1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Cops kill family dogs over minor drug offense

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by baalroo, May 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. You are certainly right in that it was an appropriate place for the dog to be. And many dogs are very protective on their own turf, even if they're normally quiet and loving.

    BUT - that doesn't matter. When the cops enter in a situation like this, if a dog - any dog - acts in a threatening way, their only option is to prevent it from attacking...and they probably have 2 to 3 seconds to do so.

    If you were the cop, you wouldn't be taking a chance on having it chew up your leg.
  2. Floyd Eye

    Floyd Eye Banned

    Feb 21, 2010
    St. Louis

    No doubt true. Still, since I am aware of how pitbulls are perceived by the public and especially law enforcement, and the fact that I am a law biding citizen with nothing to hide, protecting my dogs from over-reaction by the police would be my most immediate concern and I would do everything in my power to calm the situation down to a point where the police did not feel threatened. Would it save my dog's life? Likely not, but I would still have to try.
  3. Marlat


    Sep 17, 2002
    London UK
    Are we all assuming that it was the swat team who obtained the warrant and made the decision to delay implementing it and then elected when to go into the house? Or do we think that perhaps they were just following orders to raid a known dealers house and found themselves staring down the muzzle of an unrestrained pitball? I'd have an ounce more sympathy with the "maybe they didn't act correctly" crowd if the men wHo went through the door calle the shots on this. I doubt they did though. It sounds like a legit warrant that someone made the call for swat to serve. Perhaps that was a bad call but you can hardlyblame the trigger man here for defending himself and his fellow officers.
  4. No, it appears as though we are assuming the SWAT Team, both out of boredom and their uncontrollable urge to oppress people, drafted this warrant using dicontinued crayola crayons and then left it in a office drawer for a while. They cased his house and waited for the trifecta: empty pipe in sight, dogs uncaged and kids in an area where they can get traumatized. Then it was go time and they busted the door down, shot both dogs without mirandizing them, broke the kid's toys, ate the family's leftovers and secured the offending resin. This is how law enforcement works, don't you read this forum?

    Next time, please consult some prominent bassists in your area before posting.


  5. LOL, wow. You wield sarcasm like an MP5. Well played, sir.
  6. :D

    Like: "Oh man, it's the SWAT, we're heavily armed, just get out of your house peacefully, you are surrounded, you have no way to escape, just let us check in your house for drugs. If you don't comply, force will be used."

    They shouldn't have shot the dogs, under any circumstances. They got tasers, they got baton, use them ffs.
  8. Funniest thing I've read in weeks.


  9. Calling: implies that the city has their phone number and it's active. Sometimes if they get tipped off by phone or snail mail, thugs tend to bolt.

    Your phone call is too rude, they need to say "please" and "thankyou" more. :meh:

    As for using the baton, mace, tasers, etc, they usually go in with guns drawn, usually because they're often at high risk of being shot, which is how SWAT should be used and normally is. Although, after this story, of course SWAT raids and abuse of power is an epidemic.
  10. cheezewiz

    cheezewiz Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2002
    Just a wild guess, but MAYBE they didn't want the suspect to flush the drugs down the toilet? Just a wild guess, based on no experience of course.
  11. Why would anyone do that? Toilets can't get high. Trust me, I'm a scientist.
  12. For the most part, I agree that the SWAT members were simply acting on orders and doing their job. What I don't agree with is police using this type of force when they have bad/old information. This guy is supposed to be a dealer right? Why haven't I read anything about them finding scales, or hey, better yet, all the money someone that sells drugs would have all around?

    Then they go on to admit that it was "bad timing" and that the corgi being shot was accidental, as in, no one was trying to even shoot the thing, and it got hit. Could have been the child instead of the corgi. And do you mean to tell me they couldn't have done this when there wasn't a child in the home?

    I'm completely against near military tactics like this being the norm, especially when it's over something as harmless as marijuana, and more on point, when they can't even get their info straight, or don't even know who's going to be in the house at the time. IMO it's wrong that they go busting into this mans home, guns drawn, but they seemed to not even take into account the dogs and more importantly the child being present, so as to avoid having to use such unnecessary force in the first place. Don't tell me they didn't know these things. If they didn't, then someone failed at their job and needs to be fired.
  13. this kind of stuff goes on all the time.....it would be interesting to see how often the wrong house is entered this way.....kicking in doors has become all too common these days,and given the nature of the drug epidemic these days,not very effective.....

    a far more effective approach would be to focus on the crimes that addicts commit in search of funds to buy dope........muggings,car jacks,break ins,strong arm robberies etc affect real people.....armed entries of this nature should only be used for extreme cases
  14. Jakeob


    Apr 27, 2009
    +1, I find the amount of force they used completely unnecessary. Especially the fact that there were children present and they still shot off some rounds.
  15. burk48237

    burk48237 Supporting Member

    Nov 22, 2004
    Oak Park, MI
    The fact that someone needed to state this speaks volumes.:D:bag:
  16. Translation: Howzitgoin', Brah? Look, we're right outside and about to ruin your ****, but have no concern about our job or personal safety. This phone call is just a head's up so you can dispose of whatever drugs we might be looking for (I heard the toilet's the best option) and then have your guns ready and aimed at the likely entrance points. We were told batons and tasers are nonlethal options, but they get us sued a lot, so we're gonna go ahead and have 4 guys with feather dusters and one with a bottle of Chanel No.5 politely knock on the front door in 60 seconds.

    OK. This is as close to actually laughing out loud as I've gotten reading this site in a while. You're seriously recommending the officers use tasers and batons on the dogs? Awesome. There's not another word for it.

  17. sloasdaylight

    sloasdaylight Banned

    Feb 4, 2009
    Tampa, Florida, US

    I'm really glad I didn't chime in on this thread when I first saw it.
  18. That's a matter of opinion.
  19. MakiSupaStar

    MakiSupaStar The Lowdown Diggler

    Apr 12, 2006
    Huntington Beach, CA
    Yay! Threads and talking and stuff.
  20. Our friend Andy just went on my "ignore list"....because HE'S ignorant.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.