Posted on 05/07/2008 6:09:50 AM PDT by PittsburghAfterDark
Give Jackson a Darwin Award.
The only thing the story was missing was a crying grandmother saying "He was turning his life around".
The police dog undoubtedly did more to help the community than our "innocent" citizen here.
That said, its fairly easy to take out an attacking dog. Takes a bit of nerve and some training, but its quite doable. Tends to upset the owner/handler though.
“They killed my son over a dog,” said Donald James Jackson “
Did he come up with this right away on his own, or did an Alinsky-trained “community organizer” (like Obama used to be) help him?
The statement is just too clever and inflammatory, it twists reality a bit too much to be real.
According to accounts so far, he didn’t exactly brandish the weapon.
According to witnesses, the suspect had his hands in his coat pockets.. the police set the dog on him, he pulled out a .357 and shot the dog, and the police shot him.
I don’t know much more at this point than that... what exactly lead to the cops deciding to unleash the dog at him... however I can’t see any sane person with a weapon not pulling it out to shoot a dog that’s going for him.
I would assume the police issued the suspect orders to show his hands, or something else before releasing the dog, but I don’t know. However, I can’t condemn anyone for instinctively shooting an animal coming after them.
Understand I am not condemning the police for their actions in this matter, I don’t know the exact situation so with the facts as they are I can’t say.. However I can’t say that if a dog was coming after me and I had a gun that I would not do the exact same thing... to expect any human to take a dog attack so they can stay in compliance with an order is a bit unrealistic.
firing at an officer or not, can you realistically expect any human being to sit there and take a dog attack just because some cop ordered them too? I think any human being with a gun sees a dog coming at them in attack mode is likely to shoot. Survival instinct being what it is.
As of right now, this one definately smells a bit off.
Has it ever been upheld in a jury trial? I ask because I could easily see a jury not supporting it.
I wouldn’t neccessarily agree.
I can’t think of any human being who seeing a dog coming at them in attack mode who would not defend themselves from it, instinctively. To presume from that the person would inately keep firing at human being is a bit of a leap of logic.
Expecting someone to just take a dog attack because a police man ordered them too is rediculous.
I personaly have a problem with cops sending canine units into a situation they themselves would not go, then complain that the dog is the same as an officer. Say what you will but in MHO sending an animal into a situation where all he is armed with is his teeth against someone that is armed with a gun is a form of animal abuse. Police Dogs are tools, they respond to commands, they don’t take cover when under fire and they can’t shoot back to defend themselves. They do what they do bcause they are trained that way, they are no more an LEO than an attack dog owned by a drug pusher.
Where are the PETA lunatics when we need them?
The officers were completely justified for shooting the guy, anyone stupid enough to pull a gun out with two police officers there and shoot the dog is going to be shot on the spot, even most kindergartners know this who live in urban neighborhoods.
That being said I am of mixed mind on anyone striking a police dog with your bare hands being charged the same as striking a human officer.
If any dog, police or otherwise is biting you then you are going to defend yourself different than if an officer is wrestling you down.
Watching a mouthful of teeth come jumping at your face it is instinctive to protect yourself and strike the dog. This is an instinct so primal that someone shouldn’t be charged for it in a stressful situation IMHO.
Harper said the dog's handler and another officer, both in uniform, were driving on Arlington Avenue in a marked police car to respond to a report of shots fired when they spotted Justin Jackson. They stopped because they believed he was carrying a gun, the chief said.
But, this also struck me:
Others saw the shooting as a tragic reminder of the general decline in the neighborhood.
"I think it's kinda scary. You can't come out at night. I think a lot of it is the drugs and guns and violence," Sue Carroll said.
"We gotta get out of here," agreed Lisa Fehr, who still lives a few blocks away on the South Side Slopes where she was raised. "As soon as my two daughters graduate (from high school). People are walking around with guns. We can't live here."
Something tells me that at least one source of the violence in the neighborhood has now been eliminated...
I think any human being with a gun,
What is a scum bag doing with a gun out in public? I have many guns, but I don’t walk down the street with them and confront Police Officers. This guy got what he deserved. Great job Burgh PD.
I hear the Elvis song "In the Ghetto" playing in my head when I read this.
No, they killed your son because it was clear that he was going to kill someone. He killed the dog, and a person (or persons) were going to be next.
> “This article is missing the words, “honor student.” Perhaps the mother forgot them in her grief.”
Actually, the words I hear most often from parents in cases like this are “he was turning his life around.” When they say that, you know he has a record a mile long.
Are you kidding? Even when the dog is a police dog? It would make about as much sense to "instinctively" start shooting when a cop pulls you over.
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.