6 ms·

Every 98 minutes, a cop kills a dog - help fund the documentary

14 points by ck2 13y ago

yohann305 13y ago
Lots of police officer are just regular people like you and I and they love dogs and would never do any harm unless it is ABSOLUTELY necessary to do so. The real problem lies in dog owners not taking care of their pets the way they should.
- sp332 13y ago
  "Lots" doesn't mean "all". Both issues are a problem.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  > The real problem lies in dog owners not taking care of their pets the way they should. Failing to train your dog to never bark or otherwise become excited when somebody kicks in your front door in the middle of the night is "not taking care of their pets he way they should"? One example, of many: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwyn_Heights,_Maryland_mayor%27s_residence_drug_raid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwyn_Heights,_Maryland_mayor%...
  - k3n 13y ago
    If you're being raided in the middle of the night, there's basically 1 of 2 scenarios: 1. You're a bad -- and presumably dangerous -- person. 2. There's been a clerical error and they never should have raided your house in the first place. For scenario 1, a dog is a weapon. It doesn't really matter how big or mean the dog is, it can be a distraction just long enough for you to reach for a weapon. If the officers feel threatened by the dog when they enter, then I'm fully supportive of them putting it down in the interest of their own safety. For scenario 2, it's sad that happens, but there is always going to be cases of mix-ups like that. I can't blame the officers enacting the raid in this situation either, as they actually believe they're executing for scenario 1.
    - sp332 13y ago
      That's an argument for killing any dog in the area when the cops raid your house, no matter how they behave.
    - ck2 13y ago
      I love how people defend cops until sooner or later in their life they finally have that event, to their complete and utter disbelief, where they are completely screwed over by someone in a law enforcement position, who has way too much power over them and has zero hesitation to abuse that power - because there are so many people who will then rise in their defense regardless, because of course you had to be a bad person (or it was a "mistake" oh well).
    - glenra 13y ago
      Scenario 3: You're thought to be doing something illegal but not in the least bit dangerous, like growing marijuana. And the cops do a midnight raid just because they can on the pretext that you might "destroy evidence" if they merely came up and knocked on the door at a civilized hour like civilized people. The vast majority of no-knock raids are simply not justifiable in terms of risk to the officers or risk to the public. It's more a question of "if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail" when the PD has an otherwise bored SWAT team lying around that needs a little practice.
      - k3n 13y ago
        I think it's very presumptive to think that because someone is "just" growing marijuana, that they aren't dangerous. Yes, many times they are, but that's no guarantee. I do agree a lot about no-knock raids, though I'm not sure what alternatives there are. It seems you're trying to say that they really no functional purpose, which I'd disagree with; every single person I know that has dealt with drugs would flush them in an instant if the police showed up and politely knocked. I've personally witnessed it. Point being, that you've helped to reiterate, is that there is not a problem of officers wantonly shooting dogs; rather, it's symptomatic of larger issues in law enforcement.
        13y ago
- ck2 13y ago
  Well every 98 minutes kinda disputes your argument about lack of frequency, and have you seen some of the small dogs they have killed? I see it constantly in the news where a cop has killed another dog and sometimes the same cop because they know they won't get in trouble.
  - k3n 13y ago
    > every 98 minutes [citation needed]
buckbova 13y ago
Not the type of propaganda I'd like to fund. "Puppycide" -- really?
k3n 13y ago
It's funny that the banner story this seems to be based on is "Cisco" out of Austin, TX. I don't have time to dig up all the relevant links at the minute (still at work), but I remember that there was a lot more to this story than meets the eye. For one, the officer approached the wrong house. Two, the dog apparently charged the officer in an aggressive manner. Three, the dog -- despite claims from the owner of being "gentle" -- had previously been reported to animal control several times for behavioral issues. So, this is not near as cut & dry as the sensationalistic kickstarter would lead you to believe; please do your own research before forming any opinions. Don't take my word for all this though: 1. http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/dog-had-history-with-animal-control http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/dog-had-history-with-a... 2. http://www.kvue.com/news/Animal-Control-report-shows-Cisco-had-recently-charged-stranger-148105355.html http://www.kvue.com/news/Animal-Control-report-shows-Cisco-h...
michaelfeathers 13y ago
If people can be tased, surely police can use something non-lethal on dogs.

14 points by ck2 13y ago

Lots of police officer are just regular people like you and I and they love dogs and would never do any harm unless it is ABSOLUTELY necessary to do so. The real problem lies in dog owners not taking care of their pets the way they should.

sp332 13y ago
"Lots" doesn't mean "all". Both issues are a problem.
jlgreco 13y ago
> The real problem lies in dog owners not taking care of their pets the way they should. Failing to train your dog to never bark or otherwise become excited when somebody kicks in your front door in the middle of the night is "not taking care of their pets he way they should"? One example, of many: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwyn_Heights,_Maryland_mayor%27s_residence_drug_raid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwyn_Heights,_Maryland_mayor%...
- k3n 13y ago
  If you're being raided in the middle of the night, there's basically 1 of 2 scenarios: 1. You're a bad -- and presumably dangerous -- person. 2. There's been a clerical error and they never should have raided your house in the first place. For scenario 1, a dog is a weapon. It doesn't really matter how big or mean the dog is, it can be a distraction just long enough for you to reach for a weapon. If the officers feel threatened by the dog when they enter, then I'm fully supportive of them putting it down in the interest of their own safety. For scenario 2, it's sad that happens, but there is always going to be cases of mix-ups like that. I can't blame the officers enacting the raid in this situation either, as they actually believe they're executing for scenario 1.
  - sp332 13y ago
    That's an argument for killing any dog in the area when the cops raid your house, no matter how they behave.
  - ck2 13y ago
    I love how people defend cops until sooner or later in their life they finally have that event, to their complete and utter disbelief, where they are completely screwed over by someone in a law enforcement position, who has way too much power over them and has zero hesitation to abuse that power - because there are so many people who will then rise in their defense regardless, because of course you had to be a bad person (or it was a "mistake" oh well).
  - glenra 13y ago
    Scenario 3: You're thought to be doing something illegal but not in the least bit dangerous, like growing marijuana. And the cops do a midnight raid just because they can on the pretext that you might "destroy evidence" if they merely came up and knocked on the door at a civilized hour like civilized people. The vast majority of no-knock raids are simply not justifiable in terms of risk to the officers or risk to the public. It's more a question of "if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail" when the PD has an otherwise bored SWAT team lying around that needs a little practice.
    - k3n 13y ago
      I think it's very presumptive to think that because someone is "just" growing marijuana, that they aren't dangerous. Yes, many times they are, but that's no guarantee. I do agree a lot about no-knock raids, though I'm not sure what alternatives there are. It seems you're trying to say that they really no functional purpose, which I'd disagree with; every single person I know that has dealt with drugs would flush them in an instant if the police showed up and politely knocked. I've personally witnessed it. Point being, that you've helped to reiterate, is that there is not a problem of officers wantonly shooting dogs; rather, it's symptomatic of larger issues in law enforcement.
      - 13y ago
ck2 13y ago
Well every 98 minutes kinda disputes your argument about lack of frequency, and have you seen some of the small dogs they have killed? I see it constantly in the news where a cop has killed another dog and sometimes the same cop because they know they won't get in trouble.
- k3n 13y ago
  > every 98 minutes [citation needed]

buckbova 13y ago

Not the type of propaganda I'd like to fund. "Puppycide" -- really?

k3n 13y ago

It's funny that the banner story this seems to be based on is "Cisco" out of Austin, TX. I don't have time to dig up all the relevant links at the minute (still at work), but I remember that there was a lot more to this story than meets the eye. For one, the officer approached the wrong house. Two, the dog apparently charged the officer in an aggressive manner. Three, the dog -- despite claims from the owner of being "gentle" -- had previously been reported to animal control several times for behavioral issues. So, this is not near as cut & dry as the sensationalistic kickstarter would lead you to believe; please do your own research before forming any opinions. Don't take my word for all this though: 1. http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/dog-had-history-with-animal-control http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/dog-had-history-with-a... 2. http://www.kvue.com/news/Animal-Control-report-shows-Cisco-had-recently-charged-stranger-148105355.html http://www.kvue.com/news/Animal-Control-report-shows-Cisco-h...

michaelfeathers 13y ago

If people can be tased, surely police can use something non-lethal on dogs.