I read the article with Firefox Reader Mode. Here’s how the cops describe the incident:
In a statement, the LAPD said its officers were directed to an apartment by a person who called them to report screaming, and when the woman opened the door they were confronted by a large, barking dog.
“The officers asked her to secure the dog, and the resident closed her door momentarily,” the statement said.
“She reopened the door, and the dog exited the apartment. Once outside of the apartment, the dog charged at one of the officers, resulting in an Officer-Involved Shooting (OIS).”
It might be bullshit ofc, but I think this qualifies as “being approached” by a dog. It’s a dog owner’s responsibility to secure their dog, especially after being asked to.
Shooting at dogs is incredibly stupid. I’ve seen video where cop shoots at a dog, the bullet hits concrete floor and pieces of concrete hits a child in the face. I’ve also seen a video where a cop shoots a child behind the dog. The dog will not kill the cop but he is creating life threatening situation to everyone around. Shooting at a dog is not an appropriate defense, It should be a fireable offense.
Us police are trained in something called “killilogy”. They are taught to always assume their lives are in danger, and that their number 1 duty is to protect themselves
If you happen to kill a child, you still did the right thing
yeah gun owners and cops dont seem to remember that every bullet fired goes somewhere after it misses, and urban landscapes are full of innocent people. Guns dont belong in cities and cops arent trained well enough to be allowed to use them. Give them nighsticks. If they dont have a duty to protect citizens then they are just protecting themselves, and nighsticks are plenty for that.
I guess? I agree that any shooting should happen responsibly (train people before you give them guns ffs), but what do you mean “the dog will not kill the cop”? People do die from dog attacks, and even if it isn’t that common I don’t see how anyone can be expected to just accept being mauled. How are you supposed to defend yourself?
I mean that the dog will not just jump and rip off your head. Dogs need time to kill someone. This cop had backup. There no way the dog would be able to maul on him for so long that he would die. If you can’t get the dog off him then yes, as last resort shot it. Shooting the dog on sight is stupid. Mailmen interact with dogs all the time and don’t have to carry guns to survive.
I’m talking about realistic situations. Yes, dogs kill people if they are attacked by a specific breeds or many dogs and there’s no one to assist them. Can a dog realistically kill a cop who’s surrounded by people, including other armed cops? No. Dog will not kill you with one, quick bite, no matter how big it is. You don’t have to shoot it before it can bite you. Firing a gun to save you from a bite makes no sense.
I read the article with Firefox Reader Mode. Here’s how the cops describe the incident:
It might be bullshit ofc, but I think this qualifies as “being approached” by a dog. It’s a dog owner’s responsibility to secure their dog, especially after being asked to.
Was the dog actually attacking them, though?
This is the question.
Wait until you see a picture of how small the dog is. That lil guy isn’t charging at anyone.
Shooting at dogs is incredibly stupid. I’ve seen video where cop shoots at a dog, the bullet hits concrete floor and pieces of concrete hits a child in the face. I’ve also seen a video where a cop shoots a child behind the dog. The dog will not kill the cop but he is creating life threatening situation to everyone around. Shooting at a dog is not an appropriate defense, It should be a fireable offense.
Us police are trained in something called “killilogy”. They are taught to always assume their lives are in danger, and that their number 1 duty is to protect themselves
If you happen to kill a child, you still did the right thing
I’m not kidding, that’s what they’re taught
yeah gun owners and cops dont seem to remember that every bullet fired goes somewhere after it misses, and urban landscapes are full of innocent people. Guns dont belong in cities and cops arent trained well enough to be allowed to use them. Give them nighsticks. If they dont have a duty to protect citizens then they are just protecting themselves, and nighsticks are plenty for that.
I guess? I agree that any shooting should happen responsibly (train people before you give them guns ffs), but what do you mean “the dog will not kill the cop”? People do die from dog attacks, and even if it isn’t that common I don’t see how anyone can be expected to just accept being mauled. How are you supposed to defend yourself?
I mean that the dog will not just jump and rip off your head. Dogs need time to kill someone. This cop had backup. There no way the dog would be able to maul on him for so long that he would die. If you can’t get the dog off him then yes, as last resort shot it. Shooting the dog on sight is stupid. Mailmen interact with dogs all the time and don’t have to carry guns to survive.
Go look at how small the dog is and then come back and feel like a dumbass for thinking any rational person would be scared of it.
Dogs very much can kill people. What are you talking about?
This dog couldn’t have though, and shooting it definitely seems cruel and excessive.
I’m talking about realistic situations. Yes, dogs kill people if they are attacked by a specific breeds or many dogs and there’s no one to assist them. Can a dog realistically kill a cop who’s surrounded by people, including other armed cops? No. Dog will not kill you with one, quick bite, no matter how big it is. You don’t have to shoot it before it can bite you. Firing a gun to save you from a bite makes no sense.