Posted on 08/05/2012 6:25:11 PM PDT by FunkyZero
CLEVELAND COUNTY, Okla.
A Cleveland County woman says she called a sheriff's deputy for help, but when he arrived at her home, he shot and killed her dog without provocation.
(Excerpt) Read more at koco.com ...
I find it most unfortunate that you refuse to condemn the police officer for entering a bad situation and choosing to make it worse by shooting the dog.
I remind you of Obama’s goal: “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military].”
What has happened during his administration? Police departments have increasingly received federal funds, making them hunger for *more* federal funding.
Declaring the need for an American Gestapo + Funding a future Gestapo = Americans should not be surprised when the police view them, and not The State, as The Enemy.
How do you threaten a citizen? Shoot his dog today, knowing the implication is that you will shoot him with no more compunction another day.
Consider that, before you come back and blame the victim.
I said the cops were trigger happy. That’s not enough for you?
The rest of you post veered off Non Sequitur Ave.
The rest of my post observed a very plausible reason for this current trend of dog-shooting by police officers.
Twenty years ago, I can’t recall hearing about one such shooting.
Only in the past couple of years has this phenomenon exploded. That’s a serious trend and a serious problem requiring major addressing.
And no, blaming the victim won’t make that trend go away. One of the most heinous ways some abusers keep abused women with them is convincing them that they-—the victim—will be despised and looked down upon by others in society; that others will tear down the victim.
With such twisted arguments, the abused woman increasingly viewers her abuser as the “safest” person in a dangerous world.
Sorry, this woman had no way of knowing the officer would shoot her dog. And given other cases in the past, even if she had put her dog in a bathroom or other room, it still may have been shot. It has happened before:
Police shoot, kill grandmother’s dog after raiding wrong house (13 year-old pug named “Wrinkles”)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2541284/posts
“An officer entered the bathroom over the 62-year-old woman’s protests and shot the dog, named Wrinkles. As many as eight shots may have been fired, Robinson said.”
So long as we pretend that the problem was what the victim did *not* do rather than what the assailant *did* do, these killings will continue.
This kind of thing started before the DHS was formed. Blame the drug war for blazing the trail.
And what happens when the officer opens the door to the room where she’s keeping the dog and shoots it?
It’s happened before. ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2541284/posts )
The proper impetus is on an officer to *not* shoot a dog needlessly or unlawfully, not on the law-abiding private citizen to try to think of places to *hide* his/her dog and pray that law enforcement won’t shoot it anyway.
The latter expectation trains the citizen to fear the reaction of a government employee.
The police should be frightened of angering the law-abiding private citizen, not the other way around.
Put your dog away when the cops come. It’s not rocket science.
I’m going to paraphrase CaptainK shortly above.
I said,
“Sounds like an overreaction to me.....it does sound like the cop flipped and went trigger-happy.”
That’s not enough for you?
“Twenty years ago, I can’t recall hearing about one such shooting.”
Good God. 20 years ago, there was no Internet (in practicality). You didn’t get fed this stuff from all over the country constantly - local stories like that wouldn’t make national news. You THINK it’s more prevalent, but you have no proof - go do statistics on dog-shootings then and now. I have little doubt it’s mostly PERCEPTION because you have more information sources flooding you.
I’ll reiterate what I said in post 48.
Mr Honest Citizen most likely will never call the cops for a domestic dispute and leave Rover unleashed when strangers come a knocking.
There have been dozens of stories posted here about cops who’ve shot family pets while on or near property they hadn’t been called to. Recently one Mr Citizen killed the cop who went into his backyard uninvited and without any lawful authority to shoot his dog.
Yep, I cheered.
You folks need to learn that you work for us. If that means a few of you catch bullets or get sued into bankruptcy, so be it. I’ve had it with the Thin Blue Line and Law Enforcement mentality.
Smart and honest cops would realize that.
That's how Ruby Ridge started.
I was only responding to this story where the woman called the cops regarding a domestic dispute and failed to lock up her dog.
I’ll have a different response for a story where a cop shows up at the house of an unsuspecting citizen and shots their dog.
There is no law that a law abiding citizen *must* lock up her dog simply because a government employee is in route.
The dog was on it’s property where it was supposed to be.
The criminal shot the dog because it chose to shoot the dog. As demonstrated, he would have shot the dog even in another bedroom because the *desire* to shoot the dog is still *present*.
The problem is the unlawful desire to shoot the dogs of law abiding citizens *NOT* the ‘failure’ of the citizen to fearfully anticipate what the thug will do.
Don’t shoot the dog of a law-abiding citizen just because you have a government badge. It’s not rocket science.
It’s not the job of the law abiding citizen to live in fear of a government thug.
It’s the job of a government thug to question whether he REALLY WANTS to anger the private citizen.
It’s not merely the lack of Internet accessibility. There’s been a fundamental change in the attitude of LEOs.
Comparing “dog shootings” to “unlawful, unwarranted shootings of housedogs by LEOs” is akin to comparing “fruit” with “Texas Grapefruit”.
You compare like with like, not broad category to specific parameters.
If you can demonstrate, factually, that unlawful, unwarranted dog shootings of housedogs by LEOs has NOT majorly jumped in the past 20 years, I will apologize on Free Republic and retract my statement.
Not buying that excuse. Don’t know why you keep selling it in this thread.
There is no law that says one must have one’s dog shut up in another room for a police officer to enter a residence.
Period.
The problem is not the dog. The problem is the officer who thinks it is acceptable to shoot a housedog.
There is no law that says a cop called on a 911 call can’t shot an unconstrained dog if they fear the dog will attack them.
A dog inside a home is lawfully contained.
A fear that one will be attacked is a fear, not an example of rationality. You are attempting to justify a government employee’s irrational behavior.
Why are you attempting to justify a government employee’s irrational behavior?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.