Another Highly Debated Cop Video: NYC Cop Shoots Dog

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
The only thing that matters are its size. It obviously wasn't chihuahua-sized so whether its a pitbull or some other similar sized dog is irrelevant.

Irrelevent. Just because it's rare doesn't mean you can tell if a dog has one or not. As well, you seem to have forgotten that this dog is owned by a HOMELESS MAN. Think about that. How well groomed and sanitary do you think it was? Who knows what kind of shit its mouth has been digging around in. This is basic logic dude.

So are knife wounds hurrr. Doesn't stop brandishing a knife at a cop from being a bullet-in-the-ass worthy action though.

Seemed to be is speculation and irrelevant. When the dog charges at you you don't know if he's going to back off if you back off or if he's decided to rip your throat out. Better safe than sorry.

tazers aren't classified as lethal ON HUMANS, because they voltage FOR THAT SPECIFIC TAZER was tweaked specifically to hurt human-sized targets without killing them. A dog is not a human sized target. Again, this is common sense.

Don't be a clown. A dog can cover twenty in feet in less than one second. The dog in the video was half that distance away from the cop. If he had missed he wouldn't have had time to draw his gun, and his partner wouldn't fire his own weapon with the dog so close to the other cop, for fear of hitting him. Knowing police protocol and how they're trained to use their weapons is part of my job- is it part of yours?

31 people would still be alive today if they had just kicked the dog! hurr.

Dog got what it got and the cop did what he was trained to do. It's easy to sit here on the internet and say "hurr he should have rationalized the situation" but 1 you weren't there and 2 you obviously aren't aware that we in the law enforcement/security business are trained to assess dogs as potentially lethal threats, so if you want to blame someone because some homeless guy's animal got put down, blame the guy's training.

LoL at you editing out what you didn't like.

And it wasn't that big of a dog, definitely not some dog who would have "ripped throats" out of one, let alone two grown men.

Not irrelevant, if "OMG, death via rabies" is going o be a reason to shoot a dog, realize that the chances are minuscule. See: Overreacting. Lots of homeless people own dogs (you should know this, you live or work in SF); homeless doesn't = rabid pets, as some default.

I'd expect a cop to properly assess the situation and opt for tazering an assailant who was armed with a knife instead of shooting them with gun if possible. Bit trigger happy are we, eh.

Again, properly assessing the situation. The dog was guarding its owner; had previously charged another person and backed off once they did.

LoL. Bullets are still more potentially lethal to a dog. This is common sense.

Stop overreaching. It's wasn't that large of a dog and there were two grown men. This wasn't a scene out of Cujo where we have a 100+ pound dog overpowering multiple adults.

Strawman. Don't act like a jackass cos you made a BS claim "tons of people die!" to support your claim and it was shown to be wrong. If this had been a charging pit, mastiff or rottweiler, sure, use lethal tactics first. Back to 'properly assessing the situation.'

1) You weren't there either 2) you've not had police training, so lets not get too high and mighty here. That dog was hardly a threat going from its actions, cop lost his composure and overreacted. He should have had his tazer out; tazered the dog since the man possibly was in dire need of medical attention. If the dog happened to have did from said tazer, that would have been an unfortunate outcome, but it's better than firing your gun in a crowded area.

Originally posted by Robtard
Tazers aren't classified as lethal, guns are. That's the point of cops carrying lethal and non-lethal weapons.

Cops who have tasers are supposed to be sent to training to break them of this belief. There is no such thing as non-lethal, tasers are less lethal. That means they are unlikely to kill an healthy adult human. There is little reason to believe the dog would have been in less danger if he shot it with the taser.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Cops who have tasers are supposed to be sent to training to break them of this belief. There is no such thing as non-lethal, tasers are less lethal. That means they are unlikely to kill an healthy adult human. There is little reason to believe the dog would have been in less danger if he shot it with the taser.

Why I said they're classified as non-lethal, despite deaths happening, they're not supposed to kill. Guns with bullets are.

Except of course for the above. Cops have tazered dogs and they've not died. Some don't even stay down for long; but run off pissing themselves scared shitless.

Are we really putting the safety of a dog over the safety of a human, Rob?

Look, you can argue that the cop might have had less lethal options, but in heat of the moment situations you really have no idea how you'd react.

Who's to say you wouldn't do the same thing in the cop's position?

agreed, I think we can differentiate between "the officer acted in a less than optimal way" and "the officer did something wrong"

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Are we really putting the safety of a dog over the safety of a human, Rob?

Look, you can argue that the cop might have had less lethal options, but in heat of the moment situations you really have no idea how you'd react.

Who's to say you wouldn't do the same thing in the cop's position?

Clearly I'm not. As I've said if I felt a dog was a serious threat, put it down.

For me and you, sure, 100% agreed. Call me crazy, but I hold police officers who are entrusted with upholding laws that affect us and are armed with guns to a MUCH higher level.

Originally posted by Oliver North
agreed, I think we can differentiate between "the officer acted in a less than optimal way" and "the officer did something wrong"

Agreed. IMO, he acted like an amateur.

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed. IMO, he acted like an amateur.

For sure

It would be interesting to know what the general protocol for this type of situation is, and what training, if any, officers get when dealing with aggressive dogs.

While I do agree with you, that officers need to be held to a higher standard than regular citizens in these things, it is also true that their job requires them to make instantaneous decisions that impact their own health and others, and sometimes that wont be the most perfect choice. I'm the first person to criticize the police when that choice is clearly the wrong one, but here, it seems within the realm of reasonableness, idk.

Your point about firing a gun on a crowded street is interesting though, and to think about it, it is strange the second officer isn't trying to get people to step away from the scene...

Originally posted by Oliver North
For sure

It would be interesting to know what the general protocol for this type of situation is, and what training, if any, officers get when dealing with aggressive dogs.

While I do agree with you, that officers need to be held to a higher standard than regular citizens in these things, it is also true that their job requires them to make instantaneous decisions that impact their own health and others, and sometimes that wont be the most perfect choice. I'm the first person to criticize the police when that choice is clearly the wrong one, but here, it seems within the realm of reasonableness, idk.

Your point about firing a gun on a crowded street is interesting though, and to think about it, it is strange the second officer isn't trying to get people to step away from the scene...

Officers are allowed to shoot attacking dogs. But again, properly assessing the situation is vital. This cop could have shot the dog within parameters, but he acted far more cool and sensible than that clownshoe.

Nothing criminal, but it was amateur hour in that scene through and through, imo.

It was argued "what if the cop missed with the taser?"; I ask, what if the cop missed with the gun, considering that dog wasn't standing still and is a relatively smaller target than a human. Bullets ricochet and kill people just the same.

Originally posted by Robtard
Officers are allowed to shoot attacking dogs. But again, properly assessing the situation is vital. This cop could have shot the dog within parameters, but he acted far more cool and sensible than that clownshoe.

Nothing criminal, but it was amateur hour in that scene through and through, imo.

It was argued "what if the cop missed with the taser?"; I ask, what if the cop missed with the gun, considering that dog wasn't standing still and is a relatively smaller target than a human. Bullets ricochet and kill people just the same.

the best part: at the end of the video, when they are interviewing the black officer in his car, the caption underneath is "cocoa police department"

LoL, didn't notice that.

Rob is a smart guy in this ITT, listen to him.

Would you now?

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL at you editing out what you didn't like.

And it wasn't that big of a dog, definitely not some dog who would have "ripped throats" out of one, let alone two grown men.

Not irrelevant, if "OMG, death via rabies" is going o be a reason to shoot a dog, realize that the chances are minuscule. See: Overreacting. Lots of homeless people own dogs (you should know this, you live or work in SF); homeless doesn't = rabid pets, as some default.

I'd expect a cop to properly assess the situation and opt for tazering an assailant who was armed with a knife instead of shooting them with gun if possible. Bit trigger happy are we, eh.

Again, properly assessing the situation. The dog was guarding its owner; had previously charged another person and backed off once they did.

LoL. Bullets are still more potentially lethal to a dog. This is common sense.

Stop overreaching. It's wasn't that large of a dog and there were two grown men. This wasn't a scene out of Cujo where we have a 100+ pound dog overpowering multiple adults.

Strawman. Don't act like a jackass cos you made a BS claim "tons of people die!" to support your claim and it was shown to be wrong. If this had been a charging pit, mastiff or rottweiler, sure, use lethal tactics first. Back to 'properly assessing the situation.'

1) You weren't there either 2) you've not had police training, so lets not get too high and mighty here. That dog was hardly a threat going from its actions, cop lost his composure and overreacted. He should have had his tazer out; tazered the dog since the man possibly was in dire need of medical attention. If the dog happened to have did from said tazer, that would have been an unfortunate outcome, but it's better than firing your gun in a crowded area.

Turrible logic.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Are we really putting the safety of a dog over the safety of a human, Rob?

Look, you can argue that the cop might have had less lethal options, but in heat of the moment situations you really have no idea how you'd react.

Who's to say you wouldn't do the same thing in the cop's position?

Originally posted by Oliver North
agreed, I think we can differentiate between "the officer acted in a less than optimal way" and "the officer did something wrong"

Exactly. There's an obvious difference between what was practical and what would be like, some silly moral stance. The cop did what he was trained to do.

So just trollin, cool. Had a feeling when you implied breed doesn't matter/is a factor.

lol. Whatever you say, Dadudemon.

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
lol. Whatever you say, Dadudemon.

Dogs are people too.

Originally posted by Robtard
Clearly I'm not. As I've said if I felt a dog was a serious threat, put it down.

For me and you, sure, 100% agreed. Call me crazy, but I hold police officers who are entrusted with upholding laws that affect us and are armed with guns to a MUCH higher level.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I hope you aren't going to attempt a slippery slope argument here.

If you think, please point it out.

Originally posted by Robtard
If you think, please point it out.