Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire another one bites the dust.....trigger happy cop

There seems no way any longer to assure the safety of your dog from being shot by a cop. If they wanted to search the property, they should have first contacted the property owner. This wasn't farm land. It was the fenced-in curtilage of a man's home.

Or maybe the dog had the kid in its' mouth.

Well you got that one right.
The cops at the scene seemed to agree w/ the owner though.
They knew the shooter cop was in the wrong, so did the shooter cop.Why else would he leave?

There seems no way any longer to guarantee the safety of your Dunkin' Donuts break from people who forgot what their children looked like or that they had a basement.

We can all agree that the cop shouldn't have shot the dog. Can we also all agree that the parents are idiots and shouldn't have called the police to begin with?

Not as much difference between the two as you may have thought. He's really been showing his true colors lately.

Time to look for a lost kid in that cops neighborhood and shoot anything of his that threatens the searchers (dog, cat, kids, wife, him, whatever).

Bluedreaux, you and Itp can joke all you want but there is going to come a time when homeowners shoot back and good people are going to die all because dumba$$es like the SLC cop above weren't vetted properly by their "brothers in blue".

Sooner or later some Cops are going to get killed over something like this.

People are funny sometimes. Some people love their dogs more than their own relatives and would consider it murder for this to happened to their dog.

Some guy who's lost a job, went thru a divorce, no health insurance, has nothing left to lose, etc, etc, will come home and find his house busted into and the one thing that's been with him thru it all, has been shot and killed by a cop.

It's only a matter of time till somebody flips out and goes postal because some LEO killed his pet.

It'll happen sooner or later...

If that happened, I'd find it very hard to shed a tear for any cops involved.

Some cop retard in Utah ain't my brother any more than any other retard in Utah. And I've got no more knowledge of what he does everyday or influence over him to change his behavior than you do.

The guys I have contact with every day aren't shooting dogs, or doing body cavity searches, or whatever else behavior of strangers you want to hold me responsible for.

I've turned in subordinates and testified against superiors who are now in prison and encouraged folks to complain against jackass officers that I couldn't change. So try again, oh Painter With A Wide Brush. I've done my part and will again.

Yes. ^

What I won't agree with though is LEO's defending this kind of chit with wisecracks and innuendo simply because it was another LEO that did the deed.

The a-hole that shot the dog shouldn't have a the job to start with. Period.

What did I defend?

I think he's referring to;

Wasn't necessarily referring to you.
Sux when you all get lumped togeather, huh.

I wish we could get them to shoot dogs more often. Perhaps there would be fewer loose ones running around, biting (our) my kids, killing our (my son's) dogs, and scattering trash all over the place. Admittedly, they all are cute as puppies. But, they don't want us killing loose dogs ourselves; it's their job.

This one wasn't loose. He was in a fenced yard.

No where in any of my posts did I "hold" you responsible for the actions of the SLC cop, so get off your self proclaimed pedestal of self righteousness. I responded to your flippant remarks which you so adeptly sling at anyone who has critical remarks of LEO.

If your dept. is walking the moral high road then great, keep up the good work, but there are too many cases around the rest of the country that in the least, show basic disregard for constitutional rights of the general populous and at its worst represent abject criminal activities committed by the very people who are paid to prevent those crimes.

LEO, across the board, need to reassess it's mindset of "us vs them" and realize they are in fact, civilians just like the rest of us. If they want support from the people who pay their salaries then they better start exercising their oath or there really will be a future of "us vs them".... and LEO is totally out numbered by many magnitudes.

Yep, anyone that can defend what this cop did is a first class douche. No sense in it happening. Even the cops left on scene knew it was a screw up...you can tell by their reactions.

I respect law enforcement and have many friends and family that are but this kind of crap has to end.

Thanks. I've always thought I was pretty adept with my flippancy, but it's nice to know other people notice too.

Nice red herring. Make the argument about whether or not the cops should be out looking for lost children, that action is much easier to defend and makes anyone attacking that action the bad guy.

The issue is not that an officer was out looking for a child. That's well and good and one of the things we expect the police to do. The issue is that the officer went into a man's private back yard and shot a dog that was doing what a dog is supposed to do - defend its owner's property against strangers coming into its territory. Going into random back yards an officer would have reasonable expectation of encountering a dog or other family pet.

What people get upset about is that the officer took the recourse of using deadly force as his first choice. If he felt threatened he had non-lethal means at his disposal to mitigate the threat but chose to do otherwise.