The Glade 4.0

Yep, it does. I still have the scars from when my arm got chewed up too. :p

The comparison was yours:



The point is, should the cop be required to attempt to avoid using deadly force?

I don't see a knife wielding 3 year old being characterized in that statement...

Required how?

Shoot to wound instead of to kill?
Nope, not in the least. If you draw on another person, you'd best be prepared to justify killing them. If they resist after being shot, well, shoot them again. Once they surrender, stop shooting. It's a shame I feel compelled to include these caveats in this conversation, but I just know folks would jump at any opportunity to put words where words were never put.

Give someone an order to halt before opening fire?
Sure, if there's time and that's the cops decision, as long as it's supported by regulations.

Run away from a threat?
I don't think I'd ever require that in any way, shape or form. In fact, I'd strongly discourage that behavior. Strategic retreat, sure...if the cop thought that was the appropriate way to deal with the situation, but that's it.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Depends what you mean by run away. I don't think anyone's advocating that a cop should flee the scene to avoid the use of force. Backing off a few steps to create a buffer zone while you try to talk a perp down, standing on the other side of a gate or getting back in your squad car for a minute while a dog's owner gets it under control, etc. are very different than running away from a threat.

I'd not have had a problem if the cop had made an attempt to do that, but he didn't and after watching how quickly it all went down, I'm not going to second guess the situation. I will offer a personal analysis though -

At first, the cop was retreating (as far as I can tell from watching the video).

By the time the cop realized the dog wasn't going to stand off a ways and bark (which I would have expected from the average dog), but instead, apparently going to attack, there wasn't a whole lot of time to get back in the car.

I would have shot it too, given those circumstances. It was all done pretty quick, in my opinion. It all happened and was over in a few seconds...in fact, going back to review, it was like 5 seconds or so from the time the cop started backing up 'till the dog got shot. The dog never slowed down as far as I can tell - it looks like it was in full attack mode.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Come on, man, read the thread. I said originally, that he could have easily gotten up on his car to avoid the dog, and someone else suggested he could get into the car. I then also talked about a toddler, being able to easily stay out of stabbing reach of a toddler.

So, please stop dancing around the questions and address the specific examples I posed. I'm not talking about running away, I'm not talking about shooting to wound, I mentioned two specific examples. By supporting this dirtbag, you're basically suggesting it's acceptable for him to use lethal force instead of exerting minimal effort to avoid the confrontation.

Exactly what duty was this officer preforming at the time he shot the dog? was he there in response to a call? serving a warrant or other type of official function? the answer appears to be no. He crossed into private property to ask directions, unannounced and uninvited, he had no right or cause to even be on the property. He's lost, guess what he has at a bare minimum a radio (very probable a gps and a computer on board) to contact dispatch for directions. There is no justification for trespassing and shooting a someones pet while doing it. A badge doesn't give you more rights or the authority to ignore other peoples rights.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.

He was in uniform, on duty, performing in some official capacity. There doesn't need to be an exact function that he was performing to justify being where he was.It doesn't give you less rights either, and it does give the cop obligations that other people don't have.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

So basically what your saying Taskiss is that a cop can do pretty much whatever the hell they want.

_________________
I met this six-year-old child, with this blank, pale, emotionless face and, the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes. I spent eight years trying to reach him, and then another seven trying to keep him locked up because I realized what was living behind that boy's eyes was purely and simply... evil

Ever notice that when someone says "so basically what your saying is" what they REALLY mean is "sit still and let me fill your mouth with whatever I want"?

That ever work?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Taskiss appears to be trying to dethrone Lex for Troll of the Week.

Maybe if we don't feed him, he'll lose interest?

Why?

'Cause I believe the cop was in the right or 'cause I don't put up with ad-homs and strawmen?

Oh, and **** you.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Did I hit a sensitive spot?

You're kidding, right? Do you really think I care what some anonymous poster thinks of me?

Nope, you just earned a "**** you", so I gave you what you deserved.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Apparently as long as they are in uniform and on the clock.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Mookhow, I hope you brought enough for everyone! :p~

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I really wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, I was in a hurry and summed up what I had read of your post in maybe too succinct of a manner. Don't confuse me with some other posters on the board I think it is good to get others perspective even if I don't agree with them.

I was especially commenting on this tidbit of yours


So essentially a police officer can come onto your property for any reason he wants according to this statement is that correct?

_________________
I met this six-year-old child, with this blank, pale, emotionless face and, the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes. I spent eight years trying to reach him, and then another seven trying to keep him locked up because I realized what was living behind that boy's eyes was purely and simply... evil

So do I...but I wasn't ringing a doorbell, I was a guest in the house! Dogs can be and are dangerous at any time...however the officer in this case could possibly have avoided the "confrontation" by getting back into his vehicle as soon as he saw the dog approaching.

Never underestimate dogs, though. They can be loving, loyal, safe pets one minute and deadly foes the next...doesn't matter how well trained they are. If you aren't there to stop them, they can and will maim or kill an "interloper".

_________________
"Said I never had much use for one, never said I didn't know how to use one!"~ Matthew Quigley

"nothing like a little meow in bed at night" ~ Bruskey

"I gotta float my stick same as you" Hondo Lane

"Fill your hand you son of a *****!"

Not at all. A cop can't "do anything he wants" any more than you or I.

You or I are quite able to drive down a road, and we'd be perfectly justified in stopping at a house to ask directions. You or I can get licensed to carry. And if we were, and if you or I were threatened and attacked by an animal that could do us great bodily harm, we would be justified in protecting ourselves. Just 'cause someone's a cop doesn't mean they can't do these things too. Now, you or I may have to answer questions concerning our reason for being there at that time and place, but a cop's duty, when assigned, to it is to patrol... to drive around and check things out. It's part of the job.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

This isn't Maybury, and most cops aren't Andy. Hell, they ain't even Barney.

_________________

And they're not true scottsmen either.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

PA has a nusiance animal law where I can shoot an animal under certain conditions. I guess its ok to force the situation to happen so my choices are automatically limited to what I want to do.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill