[SkyDancer]

I know there’s a T-shirt out there with something like “The cops shot my dog and survived” .....

[rarestia]

The police are above the law and owe no one an explanation for their actions. They are answerable to themselves and their superiors.

[SkyDancer]

"The officer who shot at him, after it was over he just sort of had this goofy look on his face, almost like a smirk, and then he left. No explanation, no apology or anything."

Soon, very very soon ....

[saganite]

Dogs. Cops target practice.

[Little Ray]

When are cops going realize that every family pet shot, and every “wrong door” kicked erodes their support and authority?
Eventually, there is going to be substantial support for shooting back at the cops.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Elderly Cocker Spaniel ping

[microgood]

A cocker spaniel? What a coward!

[ro_dreaming]

Doggie Ping

[Political Junkie Too]

Concord police contend that the dog was aggressive enough that the officer perceived a threat and fired once only after a warning was given.

Is this for real?

In what language did the officer deliver this warning? Was it "Bark-bark. Bark. Bark. Bark?" Or was it "BARK-BARK-BARK. Bark... Bark?"

-PJ

[I want the USA back]

keep it up. Eventually you’ll lose the respect of ALL the citizens, not just the criminals.

[DManA]

They’ll probably get a bill for the bullet.

[Political Junkie Too]

"The officer determined that the dog was posing enough of a threat that he fired a single round to stop the dog," Roche said.

The department had no other comment. Police did not find the suspicious person.

There has to be a limit to these warrantless searches that the police are doing more and more often.

In this case, the person was just "suspicious," not even someone who was fleeing a crime. And still, the police felt that they were empowered to enter an uninvolved neighbor's private property without permission, and then claim to feel threatened by the animal that lived there, and then to fire their weapon.

This has got to stop.

-PJ

[Bon mots]

[Wurlitzer]

In NY a police officer can now charge you with a felony if you “harass, annoy, threaten or alarm” an on-duty police officer

They have not been given the right to shoot you using this criteria, YET!

I wonder if there is an honest lawyer (usually mutually exclusive terms, I know) willing to challenge this on a 1st Amendment infringement.

I only agree with the “threaten” assuming it is threatening to do physical harm not “threatening” to sue but the law, like all laws today is so poorly written as to allow the JBTs and ruling elite to do just about anything.

[Iscool]

I’ve spent my entire life cringing when I heard police called ‘pigs’...

Now I understand...

[Pollster1]

Last year, a St. Louis cop shot a golden retriever. I have never seen either a cocker spaniel or a golden retriever look threatening. This is pathetic.

[jagusafr]

Lord, a cocker doesn’t have enough brain to be dangerous! Like shooting a special-needs kiddo...

[jagusafr]

Aaaaaaand to all those with special needs kiddos, my humblest apologies. Gotta think before “send”.

[Uncle Miltie]

"Two Concord roommates are seeking an explanation as to why a police officer shot their aging cocker spaniel"

A: Because the police weren't sticking to their primary responsibility: Raising money from productive citizens for the welfare state.

[hadaclueonce]

In before that “holster sniffer” states that dogs deserve to be shot.