K9 killed in line of duty in PA - Page 2

It's so hard to make a call without being there to see.  Amazing as it may be (LOL!) I have an opinion about this.

I think the K9 officer was in error.  I don't think the dog should have been deployed if the suspect was armed - instead, I think the officer should have FIRST called for backup, then continued to demand the suspect surrender the weapon AND submit (ie; facedown, spread arms, legs, etc).  Not having been there, it's sooooo difficult to tell how fast each segment of this event happened. 

I might be wrong, but I think many departments have a SOP on this very subject. "Sacrificing" the dog isn't part of SOP that I know about.  We also need to consider this aspect:

An armed man (I'm just going to assume he was over the age of 12 and able to understand he was being ordered to surrender the weapon) - is confronted by a cop with a gun, and ORDERED to surrender the weapon and himself.  Even without a dog present, the armed man really has only two choices:  submit or fight.  From this description, the criminal CHOSE to escalate by NOT submitting.

Kill him. No cop in the world should endanger his own life when a suspect refuses to drop a weapon.

Steve    

...

Like it has been said before, tough to make a call if you are not there.  How about this that no one has mentioned.  Why not put a vest on a K9?  Cost Cost Cost!  How much is your partners life worth?  This is all monday morning quarterbacking.  It only takes a minute to put a vest on the dog, he does not have to wear it for the whole tour.  These scenarios are case by case basis.  Better to lose a 4 legged partner than one with 2 leggs.

Kyle

They discussed the vest issue on the news the other night.  They said they have vests but only use them when they are knowingly taking a dog into a situation where shootings are likely.  The vests weigh 15 lbs. and are not only cumbersome but make the dogs too hot to wear continually.  Evidently this situation erupted quickly and there was no time to make sure the dog was protected by a vest.

I have known a number of canine officers and customs officers.  In my experience, their dogs are their partners as much as a human partner and they are certainly not considered "expendible."  When their canine partner takes a hit or dies in the line of duty, it is as an arrow piercing the heart and the sorrow for a fallen partner.  No less.

In illustration, I recall when I worked at a large vet clinic and we had a big mother of a black guy come in with his Dobie.  The dog was a customs detector and he was a customs officer.  This was a very muscle bound guy with a pretty fierce dog.  But we knew another side of this pair.  When the dog was brought to the clinic, the handler, every time spoke to him like someone's little grandmother.  He was not ashamed of his great affection for this dog.

When the dog was diagnosed with Wobblers, the guy broke down in tears and all vists after that were a great sadness for us all and the animal was eventually put down.  No sorrow could be greater than the man's love for his dog.  Job dog or not!

All I can say is that I would NEVER EVER send my partner after an armed gunman, whether it was to save me or not.

Emily.

 As much as some of you may want us to, we can not shoot someone just because they have a gun. There must be an "immediate threat of great bodily harm or death" I can't begin to explain it here so for the sake of simplicity----

the guy would have to level the gun, attempt to enter a building likely to cause a hostage situation, or actualy shooting, to be considered an "immediate threat". Might seem crazy to you but that's the way it is in my neck of the woods.

From a tactical standpoint the deployment of the dog was exactly what he should have done (from the description of the scenario). He saw a gun, suspect refused to show hands, in an open public area. He can't shoot him, he can't let him run away, your not going to try and go hands on with someone you know has a gun. The dog was the correct option to use. Really the only option.

Three weeks ago I was in a very similar situation. Drive by shooting with injury, 100 MPH pursuit. I was positioning to assist when the suspect car crashed right in front of me. Foot pursuit on one of the suspects, rounded a corner and he was trying to jump a fence. I took him down at gunpoint. Had I had a dog, I would have used it. If the kid (15 by the way with his 13 year old brother and another 15 yr old) would have pointed a gun or tried to get in the front door of that house...............

AS for the use of a dog on a known armed suspect. There is a huge difference between a place open to the public and a barricaded suspect. There are many more option available. in a barricade scenario. I personally would not send my dog in on an armed barricaded suspect unless I was given a direct order. In the end though the dog is a tool. If it comes down to officer or dog, the dog has to go in first. 

P.S. 

 In CA, today is Peace Officer's Memorial Day in memory of all officers in California who have been killed in the line of duty.

"In CA, today is Peace Officer's Memorial Day in memory of all officers in California who have been killed in the line of duty."

God's blessing and care to all who have died in the line of duty, both human and canine.  They are our Heros and they are the keepers of our peace.  They honour our humanity.  They keep our trust.  They deserve to be remembered.

Thanks GARD for shedding some light on the situation.  I can understand from one perspective why not sending the dog is stated but I too tried to come up with one other viable alternative that the officer had at that particular moment given the circumstances; I could not think of anything else he could have done.  He couldn't fire his weapon because at that moment the suspect had not fired any shots at the officer or anyone else; how was he to know that the suspect would turn around and shoot the dog dead???  The whole things blows my mind actually that it went down that way.  What really did the suspect think he'd accomplish by shooting the dog???  He'd flee??  It's my understanding that once the initial shot gets fired at an officer or at all for that matter all bets are off and the officer has the right to discharge his weapon.  Is this correct?  If so, then shooting the dog was also signing off his own death certificate.

For anyone who did not read the article the dog was a 6yr old GSD.  They are planning a huge ceremony for him tomorrow I believe where he will be laid to rest in the cemetary with full honors.

Steve- Yes it's mind blowing when you hear assinine comments like "why couldn't he shoot em in the leg?"  I suposse the suspect aims to shoot at legs to right??  People never cease to amaze me anymore!  That boys mother should have slapped the hell out of that child lonnnnnnnnnggg ago when he was young robbing, fighting, carrying weapons and now she wants to play the "blame game" on the cop....

A little bit of a different note but,,,,,after my sar partner died (i still believe world trade center related) i had a peta person call me to tell me I killed my dog.

I took a big gulp and then quietly and politely asked her if she had children. she replied, a 19 year old and a 22 year old. I then returned with " if one of then was trapped or missing in the rubble would you as a mother not want to ulilize all available means, including a dog? She abruptly hung up.

A day does not go by that I do not miss my Anna, no matter how great my current partners are.