Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Two More Reports of Police Killing Family Dogs

In Pennsylvania:
“There is no misunderstanding,” said Mangan. “He shot my dog maliciously."

Mangan said the deputy's story that Lincoln tried to attack him doesn't add up.

"The leash doesn't go past where he shot him at. He can't go any farther; he was in his own back yard, secure, on a leash," said Mangan.

The deputy said he couldn’t see the leash. [emphasis added]

Allegheny County Sheriff’s Chief Deputy Joseph Rizzo said in a statement, "If, in any event, a Sheriff’s deputy goes to a house and there is an aggressive animal, they make every effort to get out of harms way. If a dog is going to attack the deputy, they have no recourse."

No recourse except maybe to outfit the officer with a pair of glasses. This story reads like perhaps the officer was too quick to shoot. I guess we'll know for sure when the police get done investigating themselves and determine if they acted appropriately. Stay tuned.

In Illinois:

Officer guns down family dog

Park Forest police chief says detective had no choice

There are many things a 10-year-old boy should not see. Police officers gunning down the family dog during a burglary investigation is one of them.

No kidding. These officers are not equipped with any means of fending off a dog other than a revolver? No pepper spray even? That sounds irresponsibly dangerous.

I want to support our public servants as much as anyone but honestly, when some officers conduct themselves in this Wild West manner, it's hard to stand by those kinds of actions. And although I haven't read about it happening yet (and I hope I never do), it certainly seems possible that one day, an officer might shoot the beloved companion of someone who is also a gun owner, quick to shoot, and in need of glasses. Or maybe a stray bullet from an officer's gun will miss the dog and hit a kid. I don't know but the police are contributing to a reckless environment when their position on dogs seems to be shoot first.


Caveat said...

The police are afraid of dogs and are not trained to deal with them or interpret a dog's body language.

Couple that with their aggressive confrontational style and they will alarm even the most laid-back family pet. Let's just say they don't tap gently on the front door and that their body language is designed to intimidate.

The ricochet thing has already happened, by the way.

Here's one, there are more:

Tiny url:

YesBiscuit! said...

I see that story is from 1998. Apparently ten years is not enough time for a "learning experience" to have any effect.

I just wonder how come they couldn't use some of their RNC demonstrator tactics against dogs they feel threatened by - why do they have to shoot them? It seems so reckless.

Caveat said...

In Calgary Alberta, AC goes in before the police to contain any dogs. It works really well.

They haven't used a catchpole in over 8years, haven't had a bite in these situations either.

They could use a net, ie, something that would 'shoot' a net over an overexcited dog. I would rather they did that with distraught people instead of tasers, too.

You know 'Get the net!' as we used to say when somebody was being nutty.

Caveat said...

PS, Sorry the story was so old, we've had more recent ones. In Ontario they were firing at a dog in an apartment and the bullets were going into neighbouring units.

YesBiscuit! said...

The story didn't seem that old to me. I still say "Get the net!" ; )