Innocent young Rottweiler killed by a stupid guy with license to kill innocents. - Page 3

Consider the manner of the Topic Header decided upon by the OP, zdog. It doesn't take a Detective to see the hypocrisy. Add into it the history of this type of post on this site. Go ahead, check out Hot Topics 2012 third from the top, and see the "business" aspect at work. He wants his company associated with this type of smear? Hope it works for him too, that he felt he had to write a book with down right lies about me? That's up to him. I suppose he thinks it will be good business to change his tenor in trite paragraphs, writing nonsense that has nothing of value to this, tragedy? 

To add to other points such as the one's Euroshepherd outlined, I just listened to the video and not watch it. The bystanders, including the man who was cuffed, acted like it was a block party. It was his own stupidity to press the issue and not take into account who is wearing a gun. 

He took a deadly risk and lost it with his dog's life. Very sad. Very stupid.

Blitzen,
miamidade, with your attitude, you're not likely to have many allies here. Are you the guy in the first video you posted here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZVmXB3XSa0&feature=player_embedded

That was the best part of this thread!  Two nice, but poorly trained dogs showed in that video.  If I were miamidadecounty K9 I would be embarrassed by the performance of both dogs and certainly would not be criticizing or questioning anyone else's training ability.

There is a lot I could say about the incident, what was going on and what happened.........But, I don't think I will.  I am surprised it took so long to be posted here.
 

I don't care what he put for a title, I don't care about his business.  I don't know who he is or what he does.  Nor do I care.  I hardly think walking on a street where police are just standing around rather relaxed should ever be considered taking a "deadly risk" and if it is, it most certainly shouldn't be coming from the cops.

Well I have been following this for a while. The news has said the offers in the video have been pulled off the street and or transferred since receiving 100's of death threats from what occurs here.

i feel like both owner and police were in the wrong here. Obviously the owner shouldn't be there. Here wouldn't have been arrested if he had listened to the police in the beginning. As well as leaving the windows down in the car.

however I dont feel the dogs actions warranted lethal action. The dog was not committed to biting or injuring the officers. It was simply aroused by the scenario. As well as the officer that was nipped at should know better than to reach over a strange aroused dog. However the dog still wasnt committed to injure him even then. It was simply a warning nip IMO.

IMO there are several way the officers in could have affected the outcome. 1) this man obviously wasnt fighting them as they had him put the dog in the car in the 1st place. They could have had him repeat the process. especially with this being a minor misdemeanor charge. 2)the man is already restrained it doesnt take multiple officers. crowding the suspect. without so much tension the dogs arousal state wouldnt be as high and would have given the officers time to find a solution.

but my favorite is:

3) Knowing the man had the dog with him before arresting him they should have had him call someone to take the dog or call animal control before detaining the suspect. Putting the dog in a hot car wasnt the right thing to do. This is my favorite solution as it takes care of all parties involved and wouldnt allow the situation to occur in the 1st place in any case or future endeavors. I feel it should be SOP. Safest for the officers, suspects, and the dogs.



I do feel though that this has happened several times previous and every incident of this nature has a lot of media scrutiny. So from or leo's what is the SOP?
I would love to know. Because I would think with as big of an issue this causes for police they would definitely take note and have a trained procedure for dealing with dogs. whether it be a misdemeanor on the street, dogs in car on traffic. felony raids, etc.......








 

But still, why does it matter?
 

Don't ask the damn question then, if you don't want an answer. 

Still was there anything that could have been done by the officer From the time the dog lunged at him to do something other than shoot the dog before he got bit..  That is about 3 seconds. 

 

the question was rhetorical,  I suspect most people will see that who or what the OP is or does, really has nothing to do with the video.

about all we've gained is you have a personal issue with the OP.  Great, go make your own thread and you two can quarrel there.

yes not reaching down over an aroused strange dog 1st. and secondly If he had simply retreated the dog does not appear to committed to a bite. it was a warn snap imo.

So instead of everyone saying this is bad. and debating on what could have happen.  how about we ask how to prevent it from happening in the future.

 

zdog, I could care less about the OP. You obviously don't know everything. Join the clueless ranks. No need to reply. 

Why do we have to comment on specifically 3 seconds of video?  Because that's all you want to make this about?   Professionals with guns could have acted like professionals for the previous 8 minutes and avoided the situation entirely.  The professionals who are trained for and paid to handle situations like this by defusing, not escalating should behave better.  Especially with a lot of  innocent bystanders around.  They exhibited very poor judgement for a supposed professional paid to "protect and serve"