Another cop shooting dogs. In Indiana

[edporch]

The police were justified in shooting those dogs.

One thing that grabbed my attention though was how the police officer SHOT INTO THE GROUND in an attempt to break up the fight.

Seems I read either on this forum or another about a guy who was HIMSELF attacked by dogs (was it in Carmel?) and he shot into the ground to scare them away, and HE got in trouble for it.

I just love double standards... :-)

 

[snowman46919]

The police were justified in shooting those dogs.

One thing that grabbed my attention though was how the police officer SHOT INTO THE GROUND in an attempt to break up the fight.

Seems I read either on this forum or another about a guy who was HIMSELF attacked by dogs (was it in Carmel?) and he shot into the ground to scare them away, and HE got in trouble for it.

I just love double standards... :-)

It was liberty sanders he was ticketed for doing so.

What is your opinion on why it was justified?

 

[Kick]

Why do all police officers hate all dogs?

Why do you hate all police officers?

*Generally statements made using the words all or none are usually false*
FYI.

 

[Bapak2ja]

More interesting than the original article and post is the way those who support the dogs and oppose the cops reinterpret the data to emphasize their bias. It seems to me that no amount of logic will persuade certain posters that the shoot was justified. They will find some way to defend the dogs. Anyone who disagrees with them are labeled biased dog haters. Apparently, they are ignoring their own bias.

On the other hand, those who support the shoot, emphasize the size of the dogs, the location of the fight (vacant lot), the duration of the fight (extensive since it took time for the neighbors to decide to make the call and for cop to respond), the effort of the cop to distract the dogs (warning shots), and the aggressiveness of the dogs.

Both sides have valid data. The interesting point is that neither side really knows what happened. All we know is what was written and presented by the local news media. Clearly, these folks cannot be trusted to provide accurate and complete information. News is supposed to get ratings and make money for the station, not present objective facts and complete information about an event. (They are journalists, after all. Please take note of my own personal bias. Remember, we all have them.)

What worries me is the attitude of the posters who are prepared to take aggressive action against any who bother their dogs or property, and who view their dogs on the same level as human members of the family. It makes me very glad that I do not have such people as neighbors.

What also bothers me is the attitude that children are supposed to be able to trust the cops and should not have to see such things. If the silly woman would have kept her dogs under control, the cop would not have had to do it. The kid will trust the cop if mom does, or if dad does. The child will adopt the attitude of the parent.

I am also concerned about the issue of family dog and stray dog. In the midst of a dog fight, how is the cop supposed to determine which dog is a stray and which is not a stray? Seems to me that would be pretty hard to do, and it puts a great deal of limitations on the cop. He is not omniscient, and he really does not have time to interview everyone present to discover the pedigree of each dog in the fight.

My conclusions based on this thread.
1. No matter what the cop does, someone is going to be mad at him. It makes me wonder why anyone is fool enough to want the job.

2. You cannot trust the statements of the dog owners. They are biased and will only say good things about their dog. Their dog never does anything wrong. It will be just like the family of a robber shot during a holdup. "Junior was a good boy! He never done nothing like this. That cop had no right to shoot him—even if he did shoot twice at the cashier! He didn't mean no harm!"

3. Cop had to make a decision on a course of action based on information available at the time. Dog fight has been going on for extended period of time—long enough for neighbors to call it in and for cop to respond. Dogs will not cease and desist when distracted by loud noises—warning shots. Cop takes action like a good er and shoots first, asks questions later. (Come on, 'fess up. Many of you have advocated that course of action on here. Some of the pro dog posters in this thread have come very close to taking that attitude.) Once it is all over, cop explain his actions. "Had to stop the fight. Dogs were out of control. Feared someone would get hurt. Did the best I could under the circumstances. Sorry about you dogs. Keep'e controlled and this won't happen to your next dog." Again, no matter what he says, he is wrong.

4. Move out of the neighborhood.

Now, watch the firestorm this generates! Flame on, friends. Fire away. I have suit on and my body armor.

 

[snowman46919]

More interesting than the original article and post is the way those who support the dogs and oppose the cops reinterpret the data to emphasize their bias. It seems to me that no amount of logic will persuade certain posters that the shoot was justified. They will find some way to defend the dogs. Anyone who disagrees with them are labeled biased dog haters. Apparently, they are ignoring their own bias.

On the other hand, those who support the shoot, emphasize the size of the dogs, the location of the fight (vacant lot), the duration of the fight (extensive since it took time for the neighbors to decide to make the call and for cop to respond), the effort of the cop to distract the dogs (warning shots), and the aggressiveness of the dogs.

Both sides have valid data. The interesting point is that neither side really knows what happened. All we know is what was written and presented by the local news media. Clearly, these folks cannot be trusted to provide accurate and complete information. News is supposed to get ratings and make money for the station, not present objective facts and complete information about an event. (They are journalists, after all. Please take note of my own personal bias. Remember, we all have them.)

What worries me is the attitude of the posters who are prepared to take aggressive action against any who bother their dogs or property, and who view their dogs on the same level as human members of the family. It makes me very glad that I do not have such people as neighbors.

What also bothers me is the attitude that children are supposed to be able to trust the cops and should not have to see such things. If the silly woman would have kept her dogs under control, the cop would not have had to do it. The kid will trust the cop if mom does, or if dad does. The child will adopt the attitude of the parent.

I am also concerned about the issue of family dog and stray dog. In the midst of a dog fight, how is the cop supposed to determine which dog is a stray and which is not a stray? Seems to me that would be pretty hard to do, and it puts a great deal of limitations on the cop. He is not omniscient, and he really does not have time to interview everyone present to discover the pedigree of each dog in the fight.

My conclusions based on this thread.
1. No matter what the cop does, someone is going to be mad at him. It makes me wonder why anyone is fool enough to want the job.

2. You cannot trust the statements of the dog owners. They are biased and will only say good things about their dog. Their dog never does anything wrong. It will be just like the family of a robber shot during a holdup. "Junior was a good boy! He never done nothing like this. That cop had no right to shoot him—even if he did shoot twice at the cashier! He didn't mean no harm!"

3. Cop had to make a decision on a course of action based on information available at the time. Dog fight has been going on for extended period of time—long enough for neighbors to call it in and for cop to respond. Dogs will not cease and desist when distracted by loud noises—warning shots. Cop takes action like a good er and shoots first, asks questions later. (Come on, 'fess up. Many of you have advocated that course of action on here. Some of the pro dog posters in this thread have come very close to taking that attitude.) Once it is all over, cop explain his actions. "Had to stop the fight. Dogs were out of control. Feared someone would get hurt. Did the best I could under the circumstances. Sorry about you dogs. Keep'e controlled and this won't happen to your next dog." Again, no matter what he says, he is wrong.

4. Move out of the neighborhood.

Now, watch the firestorm this generates! Flame on, friends. Fire away. I have suit on and my body armor.

Very good points sir I am sorry that you think me regarding my dog as family is a bad thing it is just how I feel. As such though he gets the same amount of discipline and reward as a child. I will admit that something needed done in this situation and very much respect the points you brought to the table however the question that I have asked repeatedly and has in turn been repeatedly ignored is that as the stray seems to be the antagonist and is allowed to live to repeatedly be an antagonist in this neighborhood.

Now to me a stray is easily spotted as I have seen several because apparently some people think that if you dump a dog in the country it will be magically taken care of.. and in a way it will be with a very ethical and quick death from my rifle. Now not all strays are easily spotted but my guess is that this stray is known in the neighborhood and the call to the police would have went something along the nature of there are two neighborhood dogs that are fighting with a stray.

If the neighbors truly saw the mastiffs as aggressors they would clearly know they belonged where they were at and the stray would be easily spotted. Also if they were recognized aggressors there would have been previous calls to the local chief regarding these animals which I would think make the officer involved at least vaguely familiar with the situation.

These are all assumptions and should be treated as such, maybe I am expecting persons involved to be far more educated than this world seems to be now a days. No one knows what they would have done in this situation so we can all sit down and be recliner captains all we want to. This forum is to express opinions and hindsight is almost always 20/20.

I do very much respect this forums members for not turning this into a breed specific warfare thread and that the only bread specific information being brought up being that the mastiff is a gentle giant. And also for being very respectful in general in expressing their opinions. It is Friday and their are ignorant masses abounding everyone have a good day and be safe.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Very good points sir I am sorry that you think me regarding my dog as family is a bad thing it is just how I feel. As such though he gets the same amount of discipline and reward as a child. I will admit that something needed done in this situation and very much respect the points you brought to the table however the question that I have asked repeatedly and has in turn been repeatedly ignored is that as the stray seems to be the antagonist and is allowed to live to repeatedly be an antagonist in this neighborhood.

Now to me a stray is easily spotted as I have seen several because apparently some people think that if you dump a dog in the country it will be magically taken care of.. and in a way it will be with a very ethical and quick death from my rifle. Now not all strays are easily spotted but my guess is that this stray is known in the neighborhood and the call to the police would have went something along the nature of there are two neighborhood dogs that are fighting with a stray.

If the neighbors truly saw the mastiffs as aggressors they would clearly know they belonged where they were at and the stray would be easily spotted. Also if they were recognized aggressors there would have been previous calls to the local chief regarding these animals which I would think make the officer involved at least vaguely familiar with the situation.

These are all assumptions and should be treated as such, maybe I am expecting persons involved to be far more educated than this world seems to be now a days. No one knows what they would have done in this situation so we can all sit down and be recliner captains all we want to. This forum is to express opinions and hindsight is almost always 20/20.

I do very much respect this forums members for not turning this into a breed specific warfare thread and that the only bread specific information being brought up being that the mastiff is a gentle giant. And also for being very respectful in general in expressing their opinions. It is Friday and their are ignorant masses abounding everyone have a good day and be safe.

Thanks for your kind and thoughtful response. It would be great if the cop could have had the time gather all that information. Just not sure it is reasonable to place such high expectations on ordinary man.

I like dogs, and will not sit idly by if one is being abused, neglected, mistreated, etc. I appreciate your concern for the dogs.

 

[MACHINEGUN]

I certainly see one social retard with lots of red.. he certainly likes his red!

 

[snowman46919]

I certainly see one social retard with lots of red.. he certainly likes his red!

I almost forgot dredd showed his face in this thread.. i guess it was because he didn't have any useless rhetoric spewed here to make notice of.

 

[edporch]

It was liberty sanders he was ticketed for doing so.

What is your opinion on why it was justified?

Simply because I've seen the damage that packs of dogs can do.

I grew up in a small NW Indiana town in the 1960's.
When I was a kid, there was no animal control, and packs of dogs would form up, and roam the town.
Many of them were people's pets that were let loose outside unrestrained and out of the control of their owners.
Otherwise nice dogs often change when they form up in a pack.

They were known to attack and intimidate people, and every so often the police would have to shoot them.

IN this case, this pack of fighting dogs could've easily turned their attention to somebody unlucky enough to be coming by walking, jogging or on a bicycle.

The fact that 2 of them were unrestrained on their own property isn't
relevant, because technically leash laws apply, even in the country (though it's rarely enforced).

If you've ever had a pack of dogs fighting, then seeing you and coming after you (I have as a kid on a bicycle) you'd know where I'm coming from.

On another note, there are to this day packs of dogs that roam through the countryside in that area.
One of my friends that had small kids at the time had to shoot at packs of dogs near their home on more than one occasion.

 

[snowman46919]

Simply because I've seen the damage that packs of dogs can do.

I grew up in a small NW Indiana town in the 1960's.
When I was a kid, there was no animal control, and packs of dogs would form up, and roam the town.
Many of them were people's pets that were let loose outside unrestrained and out of the control of their owners.
Otherwise nice dogs often change when they form up in a pack.

They were known to attack and intimidate people, and every so often the police would have to shoot them.

IN this case, this pack of fighting dogs could've easily turned their attention to somebody unlucky enough to be coming by walking, jogging or on a bicycle.

The fact that 2 of them were unrestrained on their own property isn't
relevant, because technically leash laws apply, even in the country (though it's rarely enforced).

If you've ever had a pack of dogs fighting, then seeing you and coming after you (I have as a kid on a bicycle) you'd know where I'm coming from.

On another note, there are to this day packs of dogs that roam through the countryside in that area.
One of my friends that had small kids at the time had to shoot at packs of dogs near their home on more than one occasion.

Maybe I am reading more into what you wrote and that unfortunately is the nature of things with textual communication but don't take what I said as being spiteful or vengeful towards your opinion I just wanted your thinking on the matter. Simply stating you agree or don't agree doesn't help educate the masses as to why you made your decision. No you don't have to explain yourself but it may help others from thinking your a complete whackjob We used to have the same problem in my area when my mom was a kid and now its coyotes or coy dogs, if I could get them to show themselves when I am not half tired or leaving for work I would hunt and kill every last one of them. But two pups is hardly a pack however we don't really know in this situation not enough info and too much media spin and I really hung it all out there based on assumptions in my early posts as I explained earlier.

 

[edporch]

Maybe I am reading more into what you wrote and that unfortunately is the nature of things with textual communication but don't take what I said as being spiteful or vengeful towards your opinion I just wanted your thinking on the matter. Simply stating you agree or don't agree doesn't help educate the masses as to why you made your decision. No you don't have to explain yourself but it may help others from thinking your a complete whackjob We used to have the same problem in my area when my mom was a kid and now its coyotes or coy dogs, if I could get them to show themselves when I am not half tired or leaving for work I would hunt and kill every last one of them. But two pups is hardly a pack however we don't really know in this situation not enough info and too much media spin and I really hung it all out there based on assumptions in my early posts as I explained earlier.

No, I took no offense by what you said, I was just explaining why I have the opinion I do. :-)

I inferred from the story saying"...Officer Doug Inman says he was called to a field off Mill Street, where neighbors say a pack of dogs were fighting..." that there were more than these two dogs.

If it was just these two dogs fighting, they were unleashed on their own property and the police officer shot them, I now think there's more to the story than we're being told.

 

[snowman46919]

No, I took no offense by what you said, I was just explaining why I have the opinion I do. :-)

I inferred from the story saying"...Officer Doug Inman says he was called to a field off Mill Street, where neighbors say a pack of dogs were fighting..." that there were more than these two dogs.

If it was just these two dogs fighting, they were unleashed on their own property and the police officer shot them, I now think there's more to the story than we're being told.

My feelings exactly after I walked away and thought about it for a bit.. there is far more of this story untold.

 

[THard6]

I am not a police officer, but i do have the power to arrest.. however i have been in many situations where the dog(s) have come into play. and instead of shooting the dog if i'm in there back yard or something i'll simply use the stun gun on it.. much easier and saves everyone from a huge lawsuit...

 

[snowman46919]

I am not a police officer, but i do have the power to arrest.. however i have been in many situations where the dog(s) have come into play. and instead of shooting the dog if i'm in there back yard or something i'll simply use the stun gun on it.. much easier and saves everyone from a huge lawsuit...

Unjustified is still unjustified no matter what county deputized your hospital security badge. I don't care if (whatever religious belief you hold insert here) parted the sky and granted you uncommunicable power if you use it unjustified on my property I hope you have a darn good lawyer and/or body armor if you have hurt my family.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Unjustified is still unjustified no matter what county deputized your hospital security badge. I don't care if (whatever religious belief you hold insert here) parted the sky and granted you uncommunicable power if you use it unjustified on my property I hope you have a darn good lawyer and/or body armor if you have hurt my family.

Ok, this nonsense needs to stop. Surely you actually consider you dog a member of your family. I love dogs. I respect them, but there's no way in God's green earth that I would ever compare my dog's life to that of another living breathing human being.
If I have to pick between my 78 year old grandmother, who has 10 minutes left of life, or my 2 year old lab, I'd pick my grandmother everytime.

If I have to pick between a 40 year old healthy man and my lab, I'm saving the life of the human.... everytime.

If my family would die the next day from starvation if they eat that day, you better believe that "fido" would be skinned and on a spit faster than you can say Seoul, South Korea.

human life > any animal

 

[snowman46919]

Ok, this nonsense needs to stop. Surely you actually consider you dog a member of your family. I love dogs. I respect them, but there's no way in God's green earth that I would ever compare my dog's life to that of another living breathing human being.
If I have to pick between my 78 year old grandmother, who has 10 minutes left of life, or my 2 year old lab, I'd pick my grandmother everytime.

If I have to pick between a 40 year old healthy man and my lab, I'm saving the life of the human.... everytime.

If my family would die the next day from starvation if they eat that day, you better believe that "fido" would be skinned and on a spit faster than you can say Seoul, South Korea.

human life > any animal

I wasn't saying that my dogs life is worth more or less than anything, my point is it seemed as if somehow using less than lethal means while still unjustified would make it right and it doesn't. If I came on your property picked a fight with you and then used a taser on you would that be okay even though I was unjustified because I didn't shoot you instead? Hell no it wouldn't be okay because I was still unjustified that is my point.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I wasn't saying that my dogs life is worth more or less than anything, my point is it seemed as if somehow using less than lethal means while still unjustified would make it right and it doesn't. If I came on your property picked a fight with you and then used a taser on you would that be okay even though I was unjustified because I didn't shoot you instead? Hell no it wouldn't be okay because I was still unjustified that is my point.

Ok, sorry.... I overreacted a bit.

 

[snowman46919]

Ok, sorry.... I overreacted a bit.

quite alright no need to be butthurt I am just wired and on a roll this morning