wow police officer shots dog wrong house

[fireblade]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhBJZomUBGs[/ame]

 

[Bunnykid68]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhBJZomUBGs

Rep inbound when I recharge

 

[Kutnupe14]

he might have been startled by the dog but remember the 21 foot rule? the chain was 25 feet and dogs are much faster than people. is it sop to walk around with your weapon out in a residential area on a dv call? otherwise by the time he got startled and yelled eek a dog he would have seen the dog was at the end of his chain before he cleared leather.

There are people that can put 5 rounds in someone's head if they atatcked at less than 15 yards. And neither you nor I are aware of this particular officer's ability.

 

[Kutnupe14]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhBJZomUBGs

I'm missing the point of the vid as it relates to this story

 

[NYFelon]

There are people that can put 5 rounds in someone's head if they atatcked at less than 15 yards. And neither you nor I are aware of this particular officer's ability.

There is an enormous differential in time to distance between a human attacking at 15 yds (45ft) and a dog; whose top speed is much greater, attacking from within 25 feet. The average human reaction time is around 200 milliseconds. The average dog reaction time is somewhere around 25 milliseconds. By the time this officer was aware of the dog, it would have been up, and moving at him somewhere between 30 and 40 MPH (average speed for most working line breeds) to cover 25 feet. At 30 miles an hour, a dog will cover 44 feet in one second. Granted the dog started from a stand still. So lets say 1.5 seconds to cover that distance. That gives the officer in question ≈1.3 seconds to clear leather, identify, target and fire at a speeding brown ball of teeth. A speeding ball of teeth approaching at 44 feet per second.

I don't for a second doubt the officer did fear for his safety. Dogs, when riled, can kill. And I'm not casting aspersions on this officer other than that he was at the wrong house and made a terrible mistake. A mistake I think he should be held personally civilly liable for. But your comparison of an officer that can put five rounds in the head of a man attacking at 15 yards to a dog attacking from just over 8 yards is beyond ludicrous.

 

[fireblade]

I'm missing the point of the vid as it relates to this story

Its ok if you missing the point of the video of how it relates.......

 

[Kutnupe14]

There is an enormous differential in time to distance between a human attacking at 15 yds (45ft) and a dog; whose top speed is much greater, attacking from within 25 feet. The average human reaction time is around 200 milliseconds. The average dog reaction time is somewhere around 25 milliseconds. By the time this officer was aware of the dog, it would have been up, and moving at him somewhere between 30 and 40 MPH (average speed for most working line breeds) to cover 25 feet. At 30 miles an hour, a dog will cover 44 feet in one second. Granted the dog started from a stand still. So lets say 1.5 seconds to cover that distance. That gives the officer in question ≈1.3 seconds to clear leather, identify, target and fire at a speeding brown ball of teeth. A speeding ball of teeth approaching at 44 feet per second.

I don't for a second doubt the officer did fear for his safety. Dogs, when riled, can kill. And I'm not casting aspersions on this officer other than that he was at the wrong house and made a terrible mistake. A mistake I think he should be held personally civilly liable for. But your comparison of an officer that can put five rounds in the head of a man attacking at 15 yards to a dog attacking from just over 8 yards is beyond ludicrous.

I actually meant feet. But never the less, you and my points are based on unknowns. The are certainly a multitude of ways that things could have developed.
Hey if the guy shot the dog because it thought it was a "free" kill, then hell, he deserves to be heaped in crap... but if he felt there was no other option than to put down the dog, in order to reach the door in safety, then that's entirely different.

 

[Benny]

if someone is not smart enough to see a dog on a chain and go around it instead of shooting it should they be carrying a weapon?

I fail to see why you keep trying to (spin) defend this action this officer took.
yes there can be very good reasons were the officer needs to shoot a dog loose or chained in the scope of his duty's ......this isn't it ......... there will be ramification to this officer after the investigation is complete.......

I am certainly not taking the officer's side here, but there is definitely a possible scenario that lets him off of the hook, IMO.

1. He responds to the dispatcher's wrong address (he didn't mess it up himself)
2. He goes to the front door and knocks (or in this case, is getting ready to knock).
3. Right then, the dog comes charging out of the garage (dog was hidden before), hell bent on getting him an LEO snack.
4. The officer sees the dog, but by then he is closing in fast and the officer has no clue that the dog is on a chain/he doesn't know how long the chain is.
5. He tries taking a few steps back (hence, why he would be at the window when home owner looked out) and fired enough times to stop the "threat."

 

[fireblade]

Really........ lets replace the dog with a child...........ok lets say police officer shows up to your house by mistake ......on a 911 call ......he goes to the side door .....but your kid outside playing with a toy gun and a game of army or cop and robbers comes around the corner the police officer see the toy gun which he things is real, the officer who was in fear for his life shoots your kid and kills him......... Some people and officers talk like mistakes are no big deal happen all the time .......heck its just a dog in this case.......


Police officer are trained to limited there mistakes to zero. A mistake cost lives ........period......this officer overreacted to the environment that was around him.......I have investigated some terrible police mistakes that cost lives to people in the community they serve and most had a pattern of supervisor's over looking the small mistakes in defense of there officers. I have seen what irresponsible or corrupt police officers can do. I have seen good officers twist story's or the facts in favor of another officer for the love of the brotherhood in reality they are hurting it. Being a police officer is a job of great responsibility they have one of the hardest and dangerous jobs out there.... but there decisions affect the public ......there no room for a mistakes when a officer fires his weapon in any case.....

(There was two beware of dog signs visible and that can be seen at night that officer failed to see or ignored them signs there a cascade of mistake the officer made location of him and the dog when he was shot. open garage area were dog came from etc.)

 

[Benny]

Really........ lets replace the dog with a child...........

Lets replace the dog with an alien being that is hear to destroy the world.

Or lets not replace any elements to the story and stick to arguing the facts. All I did was post a very possible scenario where the cop isn't a trigger-happy douche that likes killing dogs for fun.

 

[fireblade]

The facts are he overreacted to his environment and replace dog with kid with a toy gun in this case is very possible ....like i said yes there is scenario's were a officer must shoot a loose dog or chained dog in the performance of his duty's this case is not a example . Sorry if am passionate but his actions in this case are scary and wrong. hopefuly the department does the correct action after IA report..............

 

[phylodog]

I'm not casting aspersions on this officer other than that he was at the wrong house and made a terrible mistake. A mistake I think he should be held personally civilly liable for.

There is an awful lot of second guessing, Monday morning quarterbacking and general *****ing and whining about the police on this forum. There are protections in place for officers (and everyone else) to prevent them from being punished for mistakes of the head rather than mistakes of the heart.

Everyone likes to constantly bring up (and take out of context) the decision that the police are under no obligation to protect anyone. I don't know and cops who believe that. Start suing them for honest mistakes and see how much they'll do. I can guarantee you that I wouldn't get out of my car if I had to fear being sued every time something didn't go as I'd planned. I've always done the best I could and I've been fortunate that things have rarely gone wrong but threaten to pound me into the dirt for a mistake and you'll get nothing from me again. Guaranteed.

 

[PriestEG]

The facts are he overreacted to his environment and replace dog with kid with a toy gun in this case is very possible ....like i said yes there is scenario's were a officer must shoot a loose dog or chained dog in the performance of his duty's this case is not a example . Sorry if am passionate but his actions in this case are scary and wrong. hopefuly the department does the correct action after IA report..............

i couldnt agree more with you fireblade.. if this happend to me and my dog or dogs, i would prolly end up in the slammer!

yes some dogs can be intimidating to anyone, but if its visibly chained up and the call was a domestic disturbance (not something that in my mind would be more life or death, could be wrong on this tho) give it some time and let the owner take Easy into his kennel or out back.. no need to just start shooting because you felt threatened.

if a squad of MARINES just started shooting because they felt threatened, they would be torn apart by everyone ( similar to "marines urinate on dead dirt bag" thread a few weeks ago and probably get the green weenie)!! but instead he is a LEO and goes right back to the beat

 

[Benny]

The facts are he overreacted to his environment and replace dog with kid with a toy gun in this case is very possible ....like i said yes there is scenario's were a officer must shoot a loose dog or chained dog in the performance of his duty's this case is not a example . Sorry if am passionate but his actions in this case are scary and wrong. hopefuly the department does the correct action after IA report..............

I think there is a VERY good possibility that this officer overreacted, but do you know for a fact that what I proposed in post #68 didn't happen? If you don't, then you're throwing the word "fact" around too much.

BTW, a GSD protecting his homestead is going to be a bit more intimidating than a child playing cops and robbers in the back yard.



(I hope you realize I'm playing somewhat of a devil's advocate here for the sake of a good, civil debate...There are always two sides to every story and we don't have all of the facts. All we have is the story of a very shook up, very sad dead dog owner)

 

[NYFelon]

There is an awful lot of second guessing, Monday morning quarterbacking and general *****ing and whining about the police on this forum. There are protections in place for officers (and everyone else) to prevent them from being punished for mistakes of the head rather than mistakes of the heart.

Everyone likes to constantly bring up (and take out of context) the decision that the police are under no obligation to protect anyone. I don't know and cops who believe that. Start suing them for honest mistakes and see how much they'll do. I can guarantee you that I wouldn't get out of my car if I had to fear being sued every time something didn't go as I'd planned. I've always done the best I could and I've been fortunate that things have rarely gone wrong but threaten to pound me into the dirt for a mistake and you'll get nothing from me again. Guaranteed.

You mistake the point, friend. If this officer indeed made this grave of a mistake, that is, he was properly informed by dispatch of the address of a crime in progress yet ended up at the wrong address anyway, it's his fault and his fault alone. Having the department (read: the taxpayers) foot the bill for his error may go someway towards remuneration to the victim, but what does it teach the officer, a public official with whom we have entrusted many powers and responsibilities, about keeping his wits about him? Absolutely nothing, that's what. If we can't trust this man to read numbers on a house, how on this blue-green ball of mud can we trust him to make the decisions we count on the police to make everyday?

I submit that we can't. If you think my argument is with 'the police', you're wrong. My argument rests with human beings who are fallible, and deserve some measure of discretion. However just as I show NO sympathy and desire to see those responsible of no-knock raids, especially where those raids result in deaths at the wrong address, I have none here. This man showed up to a domestic dispute call at the wrong address, where he killed a beloved pet, and left the at risk complainant with no protection. Do you honestly think this is about peeing and moaning over 'the police' or about a man? A man who was derelict in his duty, and caused undue pain and duress to an unknown and unsuspecting family? I don't think he should be held criminally liable, but civilly? You bet your seat cushion.

 

[fireblade]

(I hope you realize I'm playing somewhat of a devil's advocate here for the sake of a good, civil debate...There are always two sides to every story and we don't have all of the facts. All we have is the story of a very shook up, very sad dead dog owner)

yes i completely understand and love a debate......its some of our LEO comments that have me rattled........i worked IA in the late 80's before my military career have friends who still work for IA .....

As for the facts:

Dispatch gave the correct address the officer went to the wrong location.

Two sign of beware of dog was clearly visible even at night the officer failed to see or ignored.

Failed to see the large chain in open garage area.

Officer position at time of shooting and and dog location, the dog was at the end of the chain and a very good distance from the officer.

There a cascade of mistakes here and they all point to the officer. As for the comment about whining about the police on this forum . You really think this is whining ? I never understood why good officers feel the need to try to down play or spin a story in a more positive light of officers who do bad judgments or mistakes while on duty.

 

[bingley]

There a cascade of mistakes here and they all point to the officer. As for the comment about whining about the police on this forum . You really think this is whining ? I never understood why good officers feel the need to try to down play or spin a story in a more positive light of officers who do bad judgments or mistakes while on duty.

I understand what you're trying to say, but why is it so important to convict this man on an internet forum, based on a news article? Is this less about the actual case, more about the officers on INGO? If so, winning this argument won't help you change what you see as their attitude (protect even the bad officers). Maybe you need to dialogue with them about where the boundaries are. Those who are very invested in this case should perhaps just follow it and let us know how it turns out at the end. Perhaps your thoughts and contributions will help the pet owner(s) get justice.

No, I do not see your posts as whining, but I do see them as opinions based on the "initial data" gleaned from the article. Though it's clear that you've thought about the case, I am unwilling to decisively condemn a man at this point. The news reporter is fallible, too.

Personally I suspect the fault may be with the officer, for the reasons you outlined. But to me, this is a probability, not a certainty. Perhaps your experience working in IA has given you a unique vantage point and unique skills. Even so I still think you are talking about probability, not certainty. I never worked for IA, and so I am not an expert. I am afraid all I can do is prevent myself from jumping to conclusion.

 

[VaGriller]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmvudelfYcw[/ame]

I'm gonna leave this here.

 

[jsharmon7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmvudelfYcw

I'm gonna leave this here.

Why would anyone shoot a weiner dog? I have one, in no way is he intimidating to even the smallest of children. Even if he went nuts and tried to kill me, it would be mildly annoying at best. I know the Chief fired him for lying about the incident and because he shot him off a neighbor's porch, but even if the dog had been attacking I would have had very serious questions for the officer.

 

[serpicostraight]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EfztqLMjJw&feature=related[/ame] being small will not save you.