Uh, no it’s not. The release of the dog was deliberate. The timing of the release was also deliberate – before receiving a reply. And it appears from the story they already knew the guy was innocent.
It looks like fear. Quivering, guts-to-liquid, damn-everyone-but-me fear by the K-9 officer. In a situation where they had already established the danger was low.
A lot of these episodes seem to be driven by, or distorted by, fear. Does fear make people want to be police officers, or does being a police officer (and repeated encounters with potential danger) eventually break down one’s courage?
This was NOT an accident, you lying piece of scum.
In the video, you can clearly hear the cops say that they are releasing a dog into the car. No-one says, “Oh, fuck, the dog accidentally got loose.” And they do all this after the guy clearly says that he has his baby with him.
By your definition, everything that ever happens is a “tragic accident.”
Are you this bad at reading comprehension or are you intentionally playing dumb? Releasing the dog wasn’t the accident - releasing it on a baby was. They couldn’t understand what the man was trying to tell them and jumped the gun, and that’s a real problem.
But your ilk isn’t interested in fixing the real problems that exist - you’re interested in collecting the police by any means necessary.
And there’s absolutely nothing controversial about most of these stories except in the minds of those who want to propagate the idea that the police are evil bullies who can’t be trusted with power, so they can achieve their goal of neutering the police and rendering them unable to punish the petty crimes they want to commit consequence-free.
If you’re not one of those people, then you’re being used by those people.
Forget about shooting the dog. If he’d broke away them to instinctively protect his kid in the car, they probably would have seen that as proof of guilt and shot him.
It’s almost as though you understand that police jumping the gun is a problem. You kinda get it when they’re setting dogs on infants, but you don’t quite get it when they’re gunning down unarmed children or old ladies.
There’s definitely a comprehension problem here…but it ain’t “reading.” When they released the dog – intentionally – without knowing who or what was in the vehicle – they intentionally made the decision that their goal (apparently, looking for a shoplifting suspect) was worth the risk of the dog attacking, even killing, a baby. Or several babies. Or Stephen Hawking. Or Pope Francis. Because when you direct violence into an area you can’t SEE, you are not sure what you’re going to affect, by definition. These cops are trained (although anyone can work that out for themselves, untrained) and decided to risk hitting innocents because their goal was worth it. Osama bin Laden? Hitler? Th e Cali cartel? Wait…a shoplifter?
Unfortunately for the officers, this time the innocent they blindly chose to inflict violence upon was photogenic.
I am confused about a thing in that video. It is very obviously raining. The guy gets out of his vehicle and leaves the door standing open? You cannot see the left side of the vehicle, so we cannot determine whether the officers opened the vehicle to let the dog into it. If they did, that is a serious offense on their part: illegal search, because it was already established that the guy was not the one they were looking for.
