• 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)

Here's the song Leon Rosby left blaring in his car....




Hawthorne police Lt. Scott Swain to the Daily Breeze: "It's interfering with what they are able to hear. It's not just a party call. It's an armed robbery call. The officers need to hear what's going on with the people being called out of the residence. That music in his car is bleeding over and it's distracting them,”...




Leon Rosby also has a pending civil case against the Hothorn police department. It seems Mr. Rosby is a bit of a vigilantly. I wonder if he left his windows down so that his dog would get shot so that he would have more publicity. That is how radicals think.


All of this should have been in your OP. How convenient that you left out so many details, not the least of which was a proper video showing exactly why the dog was shot.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Yes, that's very illegal. This man's behavior, in distracting the police, could be seen as interfering and/or harassment.


Whether a person is 'obstructing, hindering, or delaying the officer' is up to the perception of the officer, not the person recording. Cops may well have safety concerns that are not immediately obvious to the amateur cameraman. We don't know that the dog's owner was actually arrested or charged with anything. OP's article clams such but where is the proof? For all we know the man was released without any charge.


So? The dog lunged, that's enough to demonstrate the dog's intent and to kill it. You don't need to wait until you're injured to fire because the whole point is to prevent you from sustaining any injury in the first place.
Click to expand...

The crime of distracting the police? What a joke.

Ah, so you are NOW intensely FOR gun control because a person having a gun near a police barracade is FAR more distracting!

People that chickenXXXX should not be police officers.
 
Jerry said:
The whole reason the cops were there in the first places is they were responding to an armed robbery call. Then this jackass 1. leaves music blaring from his car (that's interfering) and 2. starts shouting bumper-sticker slogans at the cops (which is also interference). The arrest was warranted.

Then he failed to properly secure his dog, who then lunged at a cop, and was shot. Rightly so.
Click to expand...

Loud music, shouting slogans is reason for arrest. I am curious if that would have happened if he would have been white. It is not the first time that a Hawthorne police officer (or better yet an LA police officer because Hawthorne is an LA suburb) abused his/her power.

From what I found when researching the "Hawthorne police" it seems they already paid 1,000,000 dollar in a settlement for handcuffing and then physically abusing someone they arrested. And there are more reports of police misconduct in Hawthorne.
 
I see you added a clarification that you say he was committing the crime of distracting police with music that white police wouldn't like. Absurd reasoning.
 
Peter King said:
Loud music, shouting slogans is reason for arrest. I am curious if that would have happened if he would have been white. It is not the first time that a Hawthorne police officer (or better yet an LA police officer because Hawthorne is an LA suburb) abused his/her power.

From what I found when researching the "Hawthorne police" it seems they already paid 1,000,000 dollar in a settlement for handcuffing and then physically abusing someone they arrested. And there are more reports of police misconduct in Hawthorne.
Click to expand...
I don't contest that this police department has some issues to work out, but shooting the dog was justified.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Any dog would behave like that.
Click to expand...

So it was acting aggressively?

Barking at close range is not aggression, at least not violent aggression.
Click to expand...

indeed it is. This is something even acknowledged by the owner in the video.
 
Peter King said:
Now the dog might have been a threat, but if they had just sent the man on his way with a warning, not cuffed and manhandled him the dog would not have come to his defense and this would not have been necessary. More bad press for the police and it is for the biggest part all their own fault for handing this situation way too aggressively when this was not called for.
Click to expand...

Seems the dog owner should have secured his mutt
 
Peter King said:
But if not for the unreasonable arrest there would have never been a reason to shoot that dog.
Click to expand...

I don't know the full details of the arrest, hence wy I am not commenting on that. But regardless of it, it's up to the dog owner to secure his animal.

Hell, people like that ****head are the reasons why dog attacks happen in most cases: "derp, I am going to put my dog in the car with the windows down"
 
Peter King said:
You are voicing an opinion but an opinion I do not agree with, I am not saying that when it lunged it was not justified that the officer took actions to protect himself. He could however in the 10 seconds before taken his pepper spray and sprayed him in the face, incapacitating the dog
Click to expand...

lol~!!!
 
Peter King said:
Loud music, shouting slogans is reason for arrest. I am curious if that would have happened if he would have been white. It is not the first time that a Hawthorne police officer (or better yet an LA police officer because Hawthorne is an LA suburb) abused his/her power.

From what I found when researching the "Hawthorne police" it seems they already paid 1,000,000 dollar in a settlement for handcuffing and then physically abusing someone they arrested. And there are more reports of police misconduct in Hawthorne.
Click to expand...

look up genetic fallacy
 
Here are my thoughts. I understand officers have a right to defend themselves and that this guy was being a douche.

I also know that people can be very attached to their pets, they are like children to some.

When officers shoot a family pet, it should always be reviewed to ensure the activity was justified and I fully support being able to sue officers deemed to have been out of line. I don't want to see a precedent where officers just shoot an animal out of convenience when other options were available.
 
It looked like a horrible over-reaction...twice in the space of a minute. One, over-reacting to some verbal from the dog-owner. Whatever he said, what possible reason could there be to handcuff someone who hasn't shown the remotest resistance or violent intent. If it's standard procedure to handcuff every single arrested person, which I doubt, then it's that policy that's to blame here. Two, shooting dead the dog before it had touched anyone. Had the owner not been in unnecessary handcuffs he'd have been able to control the dog immediately.

Those cops looked like amateurs, and dangerous ones at that.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
He was shouting verious comments like "where all 'da black cops at" at the perimeter of a barricade.


The dog attacked a cop.
Click to expand...

If you actually look at the video, the officer put his hand down at the dog while the owner was in handcuffs. EVERY dog owner knows you don't approach a dog that way.
 
austrianecon said:
If you actually look at the video, the officer put his hand down at the dog while the owner was in handcuffs. EVERY dog owner knows you don't approach a dog that way.
Click to expand...
Maybe the cop in question wasn't a dog owner.
 
Jerry said:
The whole reason the cops were there in the first places is they were responding to an armed robbery call. Then this jackass 1. leaves music blaring from his car (that's interfering) and 2. starts shouting bumper-sticker slogans at the cops (which is also interference). The arrest was warranted.

Then he failed to properly secure his dog, who then lunged at a cop, and was shot. Rightly so.
Click to expand...

And all of his actions were OUTSIDE of a perimeter. Cops choose the perimeter. You can do whatever the **** you want if you are outside of it. To say this guy did anything illegal shows you don't know the law.

Boston and Mass State policy didn't shoot or arrest TV reporters, Cameramen or anyone else who impeding the search.
 
Jerry said:
I have to agree with you there. I would have just shot the dog.
Click to expand...

Good for you.. but would you leave an animal to suffer? Most human people would just ended for the animal. They didn't.
 
It's funny to see the same type of people in here defending the reckless life-taking actions of police officers that you see in the threads concerning abusive governmental actions against us. Good job people, keep defending outrageous uses of force. Keep up the good work.
 
Jerry said:
Maybe the cop in question wasn't a dog owner.
Click to expand...

And cops get training in these situations so that's a bs line. Shooting an animal (dog in this case) is a save your life situation as in the dog has a hold of you and at no point did that happen here.
 
Peter King said:
A video of police shooting a dog to death in front of its owner has gone viral after being posted to Reddit Monday afternoon.

The dog owner, Leon Rosby, was taking video of police officers in Hawthorne, Calif. as they barricaded a house, CBS reports.

Another bystander behind Rosby was recording him, and can be heard saying that Rosby asked the police why there weren't any black cops present. This drew the attention of two Hawthorne police officers, who started to approach Rosby.

Rosby can then be seen putting his dog, which looks like a Rottweiler, into his car and voluntarily putting his hands behind his back to be arrested. As he was being handcuffed by the officers, the dog started barking and jumped out of the car.

As the dog approached the officers, barking, the police shot the dog several times. Police said they had no choice but to shoot as the dog lunged towards them.

Police Shoot Dog, Gunshots Caught On Graphic Video (NSFW, UPDATES)


I am confused, the man posed no threat to the officers, he only filmed them and made a comment from a considerable distance, was not interfering with the crime-scene or the duties of the officers and yet he was arrested and put into handcuffs.

Then they start (from what it appears) manhandling the arrested man (searching pockets I think but pretty heavy handed for someone who poses no threat and has cooperated with the arrest) which leads to his dog jumping out of the car in defense of it's owner and then they shoot the dog.

Now the dog might have been a threat, but if they had just sent the man on his way with a warning, not cuffed and manhandled him the dog would not have come to his defense and this would not have been necessary. More bad press for the police and it is for the biggest part all their own fault for handing this situation way too aggressively when this was not called for.
Click to expand...

Another example of overzealous police officers going after peaceful citizens. Unfortunately, this one led to the death of an innocent animal. Cowards!
 
Even the Police Department has stated it was FEAR that was behind shooting the dog. Cops fear alot of things, like does someone have a gun in the house. Does that give cops right to shoot people because they are unarmed?
 
austrianecon said:
And all of his actions were OUTSIDE of a perimeter. Cops choose the perimeter. You can do whatever the **** you want if you are outside of it. To say this guy did anything illegal shows you don't know the law.

Boston and Mass State policy didn't shoot or arrest TV reporters, Cameramen or anyone else who impeding the search.
Click to expand...
The music from his car and his words were both traveling inside the parimiter.

If you were the one who was facing an armed robber in your home would you want someone distracting the police?
 
Knowledge=power said:
Not sure why he was arrested.
Click to expand...

He was arrested for filming a crime scene though he was behind barricades. Should not be a crime. And, of course, it isn't when cops do it themselves...

Hypocrites.
 
austrianecon said:
And cops get training in these situations so that's a bs line. Shooting an animal (dog in this case) is a save your life situation as in the dog has a hold of you and at no point did that happen here.
Click to expand...

You don't have to wait for the dog to get ahold of you. You can shoot it before hand. I know because I shot a dog that was about to attack me and went though the legal motions.
 
Jerry said:
The music from his car and his words were both traveling inside the parimiter.

If you were the one who was facing an armed robber in your home would you want someone distracting the police?
Click to expand...

So what? it was outside the perimeter. The law doesn't prevent someone from talking or playing music. You can't ban sound.

Then ask him to leave nicely, if he does not.. then you can arrest him. did they do that? Nope. But that man put his dog in the car which shows he wasn't being an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom