Context…. I just enjoy getting all the facts before.. usually intelligent. Does it always change anything? Nope. According to the post, the police department received a call around 5:17 p.m. Sunday about an "injured animal at large" that was "behaving strangely." The dog did not have a collar or tags.
I agree with you. I just hate to see all the terrible things being said about LEOs. I’m a staunch supporter of them and buy their lunch any time I can. I came off sounding like an idiot though. That’s nothing new.
Supporting police is fine, I also support the police. But there is nothing wrong on calling them out when they do something inexcusable like shooting a blind and deaf dog for no reason, only to offer up some “thought it was rabid” bs excuse.
Well with all due respect the officer is in no position to diagnose the dog with a medical condition. If he was that overwhelmed by a blind Shih Tzu he could have called for someone with some sense to help him.
lol did you watch the video? The dog was not acting in anyway that would make someone think “rabies” it was just walking around in circles being curious while simultaneously trying to avoid a rope around its neck - which I think we can all agree is a pretty natural thing to avoid.
"You know, I feel like things are looking up, the public is turning in its opinions, politicians aren't targeting us as much any more..."
"lOL waTCh mE FUcK uP tHIs DOg, bRo"
"..."
"Never mind."
There are so many police out there that there will always be bad actors. The problem most people have is coming from repercussions for their actions. In this case as an example that are closing ranks and defending his actions.
"the City has reviewed the dispatch report and body camera footage regarding the recent dog at large incident. The City believes that the officer acted within his authority based on the information available to him at the time to protect against possible injury to citizens from what appeared to be an injured, sick, and abandoned dog."
I generally support the police in this country and the police in my area are great. I see statements like this though and recognize that it is likely this officer will never see anything come from his actions, and I do lose more faith in organizations abilities to self police.
Obviously this officer is a piece of shit. That being said, I think the city is defending him because even though he's an imbecile, he may not have broken policy and therefore they don't have grounds for disciplinary action.
>The city wrote that it will “be sending all officers to Boone County Animal Control for training and education, in hopes that this unfortunate situation does not occur again.”
Really what this line says to me is that from now on officers "have been trained" to handle these situations so if someone fucks it up they can distance themselves "because we taught him to do it like this". My city does this down to the point I had to have a "class" to push the switch on my weapon mounted light.
Imagine being outfoxed by a blind/deaf dog to the point you can't get it with a catch-pole. Then imagine your alternative was to kill the dog.
I get shooting a dog that's making aggressive moves towards people. But I don't get what this guy was thinking.
Reports are the dog was reported as sick and possible rabies. So yes, you are probably correct about his intentions. Needed? Who knows, seems capture would have been easy.
It was a Shih Tzu. Even if it went on a blood lusted rampage it could do some damage to an unaccompanied toddler. Either pick it up or leave it be, but it wasn’t a danger to anyone.
>The City of Sturgeon wrote in a social media post on Thursday that “the City has reviewed the dispatch report and body camera footage regarding the recent dog at large incident. The City believes that the officer acted within his authority based on the information available to him at the time to protect against possible injury to citizens from what appeared to be an injured, sick, and abandoned dog.”
>The city wrote that it will “be sending all officers to Boone County Animal Control for training and education, in hopes that this unfortunate situation does not occur again
Hello, it appears you're discussing Qualified Immunity. Qualified immunity relates to civil cases and lawsuits (money).
1. Qualified immunity has nothing to do with criminal charges against an officer. It does not prevent an officer from being charged with a crime and has no bearing on a "guilty" or "not guilty" verdict.
2. Qualified immunity does not prevent a person from suing an officer/agency/city. To apply QI, a presentation of facts and argument in front of a judge are required. The immunity is QUALIFIED - not absolute.
3. Ending qualified immunity and/or requiring police to carry liability insurance will not save the taxpayers money - officers are indemnified by their employers around 99% of the time and cities face their own lawsuit whether or not they indemnify officers.
4. Doctors carry insurance instead of immunity. The need to pay doctors exorbitant salaries to offset their insurance costs contributes to the ever-increasing healthcare costs in the US. There's no reason to believe it would not also lead to increases in costs of policing.
5. Forcing police to pay claims out of their retirement is illegal and unconstitutional in the United States. All sanctions and punishments in both a civil and criminal context require individualism, which means that you cannot punish a group of people without making a determination that every person in that group is directly responsible for the tort(s) in the claim. Procedurally, trying to seize pension funds would make it necessary for every member of the pension fund to sign off on any settlement, and to object to any settlement or verdict. Additionally, even if it were not illegal and unconstitutional, it may easily lead to MORE cover-ups rather than the internal ousting of bad actors. This would give police financial incentive to hide wrongdoing, whereas they currently have none.
Qualified immunity is a defense to a civil claim in federal court that shields government employees from liability as long as they did not violate a clearly established law or violate a persons rights. QI does not prevent a lawsuit from being filed. It is an affirmative defense that, if applied, will shield a person from the burdens of a trial. A plaintiff can file a lawsuit and the merits of it will be argued in front of a judge. If the plaintiffs can show a person’s rights were violated or the officer violated a law, then the suit will be allowed to proceed to trial if it is not resolved through mediation. During this time the judge can order both parties to a series of mediation efforts in attempts to settle the suit. Also during this time, both parties have a right to “discovery” meaning the plaintiffs and defendants can request whatever evidence exists as well as interview each other’s witnesses - called depositions. All these actions are before the plaintiffs can request summary judgement. Only after mediation efforts have failed and discovery has closed can the plaintiffs ask a judge to find QI applies and dismiss the lawsuit. If the actions of the officer are clearly legal, qualified immunity can be applied at the summary judgment phase of the case.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ProtectAndServe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right? It's a tiny scared dog that's not showing any signs of aggression.
Bend down my dude. Talk in a high pitched voice. Pick the less than five pound dog up.
I would hate to see how this officer reacts to suspects that run and don't immediately come out, holy shit.
What the actual fuck. I actually said that out loud when I saw the bodycam. Like that was so fucking unexpected. Dude literally couldn’t catch it so he just said fuck it and shot it. Talk about improving community relations right? I saw the article a few days ago and thought there must’ve been more to the story but nope, this dude just straight up killed a dog for practically no reason.
Police officer: Unjustly shoots doggo.
City: Yea yea that's fine.
Police officer: Justly shoots armed black man
City: Now I'm gonna shop you right there
FFS, **CARRY YOUR OC.**
I don't care if your agency makes it optional, and I don't care how much of a wilted leaf of lettuce you are that you're so goddamned afraid of secondary exposure.
I've only used mine on a person I think three times, but I've used it on dogs, aggressive bucks in rut, boars, and even Canadian geese to great effect (and no, I didn't spray a goose in the face.)
Why wouldn't you just yeet the goose? They weigh like five pounds and are made out of cartilage. They can't hurt you. I mean don't get me wrong fuck that entire species I'm glad you sprayed the stupid bastard, just seems like a waste of OC is all.
Man, it would take a lot for me to shoot a dog, even an aggressive one. I don’t get the impression the angle on this was that the dog was aggressive, it looks more like he’s trying to claim it was humane euthanasia, but my agency would never shoot a dog just because it was sick or injured.
It’s this kind of thing that makes our policy requiring supervisor approval to kill an injured animal logical.
This was really hard to watch, and seeing that the County is backing this officer is disappointing and disheartening.
The only silver lining was that it was a Bravo Mike officer, so this video won't gain the viral backing that it could otherwise.
Why is it any time an officer makes any misstep they make sure the public knows. I know all the crap that LEO goes through (my brother was a cop), with today’s atmosphere in America I honestly don’t know why anyone would want to join. And I don’t blame them at all. The current administration has deliberately fanned the flames of the animosity towards police. I admire you guys so much!
I hope you know that not everyone feels that way.
What a dumb fuck. Holy shit.
All the work officers across the country put in to improve public trust gets undone by one shit head like this in a matter of minutes. Infuriating.
Fuck him. I wish I knew that guy so tell that piece of shit to turn in his badge to his face.
Dog was reportedly acting strange and sick. Rabies was the concern. Capture did seem possible though.
It was blind and deaf, not rabid. This cop is a moron and so are you for trying to defend him.
Maybe you can show me where I defended this man? Put it in quotes so I can not miss it please.
You’ve commented at least twice the same thing about how “rabies was the concern” as if you are defending or justifying the officer.
Context…. I just enjoy getting all the facts before.. usually intelligent. Does it always change anything? Nope. According to the post, the police department received a call around 5:17 p.m. Sunday about an "injured animal at large" that was "behaving strangely." The dog did not have a collar or tags.
Cop is a piece of shit confirmed with context.
Probably, he sounds like a overweight mouth breather and could have captured it.
I don’t think that was his intention at all. I think he supports the police and was just offering up possibilities
It’s in bad taste though, read the room. No one wants to hear excuses for shooting a blind & deaf dog
I agree with you. I just hate to see all the terrible things being said about LEOs. I’m a staunch supporter of them and buy their lunch any time I can. I came off sounding like an idiot though. That’s nothing new.
Supporting police is fine, I also support the police. But there is nothing wrong on calling them out when they do something inexcusable like shooting a blind and deaf dog for no reason, only to offer up some “thought it was rabid” bs excuse.
You are correct. I just momentarily saw red. I figured it was just another dig by cop hating Redditors.
Well with all due respect the officer is in no position to diagnose the dog with a medical condition. If he was that overwhelmed by a blind Shih Tzu he could have called for someone with some sense to help him.
Can a police officer blow your head off if you’re acting strange and sick
Yes but I don’t think it’s a good idea
LOL
lol did you watch the video? The dog was not acting in anyway that would make someone think “rabies” it was just walking around in circles being curious while simultaneously trying to avoid a rope around its neck - which I think we can all agree is a pretty natural thing to avoid.
"You know, I feel like things are looking up, the public is turning in its opinions, politicians aren't targeting us as much any more..." "lOL waTCh mE FUcK uP tHIs DOg, bRo" "..." "Never mind."
There are so many police out there that there will always be bad actors. The problem most people have is coming from repercussions for their actions. In this case as an example that are closing ranks and defending his actions. "the City has reviewed the dispatch report and body camera footage regarding the recent dog at large incident. The City believes that the officer acted within his authority based on the information available to him at the time to protect against possible injury to citizens from what appeared to be an injured, sick, and abandoned dog." I generally support the police in this country and the police in my area are great. I see statements like this though and recognize that it is likely this officer will never see anything come from his actions, and I do lose more faith in organizations abilities to self police.
Obviously this officer is a piece of shit. That being said, I think the city is defending him because even though he's an imbecile, he may not have broken policy and therefore they don't have grounds for disciplinary action. >The city wrote that it will “be sending all officers to Boone County Animal Control for training and education, in hopes that this unfortunate situation does not occur again.” Really what this line says to me is that from now on officers "have been trained" to handle these situations so if someone fucks it up they can distance themselves "because we taught him to do it like this". My city does this down to the point I had to have a "class" to push the switch on my weapon mounted light.
Honestly that sounds like great news. I wish they'd lead with that. PR is an important part of any local government.
>bad actors Wrong term here. “Bad actor” implies that people joined the police force with specific intent to give police a bad name by example.
Imagine being outfoxed by a blind/deaf dog to the point you can't get it with a catch-pole. Then imagine your alternative was to kill the dog. I get shooting a dog that's making aggressive moves towards people. But I don't get what this guy was thinking.
The fact that he shoots it...then steadies over the dog's body and shoots it again...removes all doubt as to what this moron was doing.
Reports are the dog was reported as sick and possible rabies. So yes, you are probably correct about his intentions. Needed? Who knows, seems capture would have been easy.
Did you even watch the video?
Our UPS guy is better at dealing with a blind and deaf German shepherd. If it's a sub we just say "he's blind and deaf just let him sniff you"
Our UPS guy is better at dealing with a blind and deaf German shepherd. If it's a sub we just say "he's blind and deaf just let him sniff you"
It was a Shih Tzu. Even if it went on a blood lusted rampage it could do some damage to an unaccompanied toddler. Either pick it up or leave it be, but it wasn’t a danger to anyone.
A Shih Tzu that the officer though had a broken neck. How dangerous is a Shih Tzu with a broken neck that's not even growling or attempting to bite?
>The City of Sturgeon wrote in a social media post on Thursday that “the City has reviewed the dispatch report and body camera footage regarding the recent dog at large incident. The City believes that the officer acted within his authority based on the information available to him at the time to protect against possible injury to citizens from what appeared to be an injured, sick, and abandoned dog.” >The city wrote that it will “be sending all officers to Boone County Animal Control for training and education, in hopes that this unfortunate situation does not occur again
The city is really going to regret making themselves party to this inevitable lawsuit with the inevitable outcome.
The mayor resigned and the mayor pro tem retracted all of the prior mayor’s statements and placed the cop on leave.
[удалено]
Hello, it appears you're discussing Qualified Immunity. Qualified immunity relates to civil cases and lawsuits (money). 1. Qualified immunity has nothing to do with criminal charges against an officer. It does not prevent an officer from being charged with a crime and has no bearing on a "guilty" or "not guilty" verdict. 2. Qualified immunity does not prevent a person from suing an officer/agency/city. To apply QI, a presentation of facts and argument in front of a judge are required. The immunity is QUALIFIED - not absolute. 3. Ending qualified immunity and/or requiring police to carry liability insurance will not save the taxpayers money - officers are indemnified by their employers around 99% of the time and cities face their own lawsuit whether or not they indemnify officers. 4. Doctors carry insurance instead of immunity. The need to pay doctors exorbitant salaries to offset their insurance costs contributes to the ever-increasing healthcare costs in the US. There's no reason to believe it would not also lead to increases in costs of policing. 5. Forcing police to pay claims out of their retirement is illegal and unconstitutional in the United States. All sanctions and punishments in both a civil and criminal context require individualism, which means that you cannot punish a group of people without making a determination that every person in that group is directly responsible for the tort(s) in the claim. Procedurally, trying to seize pension funds would make it necessary for every member of the pension fund to sign off on any settlement, and to object to any settlement or verdict. Additionally, even if it were not illegal and unconstitutional, it may easily lead to MORE cover-ups rather than the internal ousting of bad actors. This would give police financial incentive to hide wrongdoing, whereas they currently have none. Qualified immunity is a defense to a civil claim in federal court that shields government employees from liability as long as they did not violate a clearly established law or violate a persons rights. QI does not prevent a lawsuit from being filed. It is an affirmative defense that, if applied, will shield a person from the burdens of a trial. A plaintiff can file a lawsuit and the merits of it will be argued in front of a judge. If the plaintiffs can show a person’s rights were violated or the officer violated a law, then the suit will be allowed to proceed to trial if it is not resolved through mediation. During this time the judge can order both parties to a series of mediation efforts in attempts to settle the suit. Also during this time, both parties have a right to “discovery” meaning the plaintiffs and defendants can request whatever evidence exists as well as interview each other’s witnesses - called depositions. All these actions are before the plaintiffs can request summary judgement. Only after mediation efforts have failed and discovery has closed can the plaintiffs ask a judge to find QI applies and dismiss the lawsuit. If the actions of the officer are clearly legal, qualified immunity can be applied at the summary judgment phase of the case. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ProtectAndServe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Leading up to the shooting, that might be the world's worst attempt to catch a dog
Right? It's a tiny scared dog that's not showing any signs of aggression. Bend down my dude. Talk in a high pitched voice. Pick the less than five pound dog up. I would hate to see how this officer reacts to suspects that run and don't immediately come out, holy shit.
He can't get away that! He's not in the ATF. Bs aside. Fuck that guy.
I was just thinking, "aft Bois aren't going to like the local cops getting in on their turf"
What the actual fuck. I actually said that out loud when I saw the bodycam. Like that was so fucking unexpected. Dude literally couldn’t catch it so he just said fuck it and shot it. Talk about improving community relations right? I saw the article a few days ago and thought there must’ve been more to the story but nope, this dude just straight up killed a dog for practically no reason.
Who else here wants to see Donut and angry cop destroy this guy?
Me! Me me me! Angry'll absolutely obliterate him :D
Think I'm going to skip this one. Title was enough. What a piece of shit
I regret watching it. It’s a lot worse than the headlines implied the last few days (given how titles are all rage bait nowadays)
yeah. If there's one thing I can't fuckin' watch, it's doggos gettin' hurt :(
The city actually defending this by the way. Insane I’ve never seen a more clear and cut case.
Police officer: Unjustly shoots doggo. City: Yea yea that's fine. Police officer: Justly shoots armed black man City: Now I'm gonna shop you right there
Sad but true
Hopefully he gets charged with a felony for animal cruelty.
That cop not only killed the dog He killed the job Bastard
What the fuck, dude…
TIL there's a place called Sturgeon.
I can only imagine how this person acts in other situations if they feel threatened by a blind and deaf shih tzu
omigosh a mouse dont touch it D: *mouse moves* ***AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA***
This actually made me yell "what the fuck!" when he shot. Fuck this cop. Turn in your badge you piece of shit.
Fire and charge him with animal cruelty.
This is insane, my blood boils watching that.
FFS, **CARRY YOUR OC.** I don't care if your agency makes it optional, and I don't care how much of a wilted leaf of lettuce you are that you're so goddamned afraid of secondary exposure. I've only used mine on a person I think three times, but I've used it on dogs, aggressive bucks in rut, boars, and even Canadian geese to great effect (and no, I didn't spray a goose in the face.)
Why wouldn't you just yeet the goose? They weigh like five pounds and are made out of cartilage. They can't hurt you. I mean don't get me wrong fuck that entire species I'm glad you sprayed the stupid bastard, just seems like a waste of OC is all.
You can yeet the stupid yankee ditch-chickens but they always come right back at you. They're persistent as fuck.
Man, it would take a lot for me to shoot a dog, even an aggressive one. I don’t get the impression the angle on this was that the dog was aggressive, it looks more like he’s trying to claim it was humane euthanasia, but my agency would never shoot a dog just because it was sick or injured. It’s this kind of thing that makes our policy requiring supervisor approval to kill an injured animal logical.
Yeah, the department and city need to reevaluate their decision. He needs to be terminated and possibly be prosecuted for animal cruelty.
He tried to catch him for less than five fucking minutes 😭😭😭
"But I am nothing without my gun" "If you are nothing without the gun, then you shouldn't have it"
This was really hard to watch, and seeing that the County is backing this officer is disappointing and disheartening. The only silver lining was that it was a Bravo Mike officer, so this video won't gain the viral backing that it could otherwise.
Maybe he's working with the ATF.
Why is it any time an officer makes any misstep they make sure the public knows. I know all the crap that LEO goes through (my brother was a cop), with today’s atmosphere in America I honestly don’t know why anyone would want to join. And I don’t blame them at all. The current administration has deliberately fanned the flames of the animosity towards police. I admire you guys so much! I hope you know that not everyone feels that way.
I believe the public deserves to know when we fuck up, they also deserve to know when we excel. One of those is far more common but doesn’t sell.
Unfortunately, there's a reason HBO does better than Hallmark. People want one and not the other.