Hawthorne CA Police Shoot Dog

[nextJin]

There two issues here. The dogs death and the arrest of the owner. I fail to see any law broken by the owner, thus no need for an arrest. A unlawful arrest caused a dog to react defensively, which resulted in a officer shooting it.

The proper thing he should have done is release the owner to secure the dog but hindsight is 20/20. God wanted that "pup" dead and the officer obliged. The owner was not violent or anything that would have lead me to believe he would have become violent but I am not a LEO. There might be something that prevents them from just releasing someone after being handcuffed but I don't see what that could possibly be.

 

[Brovane]

The proper thing he should have done is release the owner to secure the dog but hindsight is 20/20. God wanted that "pup" dead and the officer obliged. The owner was not violent or anything that would have lead me to believe he would have become violent but I am not a LEO. There might be something that prevents them from just releasing someone after being handcuffed but I don't see what that could possibly be.

Usually once handcuffs go on they are not coming off until the suspect is at the station.

 

[Zebo]

nm

 

[cwjerome]

There two issues here. The dogs death and the arrest of the owner. I fail to see any law broken by the owner, thus no need for an arrest. A unlawful arrest caused a dog to react defensively, which resulted in a officer shooting it.

The POS dog owner shows up, blares the music loudly as the police are trying to communicate over loudspeakers, is yelling obscenities at them and getting too close. They ask him to turn the volume down and back up with everyone else. He refuses, they detain, probably for disorderly conduct and interfering with LEO operations. Judging by his actions, he knew he was going to get cuffed.

He did all of these things with his dog there and then didn't secure the dog properly. He should be punted in the ballsack for being the stupid, negligent dog owner and getting the animal killed.

 

[woolfe9998]

You're little executioners in blue wont protect when SHTF like in NO when they all ran so get their cock outta your throat. They could have got dog under control or allowed dog owner to had they not arrested him unlawfully.

Predictably lame and moronic. I have no great love for police. However, I don't believe in generalizing from anecdotes, about anyone or anything. The fact that you do does not speak well for your intellectual honesty. I make a perfectly logical point about anecdotal evidence, and you're rambling about oral sex. Didn't you once claim to have an IQ of 170?

 

[DominionSeraph]

There two issues here. The dogs death and the arrest of the owner. I fail to see any law broken by the owner, thus no need for an arrest. A unlawful arrest caused a dog to react defensively, which resulted in a officer shooting it.

I guarantee you that the dog was not reacting because he was in agreement with your uninformed legal opinion.

They're allowed to stop on suspicion, handcuff, and pat down. And they can hold you on suspicion. Suspicion of obstruction of justice when his sound system was interfering, he was told to turn it down, and he responded defiantly, is pretty much there.

I still think it could have de-escalated if the owner had been allowed to leash him. Suspect was cooperating.

That wasn't really cooperation, it was submission under protest. To uncuff him so he can deal with the situation shows that you're weak in regard to it. Let him loose and he might think that, with the situation out of control, now's his chance to turn on the cops and finally "win."
The guy had a huge chip on his shoulder. You can't take the chance on the hope that his attitude suddenly did a complete 180. Humans are opportunists, and you never really know what might suddenly click in their minds as an opportunity.
They had control over him, and his cooperation wasn't guaranteed, so you don't gain more control by lessening control.

Doubtful he'd try anything surrounded cops, some of them with SMGs.

Guns don't mean shit if you can't use them. The cops are not allowed to just shoot anyone they don't like. There are rules. So, from a cop's perspective, it ain't a tool of control.
Your hands are for control. Pepper spray/taser/beating them with your PR-24 is for control. Your gun is for safety.

 

[davmat787]

The video ends and the dog is still alive apparently. Anyone know what happened after, as in how long did the dog take to die?

Ironically, the humane action would have been to deliver a coup de grâce to the head of the animal to end its suffering, but that surely would have enraged people further.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The video ends and the dog is still alive apparently. Anyone know what happened after, as in how long did the dog take to die?

Ironically, the humane action would have been to deliver a coup de grâce to the head of the animal to end its suffering, but that surely would have enraged people further.

Yeah I wondered this too, but its a lose-lose situation at that point.

1) You already have to deal with the backfire of the crowd and Youtube videos and armchair police brutality experts from the Internet.

2) The dog's going to die no matter what.

3) If you go up to it and shoot it in the head once or twice more, whichever officer has to do that will get crucified. Even if he's not punished for that act, he's going to be known as that dog killer, the executioner, etc. by people online.

It's tough, but I do seriously wonder the SOP of cops in situations like these. Wounded, probably fatally wounded dog writhing in pain--what do you do?

Personally I'd elect to put it out of its misery, but with a crowd watching, expected backlash, I could see why cops would rather sit back and take the safest exit at that point.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The proper thing he should have done is release the owner to secure the dog but hindsight is 20/20. God wanted that "pup" dead and the officer obliged. The owner was not violent or anything that would have lead me to believe he would have become violent but I am not a LEO. There might be something that prevents them from just releasing someone after being handcuffed but I don't see what that could possibly be.

I don't think there's time to release the owner in a quick situation like this. If it became a long drawn out conflict, they could consider sending the owner in to deal with it. However we were only seconds into the conflict.

It looks like the 3rd officer with the gun was trying to grab the leash near the end. The dog looks like it backed down a bit and responded to the owner's commands. At that point SOMEONE (and it obviously wasn't going to be the detained man) had to grab the leash. The officer went in, the dog lunged, and the officer panicked. You can see his left hand retreating quickly to the attack. Yeah, so he shot in defense.

Hindsight is 20/20, and could he have waited for the dog to calmed down and then approached it slowly to take the leash? Yeah, but remember officers are trained to deal with people, and so that they're not experts in de-escalating with animals. They could've done it better, but it's not like what the officer did was flat out wrong or anything.

 

[sad_guy]

cops everywhere are so retarded, its ridiculous

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

cops everywhere are so retarded, its ridiculous

Yes typical anti-cop response. Care to explain how it pertains SPECIFICALLY to this incident? Or is this just a knee-jerk reaction kinda like ban all guns nao!

 

[Jaskalas]

They could've done it better, but it's not like what the officer did was flat out wrong or anything.

I agree. There are so many better cases involving home invasions and dog shootings, this is not such a case. This is not one to hang our hat on. We get past the headline, into the details, watch the video - it's quite clear that they were justified.

It's a novelty these days.

 

[yuku]

such a tragic

 

[davmat787]

Yeah I wondered this too, but its a lose-lose situation at that point.

1) You already have to deal with the backfire of the crowd and Youtube videos and armchair police brutality experts from the Internet.

2) The dog's going to die no matter what.

3) If you go up to it and shoot it in the head once or twice more, whichever officer has to do that will get crucified. Even if he's not punished for that act, he's going to be known as that dog killer, the executioner, etc. by people online.

It's tough, but I do seriously wonder the SOP of cops in situations like these. Wounded, probably fatally wounded dog writhing in pain--what do you do?

Personally I'd elect to put it out of its misery, but with a crowd watching, expected backlash, I could see why cops would rather sit back and take the safest exit at that point.

Your way of saying it is a lose-lose situation is exactly what I meant by saying ironically, albeit you said it more clearly. Just one of those weird aspects where the more humane action would have further enraged the crowd, no doubt about that.

Tis' why I wonder how much longer the pooch suffered until finally giving up the ghost, the video ends too soon too tell. Either way, certainly not germane too the overall debate or central story, just one of those weird things I sometimes notice regarding us weird humans and our behavior.

I am still undecided on the actions of the officer, but I certainly fault the owner for not securing the dog, and the officers for assumably assuming the dog was secured when the windows were open.

 

[Doppel]

Not TERRIBLE, but pretty bad. I have to question why the cops even arrested this guy anyway.

I think filming the police is a beautiful thing and everybody should do it, this guy was quite far away and his history of run-ins seems immaterial, unless we missed stuff before the filming started.

I wonder why the cops couldn't taze the dog (not a hand held one, but if they have one that fires the round).

Probably overall the shooting was justified, but it was spurred by the arrest that seems very dubious to me.

 

[Jaskalas]

Not TERRIBLE, but pretty bad. I have to question why the cops even arrested this guy anyway.

They were dealing with an armed robber held up across the street. This guy with the dog was reportedly blaring loud music from his car, interfering with the situation.

 

[Incorruptible]

The cops were totally in the wrong for what they did. The guy should never have been arrested. We need less trigger happy cops.

 

[xBiffx]

Uh oh, another internet published anecdote meant to illustrate that "cops are bad." Two million police officers in the US, but we can generalize from these stories.

Carry on, cop haters.

Not sure where the generalizing is you are talking about. I, myself, only mentioned the police department and the shooter in question.

Edit: I see some now, after your comment, however.

 

[woolfe9998]

Not sure where the generalizing is you are talking about. I, myself, only mentioned the police department and the shooter in question.

Edit: I see some now, after your comment, however.

No, there were numerous remarks attempting to broaden the issue beyond this case. I won't bother quoting all of them here. This one is fairly obvious:

Standard CA pig behavior.

I'm also reacting to the comments I repeatedly read in these "cops who do bad things" threads. At a certain point you become fed up with asinine generalizations and you feel you have to say something. It bears repeating the obvious: no amount of anecdotes about individual cops behaving badly says anything AT ALL about the general behavior of 2 million American police. Why I even have to point that out is a mystery.

I wasn't remarking on your posts by the way. I understood them to be about this particular case.

 

[abaez]

There's a second video (which I cannot find right now) that shows the entire thing unedited. Basically the guy came up with stupid loud music and was asked to turn it down and didn't. This along with his other behavior makes it pretty cut and dry and explains why the cops detained him. I'll post the link if I can find it.

 

[dascoyne]

In a standoff situation where the atmosphere is already tense and unpredictable, the last thing the cops need is some guy in the background blasting music, getting in the way and getting in their faces. He was already asked to turn down the music and the guy is just shouting about "harassment." Has anyone else noticed that all other witnesses - even other ones filming, had enough sense to stand a reasonable distance away? That guy was the only one standing close enough to constantly be within their peripheral vision.

If the standoff turned hostile and bullets started flying, that guy could have easily been shot by an officer if he's running around behind the scenes wearing street clothes. I can understand why officers would request a safe perimeter. Apparently all the other civilians knew that.

The guy was trying to create an incident by getting in the officers' faces. It's unfortunate his dog got shot, but it's his owner is the one who put him in harms way. The dog lunged to defend his owner and the cop (after trying unsuccessfully to grab the leash) shot the dog in self defense.

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms about police behavior but this one isn't one of them.

 

[Orignal Earl]