If you feel it’s obvious, why do you also feel the need to mention it?
[Arte Johnson] Eeeentereshting…but shtoopid. [/Arte Johnson]
The cops where idiots and abusing their power – why only arrest this guy, when obviously others recording the same thing.
The dog owner is an idiot for not securing the dog properly and putting the dog irresponsible into this situation.
… or in other word: USA! USA! USA!
The Land of the FREE – where you have the right to be an idiot – Welcome to the Police State
This is why I’m never getting another dog. The police will probably just kill it again.
I’m in favour of police officers getting mandatory vaginal ultrasound and a 72-hour waiting period before killing a dog.
If you concede that it’s obvious, why did you use the term “murderous” repeatedly in your OP?
[Stoid] Herp Derp! Herp Derp! HERP DERP! [/Stoid]
I felt the need to mention it because, as usual, you’re freaking blind to reality, logic, and any other concept which involves thinking like you have a working brain. Whenever a mind-boggling post appears here, it should be referred to as a stoidful post. Good grief.
And, yes, I watched the video. Your characterization of the entire video was not accurate. Hey, I’m surprised you even got it right that there were people and a dog involved.
And lots of bacteria. Being bit by a dog is not fun.
To the best of my ability to ascertain, all players in this little drama were mammals. Including, I’m willing to wager, the OP. There were no herps involved. (I like herps, I work with herps; herps would have been welcome. But no herps.)
Dogs are neither innocent nor are they guilty. They are just dogs.
If a dog, like the one in the video, was attacking you, or your loved ones, maybe your child, all due to a terrible series of unfortunate events, would you be calling the cops murdering assholes if they shot it? BEFORE it grabbed hold of little Timmy by the face and started shaking him?
What if it was a pack of wild dogs? Going all wolf pack on your toddlers? Would you call the police names and rage against the machine? If not, why not? They are doing the exact same thing, shooting a dog that is attacking somebody.
Care to elaborate on that one?
Relax. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. If it’s one of the old kinds. The new ones, when they break, you might get nothing at all.
Innocence and intent and guilt are human legal terms. Most anywhere in the civilized world, a large dangerous dog attacking the authorities is going to get shot. The more humane cops will use a taser. The postman will use pepper spray. Nobody with experience and training will just let a dog they do not know, or trust, attack them in any way. It’s how the world works.
The issue of the arrest and the owner not securing the dog do not matter in context of a dog attacking (or even seeming to) a LEO.
If you dog attacks a cop, it’s going down. If you are lucky, it will be a tazer. If not, bullets until it is no longer a threat. Same for your teenager, or a mentally ill person, or some cracked up lunatic, or anyone else who attacks the cops, in any way. Tazer or pepper spray, but if you have a weapon or seem like a deadly threat, in any way, they will shoot you until you are dead.
Welcome to the Police State.
Hell, even if they just think you are a threat (mistaken identity, not cooperating, cell phone might be a gun, whatever), you might get shot full of high powered metal things designed to harm, delivered into your center of mass until you go down.
If the dog was doing to me what the dog in the video did I would be horrified if it were shot. That is my whole point. I have no problem with cops shooting dogs were genuinely attacking. Especially if no alternatives are available. That dog was clearly not attacking And several alternatives were available.
If you look at the video frame by frame (use the one below for reference)
- YouTube you will see the officer who shot the dog try twice to get the dog by the collar. He didn’t shoot the dog the first time it approached him (sniffing him?) At 3:17 he attempted to grab the dog the first time. The dog is right there by his legs. The dog retreated.
At 3:22 he was attempting to get the dog by the collar when the dog leaped up at him.
Exactly. I’m not really sure what you’re trying to illustrate but I can see for myself what happened: the dog leaped. Have you ever spent time with dogs? Do you interpret every time they leap as an attack? If you do I suggest you don’t spend more time with dogs because you will be terrified. If the dog leapt with his teeth bared, snarling, that would be an attack. This dog did neither. Also, knowing the behavior of cops around dogs, why was the cop trying to get the dog by the collar? What was the dog doing that the cop needed to grab the dog? Why not let his owner control the dog? Why not leave it alone entirely? Why not call someone else over to take the dog? The dog was clearly not in attack mode.
He was trying to avoid shooting the dog.
Lunging at the cop.
Because the owner was in handcuffs for interfering with a police investigation.
Because it was lunging at the cop.
Because the owner was in handcuffs for interfering with a police investigation, and the cop did not want the dog to attack anyone.
Regards,
Shodan
Disclosure - I am a dog (and cat) lover. I felt pain and horror when I watched the video.
Cats? eeeeewwwww! 
I’m also fond of people. So, fuck me, right?