That'd be a 10 to one return on a small investment ~ can't hardly beat that one no how.
Once I get my money you can stir them up eh.
$5000 at the most for a dog. The only people who lose here are the taxpayers. No dog is worth $600,000
WTF??? The dog isn’t even dead though it may have run up some steep veterinarian bills.
A moral victory should be good enough.
Taking that much money from taxpayers is just wrong.
The ruling was good, but I think the funds should come right out of that PD’s operating budget —the PD needs to suffer, not the innocent taxpayers.
This is happening more and more and I think cops should take out a bond for these types of events —when finally they can’t get coverage, well, the PD would know what to do with that guy’s contract...
Same for judges who pen-whip applications for no-knock warrants
Lessay when you got pulled over for speeding, your ticket was paid by the CITY —not by you.
Does anyone think that would deter you from future speeding?
The transgressor should be the payer —then everything works.
I have a cat, the cops could shoot it for less than half that.
Finally.
I can understand a circumstance where you’d shoot a pit bull.
But a choco lab? That’s hard for me to see.
This should be a wake up call to those creating, us VS them, militarized war like police policies.
We need a few more of these actions to get government's attention.
Agreed.
What kind of individual shoots a choc lab? A miserable sumbitch who happens to be a jack booted thug cop.Unreal.The taxpayers are the ones that voted in that kind of nonsense so they get the bill.Fitting.
I don’t know that this was so much about shooting the dog, but more about the behaviour of the deputies. It seems that they presented that gung ho, “we win you lose, loser” attitude that is slipping into too many departments via young aggressive attitude types.
Who in hell gave these keystone cops the right to invade a home after the family was gone? Was there a warrant? Doesn’t look like it. You don’t just go rummaging through a person’s house because you feel like it.
At first I did think the settlement was way out of line, but I now think it was to punish the department. And yes, that means the taxpayer pays. So Mr. and Mrs. taxpayer, send the buffoons you hired, off with a pink slip and a kick in the butt.
Until the taxpayer starts treating these mediocre, midlevel bureaucrats like PAID EMPLOYEES who serve at the taxpayer’s wishes, then this stuff will continue to happen.
I’d like to be at the next township meeting when the board members have to tell the residents that the blockheads in their cop shop just rampaged through the proverbial china shop and broke every piece of crystal in the place, and now this is what its going to cost. “Dear fellow residents, do we buy ANOTHER BOND that we can’t pay, or do we boost your income and property taxes to cover that nut?”
Cops should remember the old adage - be nice to people on your climb upwards because you will meet them again on your way down. Pensions and job prospects are going into the toilet when austerity hits. People are not going to be well-disposed toward public employee unions when it's crunch time.
I want to live in a state that has those common sense laws! This needs to be a trend, suing the crap out of the individual, the department and whomever is in charge and make it hurt until it stops.
Dogs protect us and give us more love and devotion than, well, than I've ever deserved and we must give as good as we get, so that maybe we will someday be worthy of the gift God has given us in these beautiful animals.
The judge and jury got this one right sticking it to the Nazis like that.
The shooter should pay, not the taxpayers.
$600k for a dog?
I love my dog. As much as anyone else. But she ain’t worth $600k.
Does this dog talk or something.
$600k for a dog?
I love my dog. As much as anyone else. But she ain’t worth $600k.
Does this dog talk or something.
$600k for a dog?
I love my dog. As much as anyone else. But she ain’t worth $600k.
Does this dog talk or something.