Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Shuma....would that be called situational awareness?

Which is it, ricochet or over-penetration? It can't be both

Yes you can have both. Doesn't take much to punch through flesh

mattyrm wrote:
I don't agree mate. I think if I was there I would have ignored the dog, and if it did actually bite someone, I would boot it in the face two or three times and it would whimper and flee. A dog that isn't starving or mad will whimper/yelp and run when It knows it isn't going to win. That is how dogs work, they aren't as smart as you seem to think, and if it is only biting you for "gaks and giggles" it doesn't have enough invested in the situation to want to deal with numerous kicks to the face.

Doesn't matter. Dogs are not allowed to be aggressive in the street.

And a dog that has been booted about a bit doesn't even need to see a vet, let alone get put to sleep!

Do you think I meant because of its injuries? No dude, it's going to be put to sleep because it went after a cop. A JUDGE is going to order the animal destroyed. This is VERY COMMON.

And I can testify to that because my border terrier is great with humans but hates dogs. He slipped his leash two years ago and started savaging a black Labrador while it yelped in terror (it was the bigger of the two and did an awful job of self defence to be fair!) the owner stamped on his head about ten times, until I caught up and scooped him into my arms, and he was only groggy for about 30 seconds. I didn't take him to the vet, and I gave him a slap myself for good measure.

If he had pursued it with the legal system, your dog would have been put down and I would have agreed.

If I was a cop and said dog was gnashing on my mate's leg, then I would kick it 3 or 4 times and expect it to flee, your talking numerous large men here! If at that point it still wasn't slowing its attack, I might get my baton out and possibly beat it half to death yes, or possibly shoot it If I really really felt the need but only AT THAT MOMENT.

And you would be a horrible officer. That dog just attacked a police officer and you let it go like it was nothing. When it goes off to kill someone's animal or child, you are now responsible.

The point is, in this instance, it didn't NEED to be shot because it wasn't even snaffling anybody!

We don't know what it was doing, since all we have is questionable newspaper testimony.

You have a logical escalation of threat that is trained to soldiers and policemen for use when dealing with humans, why isn't it the same with other animals?

Because animals do not have constitutional rights. Legally animals are property.

With a human you go from passive to aggressive posture, then you give verbal warnings, then you use physical restraint, then force, THEN deadly force. Why not with a dog?

Really? I don't even know how to respond to this one.

So with a barking dog why not just try and ignore it?

If the dog was JUST barking, then they should have waited for animal control. My argument isn't that this wasn't the case, just that we don't actually know what happened and that there IS a scenario where shooting is justified even with a dog this small.

If that is impossible, why not attempt to reassure the animal - then posture aggressively- then minor physical warning such as a threatning swipe with a baton - then an actual strike with a baton - then numerous strikes with a baton, THEN shoot it.

Because dogs have teeth. If you MUST force it into the use of force matrix, it's at the level of a person with a knife. A very fast person with a knife and a small outline.

Not just rock up, see it barking - slot it.

There was really no need for it.

Based on your flawed understanding of police work combined with your interpretation of a horribly written news piece designed to get you angry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:Shuma....would that be called situational awareness?

Which is it, ricochet or over-penetration? It can't be both

Yes you can have both. Doesn't take much to punch through flesh

He can't argue both. He can't use a gun's propensity to do one as an argument for the other. He said that police guns are notorious for over-penetration, then said they could ricochet a mile. Which is it? A gun with high energy is going to ricochet LESS. A gun that is NOTORIOUS for over-penetration is a gun that's overpowered. If it's overpowered, then it's going to have a LOWER risk of ricochet

Rented Tritium wrote:

Based on your flawed understanding of police work combined with your interpretation of a horribly written news piece designed to get you angry.

Hey just so were clear like, I'm not angry about it. It wasn't my dog.

I just don't think it needed shooting if it didn't even go to bite anyone.

He can't argue both. He can't use a gun's propensity to do one as an argument for the other. He said that police guns are notorious for over-penetration, then said they could ricochet a mile. Which is it? A gun with high energy is going to ricochet LESS.

You are not the king of physics it would seem.

A gun that is NOTORIOUS for over-penetration is a gun that's overpowered. If it's overpowered, then it's going to have a LOWER risk of ricochet

A more energetic projectile is going to maintain more velocity when it ricochets. It has less of a chance of doing so due to the propensity to enter the object it would otherwise bounce off of, but asphalt at a 30 degree angle would to ricochet a 50 caliber round.

mattyrm wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Based on your flawed understanding of police work combined with your interpretation of a horribly written news piece designed to get you angry.

Hey just so were clear like, I'm not angry about it. It wasn't my dog.

I just don't think it needed shooting if it didn't even go to bite anyone.

IF it didn't go to bite anyone, I 100% agree.

But I don't think we actually KNOW that since that news piece is so crappy.

For further proof.....on youtube there was a Iraqi Insurgent with a RPG going to engage the marines down a pave road...

ShumaGorath wrote:
A more energetic projectile is going to maintain more velocity when it ricochets. It has less of a chance of doing so due to the propensity to enter the object it would otherwise bounce off of, but asphalt at a 30 degree angle would to ricochet a 50 caliber round.

Ok, but see we're talking about what the cops should take into account when doing a thing.

The argument made was that they shouldn't have IRRESPONSIBLE used guns when there could be ricochets.

The likelihood and danger of a ricochet has got to be greater than the danger to nearby people.

If the dog wasn't going after anyone, I actually don't think they should have shot, that's not even what I'm arguing anyway.

But on the assumption that it WAS, shooting is fine. If there is ANY judgement about ricochets to be made, it's that the cop can see behind the dog. Is there a sidewalk, Y/N? But the armchair cops all want to assume that there might have been and guns are NEVER ok.

And like I said, if the dog is big enough to block a sidewalk, maybe a regular gun isn't the right call anyway.

Ok, but see we're talking about what the cops should take into account when doing a thing.

I was talking about you being bad at physics, which given your thorough lack of understanding of dog scale is starting to make this whole kit and kaboodle pretty farcical.

You should stop.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Ok, but see we're talking about what the cops should take into account when doing a thing.

I was talking about you being bad at physics, which given your thorough lack of understanding of dog scale is starting to make this whole kit and kaboodle pretty farcical.

You should stop.

Are you still on about the dog thing? Do you really not get how small a dog can be and still do serious damage? Half of the small breeds were for hunting. I saw the picture, if that dog was being aggressive, I would absolutely fething shoot it.

You can call me a girly man all you want. Nothing is worth that bite.

Are you still on about the dog thing? Do you really not get how small a dog can be and still do serious damage?

Correct. Because it's bull gak. A housecat can do serious damage too. We're not invincible rock men. The point is how difficult it is to do, and it's exceptionally difficult for a small young dog to harm fully grown adult males even when trying it's damnedest.

Half of the small breeds were for hunting. I saw the picture, if that dog was being aggressive, I would absolutely fething shoot it.

Hunting dogs track and retrieve prey, they don't run up and kill the fething deer.

You can call me a girly man all you want. Nothing is worth that bite.

Killing a small animal because you're afraid of a few scratches is cowardly.

I didn't realize that the police were firing magical Kennedy Assassination bullets.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Killing a small animal because you're afraid of a few scratches is cowardly.

Telling a cop that they need to stand there and get bitten in the name of honor and courage is stupid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
When you are a cop, you cannot be worried about courage. You're worried about getting home in one piece at the end of the day. Nothing justifies telling someone on the job that they should get extra holes in them because stopping it would be cowardly.

That's the same nonsense that makes people break OSHA rules because of peer pressure. It's a job. Nobody gets to tell you to take an injury in the name of a job.

ShumaGorath wrote:

You can call me a girly man all you want. Nothing is worth that bite.

Killing a small animal because you're afraid of a few scratches is cowardly.

Yeah, nothing is worth that bite?!

Nothing at all?

An old woman's Jack Russell bit my foot once, the little gak went for me as we passed on the pavement and got the tongue of my sneaker in its mouth and started going mental. I found it amusing, ripped my shoe from its mouth and leapt away as she tugged on tugged on the lead and apologised.

Ill tell you what I should have done, shot it in the head.

5 times.

I mean, it might do that to another kid, and nothing is worth the bite. In fact, Im going to go find out where she lives and stove its head in with a spade in an act of vigiliantism that way well spare the life of a child one day. I mean, it might do that again, and it might sever a major artery. It might do that, and then run over a busy road, and then a truck driver might swerve to miss it and then it might hit a gas station and blow up.

And then it might like.. the Iranians might see the resulting explosion on satellite, and they might think its the USA launching a Nuclear device! And then the Israelis and the Americans will retort and half of the world will die in nuclear fire because of that cursed hound!

And that is pretty much how this thread has gone. I'm sick of hearing "might" and "perhaps" and "maybe it will hit the femoral artery"

Big blokes don't need to shoot dogs 5 times if they aren't rabid and savaging people.

Rented Tritium wrote:Telling a cop that they need to stand there and get bitten in the name of honor and courage is stupid.

It's easy to post about courage from behind a keyboard though.

mattyrm wrote: Big blokes don't need to shoot dogs 5 times if they aren't rabid and savaging people.

I think if there's a potential that they could savage people, something does need to be done though. I think having animal control come and collect the dog would have been a better call, but if they had decided to wait and the dog did end up biting someone the cops would have a similar media problem.

Did you guys see the picture of this dog? It's head was above the couch cushion and it had AT LEAST 4 or 5 inches of bite. That is PLENTY.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If it turns out the dog was NOT being aggressive at all, then it doesn't matter how big it was, it was not justified.

If it turns out the dog WAS being aggressive, then it doesn't matter how SMALL it was.

Monster Rain wrote:It's easy to post about courage from behind a keyboard though.

Well sure it is, were just talking, I dont actually feel THAT strongly about the topic, and I do think that an officers life is more important than a dogs clearly, it just seems unnecessary to me, and I do think we all have the right to disagree with things that coppers do.

All I'm saying is I personally don't think you should slot a dog for barking, I think it is either a bloke being particularly cowardly or was done purely to be malicious, and I think its likely to be the latter because I don't know a grown man who is that scared of a gakky little dog that isn't foaming at the mouth.

Rented Tritium wrote:

AustonT wrote:Missed a doozy.

Rented Tritium wrote:If the kids are close enough to take a ricochet, they are in serious danger from the dog. You are SERIOUSLY overestimating the energy in a ricochet from a regular old police gun. This isn't the movies.

one of the most ignorant things I have ever seen on this board.

rule 1

Your right I do find your ignorance appallingly impolite.

A "regular old police gun" in the here and now is no less than a 9mm, probably one of the most efficient and powerful modern cartridges, and notorious for it's ability to overpenetrate.

Which is it, ricochet or over-penetration? It can't be both.

mattyrm wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:It's easy to post about courage from behind a keyboard though.

Well sure it is, were just talking, I dont actually feel THAT strongly about the topic, and I do think that an officers life is more important than a dogs clearly, it just seems unnecessary to me, and I do think we all have the right to disagree with things that coppers do.

It wasn't really aimed at you, boss.

I get your point, I'm saying that others trying to make the point that people should get bitten by dogs to prove their courage or honor is delusional.

The British police seem capable of dealing with barking dogs without shooting them.

Perhaps dogs are more aggressive in the US.

Monster Rain wrote:

mattyrm wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:It's easy to post about courage from behind a keyboard though.

Well sure it is, were just talking, I dont actually feel THAT strongly about the topic, and I do think that an officers life is more important than a dogs clearly, it just seems unnecessary to me, and I do think we all have the right to disagree with things that coppers do.

It wasn't really aimed at you, boss.

I get your point, I'm saying that others trying to make the point that people should get bitten by dogs to prove their courage or honor is delusional.

Of course it's delusional...
That's like saying 'You should cut yourself to show you are manly'

Kilkrazy wrote:The British police seem capable of dealing with barking dogs without shooting them.

Perhaps dogs are more aggressive in the US.

Hey that is an exceptionally good point.

And how often must they do it?! Seeing as almost all of the drug dealers and chavs seem to be sporting bull-terriers called Tyson!

Yeah, again, shooting the dog wasn't the best move no matter what the situation if only from a PR perspective, let alone all of the other considerations.

It does seem that there's more to this story than this clearly one-sided news piece is giving us, however.

Kilkrazy wrote:The British police seem capable of dealing with barking dogs without shooting them.

Perhaps dogs are more aggressive in the US.

There are a lot of stupid abusive pet owners...
And morons that think it's gangsta to have a pitbull

AustonT wrote:It's acknowledged that muzzle ENERGY, will reduce overpen, as Muzzle VELOCITY will increase that tendency, the ratio between the two blah blah. I don't care enough. That is to say that velocity also increases the Likly hood of ricochet, in ratio with the angle of attack. Blah blah...you get it I'm sure if not I'll care more in a few hours.

Physics 101. Muzzle energy is the relevant stat. Muzzle velocity is part of what defines energy. What you are looking for is the ration between velocity and MASS, not velocity and energy as velocity is already PART of energy.

What determines over penetration is muzzle energy (and a bunch of other non-velocity things like shape of the round etc etc etc, but you know that)

So for our purposes, energy really is the only thing that matters.

purplefood wrote:
That's like saying 'You should cut yourself to show you are manly'

What about "I don't mind carrying a man-bag, watching Twilight with my girlfriend, or fellating big gangs of sailors to prove how secure I am with my heterosexuality"

Kilkrazy wrote:The British police seem capable of dealing with barking dogs without shooting them.

Perhaps dogs are more aggressive in the US.

And I'll bet more officers are injured by dogs there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monster Rain wrote:Yeah, again, shooting the dog wasn't the best move no matter what the situation if only from a PR perspective, let alone all of the other considerations.

It does seem that there's more to this story than this clearly one-sided news piece is giving us, however.

Unfortunately, it's a small enough town that to get the report, one of us needs to put in a public records request.

mattyrm wrote:

purplefood wrote:
That's like saying 'You should cut yourself to show you are manly'

What about "I don't mind carrying a man-bag, watching Twilight with my girlfriend, or fellating big gangs of sailors to prove how secure I am with my heterosexuality"

Well...

Define a "big gang."

mattyrm wrote:

purplefood wrote:
That's like saying 'You should cut yourself to show you are manly'

What about "I don't mind carrying a man-bag, watching Twilight with my girlfriend, or fellating big gangs of sailors to prove how secure I am with my heterosexuality"

It's a man-satchel... Indiana Jones has one!

You should cut yourself to show you are manly'

How deep am I in the water?

Rented Tritium wrote:Unfortunately, it's a small enough town that to get the report, one of us needs to put in a public records request.

It's enough for me to know that this is a gakky news piece, that if the cops truly did something as unlikely as shooting a dog because it was barking they'll be disciplined, and that it really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.