interacting with them because they initiated dialogue, something is terribly wrong, and I'm probably going to be very, very cautious.
I was simply offering justification for why people don't like them, and pointing out that you have no way to easily tell if the guy walking up behind your car is a decent guy or a power-tripping thug. And yes, I've met both.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: All I know is I nearly cried when I saw the poor dog, and I thought the policeman was a complete gak for not giving it the coup de grace.
I was afraid of that, which is why I spared myself the video.
You gotta be careful about what you put into your head. You forget what you want to remember, and remember what you want to forget.
For the purposes of this discussion how about we you "not automatically ascribe malicious intent to" instead of trust since the semantics seem to be an issue here.
Some are nice.
Some are indifferent.
Some want to bite you.
And so, because you never know if chief wiggums is going to smile at you or beat you down because he's having a bad day and because you "resisted arrest", why would you naturally want to trust any cop? I find it perfectly acceptable to not trust a cop until you know them, much like you would a dog. Until they show you that they are nice, treat them like they're about to give you a very bad day.
Also, the concept that cops only screw with bad guys is laughably naive.
Rosby has filed a complaint against Hawthorne police for killing his dog, one of six complaints he's filed in recent years for harassment and racial profiling, according to Daily Breeze.
The story says he also sued the police department before, saying officers broke his rib when they responded to a domestic violence call. Rosby has convictions including battery and driving under the influence, according to Daily Breeze.
So the guy sounds like an donkey-cave that created a situation wherein the officers were forced to shoot his dog. The video clearly shows the officers attempting to deal with the dog without lethal force at first, and are left with no other choice.
The military doesn't write you speeding tickets, beat your kid and shoot your dog. (They send us else where to do the last two to furinners) also we can't abuse our authority over the civilian populace as we in fact have none.
I kind to have to side with the cops.....I deal with the unknown on my deployments that could get me wounded or killed....LEO's that deal with it year after year....of course when I get into incidents it involves quite a bit of lead getting exchange...or something goes "boom"....everyone not getting the LEO's didn't move till after he walked back from behind the LEO's vehicles? Only a few here can see it and understand what he did was wrong? Or is it being ignored because it doesn't fit your perception?
This video is disturbing. I don't really want to focus on the police shooting the dog because to my eyes the events that lead to the shooting should not have happened. The individual they arrested was one of at least 3 filming the raid. He was in no way disrupting the police's ability to do their job. 2 officers carrying submachine guns march up and arrest him for no apparent reason (he complies). I can't think of a dog that would not have had the same reaction to their owner being surrounded.
He was blaring Usher on repeat out of his car at a SWAT barricade while the police were trying to deal with an armed robbery. He had no business being there in the first place.
Rosby has filed a complaint against Hawthorne police for killing his dog, one of six complaints he's filed in recent years for harassment and racial profiling, according to Daily Breeze.
The story says he also sued the police department before, saying officers broke his rib when they responded to a domestic violence call. Rosby has convictions including battery and driving under the influence, according to Daily Breeze.
So the guy sounds like an donkey-cave that created a situation wherein the officers were forced to shoot his dog. The video clearly shows the officers attempting to deal with the dog without lethal force at first, and are left with no other choice.
Aza has it 100%.
The dog owner needed to secure the dog and there would have been no issues.
The dog owner was wrong, the cops had no other choice.
This thread surprises me a bit. I'm shocked at all the hate for police officers. SOME cops are dill holes, MOST are not. The vast majority of police are fine people that truly uphold the laws,not these asshats that you lot are talking about and showing us some YouTube vids as proof of them all being evil. The times I've had to call on the police had typically been good examples of law enforcement, and the only time it wasn't I asked the officer to ask for a state trooper to be present and all was well after that.
I think you lot need to stop watching YouTube for reasons to hate on a group. Weather that cop was good or bad, and weather or not the owner of the dog was at fault, the fact remains that a large, scary looking dog jump at the officer... twice, the last time with obvious intention to bite said officer. In that moment, the officer had good reason.
Let's stop hating on cops just cause of one possible donkey-cave
Regardless of youtube, I can't help but be nervous around people who could shoot me without repercussions.
I'm more than willing to say that these police weren't looking for trouble, and may even be in the right for the most part. That still doesn't change the fact that the above is a fear that exists in my mind every time I see a cop behind me. It might be irrational.
Let's please try to limit painting entire careers and/or communities in a negative nature--as there is a good chance that either Dakka has users (Or family) that happen to be in that career field. As always, let's try to be objective and judge others by their conduct--rather than their profession. Thanks.
daedalus wrote: Regardless of youtube, I can't help but be nervous around people who could shoot me without repercussions.
I'm more than willing to say that these police weren't looking for trouble, and may even be in the right for the most part. That still doesn't change the fact that the above is a fear that exists in my mind every time I see a cop behind me. It might be irrational.
No not irrational, I get afraid when a cop is behind me as well, but that's because I done want to get pulled over. It's definitely NOT because I'm afraid the officer might shoot me. Because, that's what cops do apparently, you know, just shoot people
Didn't NYPD admitted that's how they train? A hail of gun fire to bring down the "perp" Also have to take into account how often these LEO's have to draw their side arms in response. Seriously think train, train, train, and more training needs to be implemented.
Jihadin wrote: I kind to have to side with the cops.....I deal with the unknown on my deployments that could get me wounded or killed....LEO's that deal with it year after year....of course when I get into incidents it involves quite a bit of lead getting exchange...or something goes "boom"....everyone not getting the LEO's didn't move till after he walked back from behind the LEO's vehicles? Only a few here can see it and understand what he did was wrong? Or is it being ignored because it doesn't fit your perception?
You can't say that pointing a smartphone while shouting comments is equivalent to planting IEDs and sniping at patrols.
Ignore the fact he walked behind the LEO's vehicles? Miss the part before he got arrested the one cop was pulled back like I posted earlier? I would have done the same like I posted earlier. Do not walk into my "AO". Even the bystanders knew he was screwing up.
Orcs might have a higher BS then the NYPD, what was that last big one? Shot eleven people and none of them were the perp? Talk about shooting "minute of barn door".
daedalus wrote: Regardless of youtube, I can't help but be nervous around people who could shoot me without repercussions.
I'm more than willing to say that these police weren't looking for trouble, and may even be in the right for the most part. That still doesn't change the fact that the above is a fear that exists in my mind every time I see a cop behind me. It might be irrational.
No not irrational, I get afraid when a cop is behind me as well, but that's because I done want to get pulled over. It's definitely NOT because I'm afraid the officer might shoot me. Because, that's what cops do apparently, you know, just shoot people
Well, it happens. Remember that time those cops shot the women during the Dorner manhunt because two women in a blue Toyota look just a little too much like one guy in a grey Nissan?
Sure, it's one time, but it was also the first thing that came to mind. I don't exactly go out of my way to research this stuff, because it's not particularly pleasant and would only fuel my paranoia.
I might also point out the thread where the police occupy the guys house against his wishes without a warrant and then beanbag him and his dog to submission.
