Log in

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008, 07:24 am
So I found out today that a cop shot my ex-boyfriend's dog.

This is neither justified nor at all abnormal, cops shoot dogs all of the time.  But it's still horribly nauseating and rage-inspiring when it happens to someone you know and care about.  What is slightly different about this encounter, however, was that the police were not even there to arrest my ex--- he hadn't done anything wrong. They were there because the house behind the one my ex was staying in (a friend's house) was on fire.  Not arson, mind you-- so really, no explanation for why the police were there at all.  But for some reason, the police deemed it necessary to go through my ex's friend's backyard, where Gracie, a small mixed spaniel, was hanging out.  Apparently when the police officers decided to cut through the yard, Gracie went up to them and nipped one of them slightly on the finger....upon which the officer promptly shot her in the head and killed her. 

First point-- Why the hell were the police called to the scene of a fire?  This is just one more example of why there needs to be a "911" which calls the police, one which calls the paramedics, and one which calls the fire department, and never the twain shall meet.

Second point-- My ex was not committing a crime-- the police were.   First, by trespassing on someone else's property.  They were given no warrant to be in that yard.  Second, obviously, by killing a dog who was someone else's property.  It's not as if they were in the process of arresting my ex for something and his rottweiler came out and attacked them.  It's nothing even remotely close to that.  Want to wager what the penalty would be if you shot a police dog in the head? 

Third point-- I hate to get all political about this, except that police officers do things like this all of the time.  It's not like this is some isolated incident.  To put it plainly, if you ever plan on having police officers at your house (or anywhere near it) for any reason, or even if you don't plan it, do not let your dog anywhere near the police.   It doesn't matter if the dog is the friendliest, most well-behaved, smartest animal in the world.  They will seize upon the slightest pretense to kill it.  If you care at all about your dog, don't let him or her anywhere near the police.

Edited to add:  Apparently the wound the police officer showed my ex boyfriend was on the knuckle of his thumb.  When you shoot a 9mm or a .380, it's not uncommon for the kickback to tear a bit of skin off that knuckle if you're not careful.  My ex reports that if Gracie were to go after anyone, she would go for the ankles (she's just not that big).  So I can't help but wonder if this entire "she bit my thumb" thing is fabricated.

My ex is going down to the station today to file a report.  I wish he'd sue, but the amount of time and money that would involve might be just too daunting.

I apologize that this post isn't as coherent as it could've been.  I was just too angry when I wrote it.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 10:33 am (UTC)

Third point-- They will seize upon the slightest pretense to kill it. If you care at all about your dog, don't let him or her anywhere near the police.

While I respect your rights to offer this advice freely; I do have to disagree. I have had many "giant drooling beasts" of a dog, and have never had a problem with them around police officers. In fact my retarded dog had gotten me out of more than one traffic ticket. I understand that many police officers will shoot a dog if it is interfering with the completion of their duties, and that leaves a mile wide path of "gray area" as to when that is appropriate. I feel that a sweeping statement above doesn't do anyone any justice.

As a personal experience to counter the sad tale above, I offer:

The Last time I was arested, two cops showed up at my door to server a warrent, I was of course caught by suprise. I explaned that I had two dogs, and if I could take a couple minutes to get them in their crates for their own saftey. The officers not only allowed me, but helped close the doors as I was already in handcuffs by this time. One officer then asked if I needed to call anyone to come take care of them while I was cooling my heels in the poke.

In the end cops are just people; granted due to the nature of the work, bullies and assholes tend to gravitate toward that job and that is sad really, but I would guess that for every high school bully that is now just a bully with a gun, there are at least two officers that are out there to truly protect and serve.

PS I D/Led a leaked working print of true blood It has potential but man, so many really bad cajun accents in one hour was almost painful.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 04:15 pm (UTC)

It's good to be reminded that not every police officer out there is a complete asshole. I do still think that, all things being equal, there's good reason to keep your dogs away from cops, but that of course doesn't mean that they will necessarily mistreat them (or you) if you don't.

IMHO, people who want to protect and serve should do so as body guards, private police, etc.-- not in a position where they have an incentive to abuse people. There just isn't enough accountability for police officers. There are too many instances of cops aiming guns at kids, thinking they're above the law, torturing people, and bursting into people's homes in the middle of the night for me to think anymore that a sane, good person would choose to become a police officer. It's not like jury duty, where people are more or less randomly selected. To become a police officer these days is to voluntarily join a highly corrupt system.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 08:10 pm (UTC)

I agree that there are a lot of people that don't have the correct temperament to be officers. Personally I think it has all to do with the shoes. Once they all started wearing tactical combat boots and not a reasonable loafer it was all down hill from there. Of course I am making light here but it is true none the less. the police at one times wasn't a pseudo-military organization, but then neither was the public. I also feel part of the issue is that the reasonable and intelligent men and women of the police force get promoted to non-public facing positions where the rest stay at the "beat cop" level for far longer, sadly the police have the same issues with promotions as a call center where the good ones work hard to get off the phones leaving the ones with no greater ambition to stay and create the public image of the company.

Thu, Oct. 9th, 2008 04:35 pm (UTC)

Correspondingly, a sane person would treat policemen just like he would treat other criminals - avoid them as much as possible.

Fri, Oct. 17th, 2008 03:45 am (UTC)

GARY RAYMOND: This is not the bad old days -- this is highly sophisticated procedures these days. CALLER: Commander Raymond, right, don't tell me about the good old days, right, because they're still here, better than ever.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 04:21 pm (UTC)

PS I D/Led a leaked working print of true blood It has potential but man, so many really bad cajun accents in one hour was almost painful. .

What's a "working print"?

Yikes. I saw really brief preview on TV last night-- so brief, I almost didn't catch what it was-- and so wasn't able to evaluate the accents. Considering that the entire damn cast is supposed to be some form of Louisiana southern, you'd think they could go to the effort to hire actual southern actors, or at least a good voice coach!

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 08:01 pm (UTC)

A working print is like a rough cut but still has a few scenes missing, something that execs can see to get a feel of what is happening more so that they could from dailies bit still isn't a final product.

It was most of the show, but there were a few parts where background music was missing, and a couple of missing scenes, it would go to black with a flash that says insert scene #23.. or insert Sam's POV etc. For all I know they are going to go back and ADR most of the dialogue once the actors get the accent right.

Fri, Oct. 17th, 2008 06:36 am (UTC)

We still have a few more elements to get and add, but all in all feeling comfortable with what we have.

Fri, Oct. 17th, 2008 10:27 am (UTC)

They will have to carry many more bodies in coffins on their shoulders if they don't come to the realistic conclusion that their forces must withdraw from our country.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 03:16 pm (UTC)

Bob is a Chow/Shepherd mix and had to be registered as a vicious dog, he has a tag and everything.
The cop came to our house to talk to Clare about douchebag man who lived next door when she was too afraid to even go to her own house because of him (ah the good old days). Bob did his usual barking craziness when someone we didn't know came to the door. The cop let him sniff his pants and then his hand and asked if he could come in. Bob then went off somewhere and took a nap. The cop was a real hard-ball kind of guy wouldn't sit down and chat and flat out told Clare until or unless there was bodily harm she was shit out of luck. My point here being the guy himself came across as a real jerk but he was good with the dog.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 04:24 pm (UTC)

Did the cop apologize for shooting the dog? I mean, there's shooting a dog while on duty because you're reacting in the moment and you feel threatened and then there's realizing that you shot someone's dog on your way to a fire and you feel like a fucking asshole for the choice you made in the moment and you apologize... Or you stand by your choice and you explain it to the person who owned the dog.

I guess what I mean is that he was acting with his cop brain when he shot the dog, but he's a person and so I'm wondering if there was any apology or explanation to the dog's owner at any point during any of this?

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 04:29 pm (UTC)

Apparently what the officer did after shooting the dog was yell at my ex about how he would have to get tested to make sure he didn't get some kind of disease from being nipped on the finger. I'm really proud of my ex for not punching the man or telling him to go to hell, because I don't know if I could've restrained myself in such a situation.

Sun, Jun. 22nd, 2008 06:42 pm (UTC)

Cognitive dissonance -- the cop who shot the dog probably realized immediately that it was a poor decision and that he just killed someone's pet who posed him no threat, and then (unfortunately) the brain went to work, and the dog became a dangerous beast who had already tried to kill him, justifying the shooting and making the owner a Bad Person who deserved it. I'm sure, by now, the cop truly and fully believes that the owner should be apologizing to HIM for subjecting him to such a vicious beast, and thanking HIM for putting it down.

The brain can be both a terrible and wonderful thing -- unfortunately, cognitive dissonance usually works to make good cops bad, and bad cops worse.

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 12:41 pm (UTC)
(Anonymous): puppycide

ive said it before and ill say it again. if a cop were to shoot one of my dogs like that id put a bullet in the cop

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 01:40 pm (UTC)
(Anonymous): Re: puppycide

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?" -The Gulag Archipelago, A. Solzhenitsyn. Chapter 1 "Arrest", fn. 5.

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 01:58 pm (UTC)
tjic: Re: puppycide

ive said it before and ill say it again. if a cop were to shoot one of my dogs like that id put a bullet in the cop

Why stop at one (bullet) ?

I wouldn't.

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 01:45 pm (UTC)

Hello, fellow LJ-er and Agitator-reader!

A spaniel nipped his thumb, eh? How low was this officer dragging his arms, anyway? (Insert knuckle-dragger insult here) The only way I can imagine a spaniel nipping a knuckle is if the knuckle had been proffered for sniffing.

In which case, one must ask why was an officer stopping to make nice with a dog while he was trespassing in an *urgent* attempt to reach the scene of a fire?

That makes no sense at all.

Besides, wouldn't a stern, "Bad dog!" have sufficed, if the officer felt threatened by this particular ankle biter?

*shakes head* I'm sorry for your ex's loss. I hope he nails the bastard to the wall for it.

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 03:59 pm (UTC)
(Anonymous): Couple points to clarify

First let me state I'm not a cop fanboy at all, but I'm very curious and have read up fully on the rights and wrongs of the cops.

If like you said there was a fire behind your ex's house, then I doubt the cop trespassed. The reason for this is exigent circumstances, in the event of life or death the cop does have the right without a warrant to secure, enter, or proceed to the residence without a warrant.

as a side note: Something to attempt to do with an angered dog is whistle.
It is amazing how a dog is instantly confused, and responsive to a simple whistle. They can become your best friend, and let you become a part of their pack within seconds.

Mon, Jun. 23rd, 2008 11:42 pm (UTC)

First point-- Why the hell were the police called to the scene of a fire? This is just one more example of why there needs to be a "911" which calls the police, one which calls the paramedics, and one which calls the fire department, and never the twain shall meet.

No, they need to be together, so that when your car crashes and is on fire, you don't need to call 3 separate dispatchers (and give them the same info three times) to get police to direct traffic or arrest the drunk that hit you, ambulances for the injured, and a fire truck for the car. Do you really want a domestic violence victim to have to call 2 numbers while being beaten, meanwhile figuring out which one to call first? Consolidating dispatch speeds things up and is cheaper.

Police show up to fires for crowd control and traffic direction, since the firefighters expect to be busy fighting the fire. That doesn't explain what cops were doing in your ex's backyard and I don't mean to defend their actions (which probably wouldn't have happened had they been on the street facing the burning house where they should be), but they at the very least have a duty to be on scene.

Fri, Aug. 8th, 2008 10:52 am (UTC)

In the case of this incident, perhaps there's a slim hope of repercussions for the gunmen. Doubtful, I know.

Sat, Dec. 12th, 2009 03:10 pm (UTC)

Happy Birthday!