• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police Shoot Dog, gunshots caught on graphic video (NSFW)

Seemed like a busy neighborhood, lots of people out and about.

Maybe the whole incident makes the police appear callous in general.

Stray bullets vs stray dog, wonder which is more dangerous.
The dog wasn't a stray.
 
When is the last time a full grown man was killed by a dog?
In fact, you are more than twice as likely to be killed by a dog than an 'assault weapon'.
...and we all know what CA did to 'assault weapons'.

What we need, therefore, is common sense assault-dog bans. These military-style dogs....to include Rottweilers, German Shepherds, and Pit Bulls....need to be taken off the streets. You don't need 10lbs of dog to play fetch! Any dog heavier than 10lbs (or 7lbs in NY) is a high-capacity military-style dog of war, and should be reserved strictly for military and police use.
 
Last edited:
What are the numbers when you filter out elderly women and children?

My point is that the police didn't really have a reasonable fear for their life. Deadly force wasn't necessary.

Well, I don't think that's the standard for a dog attack. You seem to be conflating this with the level of response a policeman makes with respect to threats from people. Not the same, needless to say. If the cop thought that dog was simply going to bite him and cause injury (which is reasonable based on the video and the breed), he had a perfect right to shoot it. Hell, I think all rottweilers and pitbulls should be shot as a matter of principle (but that's just me)
 
I understand its illegal to play music at a certain level. But did he not comply?

My understanding, based on the witness' statement, was this was not the issue. The issue was police were in the middle of a potentially dangerous operation and had surrounded a house with a robbery suspect in it. The last thing they needed was music blasting from a car radio nearby interfering with their communication.

The guy should have just turned down his radio. He didn't. It's his own fault he got arrested and his own fault for not having the foresight to restrain his dog, especially a dangerous breed like a rottweiler.

I understand that there are strained relations between the minority community and the Hawthorn police department, and the community has real grievances. And I'm not passing judgment on the guy's distrust for the police. It's probably warranted. But that has nothing to do with the fact that he interjected himself into a dangerous situation and the police have a right to protect themselves in the line of duty. You don't solve police abuse issues by interfering with an arrest and having your Rottweiler lunge at a cop.
 
Last edited:
He did not. The song he had on repeat can be heard in the video.

I believe the witnesses (who are hardly pro-police) have said the same. They claim when the police asked him to turn off his car radio, he responded with an obscenity. He denies it (claiming he's a God-fearing Christian -- always a dubious defense), but there is no reason to doubt the witnesses.

That's why they arrested him (after resolving the robbery arrest). My understanding is his music ostensibly and indirectly made the robbery arrest more difficult, so they arrested him for disorderly conduct. If he had turned off the music, they clearly wouldn't have arrested him.
 
I believe the witnesses (who are hardly pro-police) have said the same. They claim when the police asked him to turn off his car radio, he responded with an obscenity. He denies it (claiming he's a God-fearing Christian -- always a dubious defense), but there is no reason to doubt the witnesses.

That's why they arrested him (after resolving the robbery arrest). My understanding is his music ostensibly and indirectly made the robbery arrest more difficult, so they arrested him for disorderly conduct. If he had turned off the music, they clearly wouldn't have arrested him.

this might be the first time I have ever seen that charge properly used
 
Rule #1 You must always comply with a police officer's command. If the guy has a beef with the low number of black police officers he needs to take it up with city hall or enlist himself but not at an armed robbery scene. Wrong time, wrong place.

Rule#2 Never put your dog in an unsafe place. You have all this commotion going on and you don't even secure your dog. That is like letting your dog run loose at a firework show.

I have a Rottie mix and I would never put my dog in harm's way.
 
The officer was right to shoot the dog. The dog lunged and went to attack him. He was defending himself.
 
The officer was right to shoot the dog. The dog lunged and went to attack him. He was defending himself.

Unfortunately that is true. The dog's owner is the idiot for not taking care of his dog properly. There is an armed robbery down the street, there are police everywhere, there are gawkers everywhere, and on top of that you got your car stereo blasting. A poor dog has not idea what all this commotion is about so best keep it on a leash or in the vehicle with the windows down slighting for ventilation.........or take the dog home.
 
lol, yes, because there are no other signs of aggressive behavior from a dog

Just go away

Most people can't tell the difference between excitement and aggression in a dog.
 
1) deadly force isn't limited to fear for life. It also applies to bodily harm

2) that metric is applied to people, not dogs

Cops don't shoot people because they kicked or punched the cop.
 
It doesn't have to be about life.

A dog's life is clearly less important than a human's well being.

Im not risking getting ****ing rabies from some fool's dog, im not risking getting 72 stitches to keep some ****ing idiot's dog alive. I'd rather take the dog out, consequences of rollin' around with an aggressive dog.

How many dogs have you killed or witnessed being killed in the line of duty? It's not that common, right?

I'm sure you deal with dogs quite a bit. Have you had any training in dealing with dogs in the line of duty?
 
In fact, you are more than twice as likely to be killed by a dog than an 'assault weapon'.
...and we all know what CA did to 'assault weapons'.

What we need, therefore, is common sense assault-dog bans. These military-style dogs....to include Rottweilers, German Shepherds, and Pit Bulls....need to be taken off the streets. You don't need 10lbs of dog to play fetch! Any dog heavier than 10lbs (or 7lbs in NY) is a high-capacity military-style dog of war, and should be reserved strictly for military and police use.

As a grown man, I am not more likely to be killed by a dog. Those statistics include children who are usually the victims in fatal dog attacks.

You are more likely to be killed by lightning strike.
 
Well, I don't think that's the standard for a dog attack. You seem to be conflating this with the level of response a policeman makes with respect to threats from people. Not the same, needless to say. If the cop thought that dog was simply going to bite him and cause injury (which is reasonable based on the video and the breed), he had a perfect right to shoot it. Hell, I think all rottweilers and pitbulls should be shot as a matter of principle (but that's just me)

A dog bite isn't that scary of a thing. People freak out about dogs as if they were mythical monsters.
 
As a grown man, I am not more likely to be killed by a dog. Those statistics include children who are usually the victims in fatal dog attacks.
Just like the numbers I gave also include children killed by firearms.
 
The owner was a fool. His dog died because of it.
 
How many dogs have you killed or witnessed being killed in the line of duty? It's not that common, right?

I'm sure you deal with dogs quite a bit. Have you had any training in dealing with dogs in the line of duty?

None. It not really that common...... but more common than shooting a person.

Sure. Avoid them if you can. But in some situations you can't avoid the dog. If a dog becomes a threat, you don't taze, you don't pepper spray, you shoot. If they are aggressive but staying back, you warn the owner that they need to control their dog (if the situation permits) and let them know that if the dog attacks you, you will be forced to shoot it.

Other than that... no.... we don't deal with anything other than that.
 
Most people can't tell the difference between excitement and aggression in a dog.

I think lunging at people and charging them would account for aggression. In fact, even the owner of the dog, a person much more familier than you, commented on his aggressive behavior.
 
A dog bite isn't that scary of a thing. People freak out about dogs as if they were mythical monsters.

no one has a need to get bitten because of an irresponsible owner.
 
The dog wouldn't have tried defending its owner if the police weren't abusing their power. Their detainment of the dog owner was unjustified and uncalled for... but in present day America, police can arrest you for next to anything, and ask questions later. Sad.

Note that the dog owner was recording the police with his phone, something that the police no longer allow. Funny that there was a second person recording the recorder from across the street.

This is why citizens should always have the right to record police action. If the police aren't abusing power then they have nothing to worry about.
 
The dog wouldn't have tried defending its owner if the police weren't abusing their power. Their detainment of the dog owner was unjustified and uncalled for... but in present day America, police can arrest you for next to anything, and ask questions later. Sad.

Note that the dog owner was recording the police with his phone, something that the police no longer allow. Funny that there was a second person recording the recorder from across the street.

This is why citizens should always have the right to record police action. If the police aren't abusing power then they have nothing to worry about.

you should read the thread. All these points have been addressed, and if you find something you particularly don't agree with, directly address it, as opposed to rehashing your original argument, again
 
Back
Top Bottom