@ Stalwart SentinelThe police entered without an invitation? Police
officers can do wellness checks by invitation which was requested in this case.
I work in the mental health field and if the safety of someone is in question
then it is within their job duty to complete a wellness check. No fault on the
police officers here for going to the house.
Before pits polluted our communities, police and other first responders never
shot dogs. 30 years ago, this dog would have been a Collie/shep mix
pet and would not come with centuries of attack and maul heritage. Yes the dog might have rushed the officers, however a yell to get back or one
swift kick would have ended the danger.Before pits we never had
victim dogs killed on public sidewalks and we never had home invasion dog
murders where dogs broke into neighbor homes to seek and destroy victim dogs.
These attacks are solely the work of good mutant pit bulls. Who needs these traits? Dog fighters do. Let's stop
supporting dog fighters. Let's stop breeding pits.
If the facts in the story are correct, this is very different from the shooting
of Geist. Any person who orders a dog to attack others, whether the dog is
trained to or not, is the responsible party in the dog's death and should
face charges.I expect Police to use caution and better common-sense
tactics than shown with Geist, but I don't expect Police to have to be
bitten first before using force to defend themselves when a dog is charging
them. If the dog is barking and charging while staying out of arm's length
that requires an entirely different response.An unknown dog charging
at me that gets within my reach would cause me to defend myself because I
wouldn't know if the dog would actually attack. But, since I don't
carry a gun, shooting the dog would not be an option.
I just saw on FOX13 that this family is planning to sue Ogden PD for shooting an
attack dog. Even if he wasn't raised to attack, he did apparently on
command, even if it wasn't the owner giving the command. The owner
didn't care enough about the animal to license him, and there had been
calls for the animal being aggressive before. And they really think they may
get something for suing -- what kind of attorney would represent them. Are they
getting this idea from the dog who was shot by the officer a few weeks ago? I
think that one was justified also, and if I saw a pit bull coming toward me, or
a 110 lb dog of any kind, I think I would shoot too.
I hate to see any animal hurt or killed, they are only doing what comes natural
or what they are taught. I would never condone an animal being disposed of
unless absolutely necessary. This was just unfortunate and stupid on the part
of the dog owner. With that being said, and going back to the shooting of Geist
a few weeks ago, it is another unfortunate situation. No, the owner did not
order him to attack the officer, but the officer was performing his duty of
searching for a lost child, and the dog was protecting his territory. I'm
sure he wasn't aggressive with the owner, or when the owner was around, but
when there is a stranger, dogs become aggressive when they are in their
territory. I don't know of any of the protesters in this shooting who
would be okay with the officer not searching everywhere if their child was
missing. Maybe it would have had a different public outcome had the child been
found hurt or dead?????
This is a typical gang attack dog that we see here in South Central LA.
Since there was an unbiased, separate witness to the incident who backed the
officer's story, things seem pretty cut and dried. It wouldn't
surprise me if the dog handler had been drinking alcohol to act so invidious
toward the officers.Had I been one of the officers, I would've
done the same thing. Any dog attack can be dangerous. But Pit Bulls can be
especially dangerous. I believe the guy who sent the dog after the
officers (after they had identified themselves) should have been arrested. There
is no excuse for his conduct. I feel sorry for the dog who was just being
obedient. I hope the lady who owned the dog recognizes the real fault in this
case and kicks out the guy who ordered the dog attack. I very much
agree with DN Subscriber that this is totally different from the SLC dog killing
incident last month. From what was reported, the officer in that case seemed to
be at fault.
But for the dog, everyone appears to have committed wrongdoing. The
man seems very likely to have attempted to assault a police officer. He should
be held accountable.The police entered a fenced residence without
invitation and ignored what appears to be a highly visible warning sign
regarding a dog on the premises despite no illegal activity occurring. I'm
sorry, but failure to respond for three days on Facebook is not sufficient to
warrant any sort of "missing persons" or "suspect gang activity"
response from the police. They need to be held accountable for the dog's
death. The owner apparently did not license her pet which is not
fair to the animal in the first place. She should be held accountable. As is often the case, this scenario shows that the innocent often pay
the heaviest price. Very unfortunate.
What kind of a person does this? The officers are there to see if you are ok and
you send the dog after them? What kind of a family is this? How can you blame
the officers? Your sister from California asked them to come!Something is seriously wrong with these people. If it were me, I might have
shot more than just the dog.
If the facts are as reported, then this is a perfectly legitimate exercise of
self defense by the officer. While we might feel sorry at the taking of a
canine life, the fault is the guy who ordered the do to "get him," not
the officer.Thank you officers for doing your job, even for people
who are ungrateful for it.This is totally different from the dog
shooting in Salt Lake a few weeks ago, so we should not see any nonsense about
"Cops on dog killing spree.."