I could only read the first three paragraphs because of non-membership.
Edit: bad first paragraph on my part. The title comes from the 25-30 dogs a day estimate, but this also an estimate so the title should say it’s an estimate.
I also cannot read how they addressed use of police force on calls of dangerous animals. Dogs do kill people, especially children, and the use of police force is often necessary. Again, someone with the article please tell me how they address that, because the title seems to lump those in with actual cases of police abuse, which is bad propaganda.
There are better ways of reporting on the absolute police problem than this.
Disclosure: I have bias stemming from experienced attacks on myself and my dog from other dogs.
How many dogs are roaming around biting everything that moves? That’s about the only time they should be publicly executed.
Obviously animals can be dangerous and all that but there is a clear lack of oversight on police officers actions and an almost non existent repercussion for wrong doings.
Dogs with regular violence issues are dealt with by animal control and a vet. They aren’t taken care of by a police officer emptying their gun into the animal in someone’s yard/home.
Replying to both your comments at once. Bear with me!
I am pointing out that dealing with animals falls under animal control. Not police officers.
Depends. Had to shoot a wild pig tearing up my property and terrifying my pet pig.
Animal control: “We don’t handle wild pigs. Call the cops.”
Cops: “We don’t handle wild pigs. It’s up to the homeowner to resolve the situation as they see fit.” Plain talk, shoot the fucking thing. So after four calls, on two different days, I shot gunned the fucking thing.
But back on topic. Dogs. Are you going to take time to call the authorities? If there’s a violent dog tear-assing around the neighborhood, I’m killing it, immediately. Read on NextDoor.com about a couple of pit bulls that often get loose on the next street. Chased a pregnant woman, among other incidents. They’re getting shot if they rush me. Hell, about shot a pit bull that was running along my porch last week. Thank god it was just a dumb puppy and the young couple walking him got him back. But still, opened my door hearing my pig freak out, and there’s a pit spazzing out right there. (I have a giant dog door, which a bear came in one night. Not like I can close the door and call 911.)
Jaderick has a point though. How many of these dogs were shot because they needed shot? I’m guessing the vast majority of cases were cops abusing their power. But who else you gonna call? Animal control doesn’t have the wherewithal to jump on a 911 call.
And YES, we need oversight. A cop can blast your dog with zero repercussions. None. We’ve all seen the videos, we know cops shoot dogs for target practice.
EDIT: I should note that I clearly remember the handful of animals I’ve killed in life. All but 2 were mercy killings and those memories still tear me up. I do NOT take killing lightly. That shit sticks to you forever.
Just an FYI, if you do shoot a dog, you can face criminal and civil action. Just being scared is only a defense for cops, regular people need to have more.
Criminal and civil action comes in very few cases. I’m willing to bet very few people are shooting dogs for fun where the absolute majority is in defense of self or property.
Anecdotally the only civil action I’ve heard of is the Nashville case this past year of the guy shooting an off leash German Shepard
Nope. Self-defence laws apply equally to police and non-police. You are confusing the difference in favoribility towards a LEO’s perspective and the general expectation that they do not disengage, with having a different actual standard. (Or more likely uncritically accepting whatever lunatic opinions you read on social media).
Is this what the article says? You’re not wrong that police need far more oversight, but im having problems with this article and it’s reporting on the very real problem of police.
I am pointing out that dealing with animals falls under animal control. Not police officers. The exception being an in progress attack and even then a gun probably isn’t the best choice considering the animal would be next to/on the person it’s attacking.
The article points out that the reason is unclear. Based on what we know about how police offers act, how police departments respond, what punishments they face, and how they update their procedures/trainings, it draws a clear conclusion.
The reasons for the high number of pet killings by law enforcement are not clear. Some factors include mistaken identity, warrantless searches, lack of training, and legal protections for police officers when using force, including against animals[1].
Well thats a bunch of bullshit. The reasons are exceedingly clear. To minimize the chances the dog will attack; to inflict trauma and anguish on the citizen; and to be a big fuckin idiot man with a gun and a teeny-tiny little cop pee-pee.
The reasons for the high number of pet killings by law enforcement are not clear.
???
This is speculation because it’s reporting on the possible reasons for this estimated amount of pets killed by police. The title says 10,000 are killed a year but talks about estimates. The title is misrepresented.
Agree on the animal control part but most municipalities skimp or forego animal control.
Well, yeah. Dog favoritism is simply emotional specieism, there are far stronger arguments towards the permissibility of arbitrary killing of dogs than say pigeons.
What are you even talking about? I’ve seen videos of cops shooting at dogs wagging their tails. I’ve seen cops shoot at small dogs and accidentally hit the owners. Here’s just one of many videos, see if you can watch it without being disgusted by these pigs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D1wzZU14h0
I’ve seen videos of dogs mauling other dogs, children, grown men. Anecdotal videos are not data. Again, we both agree cops overuse force because there’s no consequences for them, but the question is does this article lump legitimate use of force on a dangerous animal with the overuse of force?
Edit: I did read the article and all it says is that we need to actually start recording data about this. I have great issue with the title of the article and the varied estimates it’s reporting on.
Of course there are some dangerous dogs. But we have seen dozens of videos of cops shooting tiny harmless dogs, or missing dogs and hitting people behind the dogs, or keeping people from bringing dogs who were just shot to the vets, and yet somehow the cops are never arrested or convicted for their actions.
You claimed that “police force is often necessary” but actually you have not provided any evidence. Is it “often” necessary? Maybe it’s only “occasionally” necessary. We can speculate, but without data, we just don’t know.
Here is a video of dogs mauling a man and cops shooting them to stop it. There’s a lot of videos of this nature, just as I’m sure there are videos of cops overusing force as you claim but do not provide evidence for. My inquiry is about this article drawing the 10,000 dogs a year conclusion without parsing the reasons behind it, which it seems it does not.
Human lives are always above a non-sapient animals because otherwise you are some degree of a misanthropist. Misanthropy breeds contempt and contempt breeds hate.
The phrase “not provided any evidence” is applicable to your entire post as well.
We all agree dogs can hurt people and cops can kill harmless dogs. But you made a claim about the /frequency/ of incidents without any data to support it. That was irresponsible of you, especially because you were criticizing the article for a similar reason. Please do better next time.
And this is important. If cops are mostly killing dangerous dogs and occasionally killing harmless dogs, then we might be sympathetic to their occasional mishaps, provided that reckless and careless officers are properly reprimanded or prosecuted when they violate policy or law. But if most of the killings are unnecessary, we are less likely to sympathize.
I could only read the first three paragraphs because of non-membership.
Edit: bad first paragraph on my part. The title comes from the 25-30 dogs a day estimate, but this also an estimate so the title should say it’s an estimate.
I also cannot read how they addressed use of police force on calls of dangerous animals. Dogs do kill people, especially children, and the use of police force is often necessary. Again, someone with the article please tell me how they address that, because the title seems to lump those in with actual cases of police abuse, which is bad propaganda.
There are better ways of reporting on the absolute police problem than this.
Disclosure: I have bias stemming from experienced attacks on myself and my dog from other dogs.
How many dogs are roaming around biting everything that moves? That’s about the only time they should be publicly executed.
Obviously animals can be dangerous and all that but there is a clear lack of oversight on police officers actions and an almost non existent repercussion for wrong doings.
Dogs with regular violence issues are dealt with by animal control and a vet. They aren’t taken care of by a police officer emptying their gun into the animal in someone’s yard/home.
Replying to both your comments at once. Bear with me!
Depends. Had to shoot a wild pig tearing up my property and terrifying my pet pig.
Animal control: “We don’t handle wild pigs. Call the cops.”
Cops: “We don’t handle wild pigs. It’s up to the homeowner to resolve the situation as they see fit.” Plain talk, shoot the fucking thing. So after four calls, on two different days, I shot gunned the fucking thing.
But back on topic. Dogs. Are you going to take time to call the authorities? If there’s a violent dog tear-assing around the neighborhood, I’m killing it, immediately. Read on NextDoor.com about a couple of pit bulls that often get loose on the next street. Chased a pregnant woman, among other incidents. They’re getting shot if they rush me. Hell, about shot a pit bull that was running along my porch last week. Thank god it was just a dumb puppy and the young couple walking him got him back. But still, opened my door hearing my pig freak out, and there’s a pit spazzing out right there. (I have a giant dog door, which a bear came in one night. Not like I can close the door and call 911.)
Jaderick has a point though. How many of these dogs were shot because they needed shot? I’m guessing the vast majority of cases were cops abusing their power. But who else you gonna call? Animal control doesn’t have the wherewithal to jump on a 911 call.
And YES, we need oversight. A cop can blast your dog with zero repercussions. None. We’ve all seen the videos, we know cops shoot dogs for target practice.
EDIT: I should note that I clearly remember the handful of animals I’ve killed in life. All but 2 were mercy killings and those memories still tear me up. I do NOT take killing lightly. That shit sticks to you forever.
Just an FYI, if you do shoot a dog, you can face criminal and civil action. Just being scared is only a defense for cops, regular people need to have more.
Criminal and civil action comes in very few cases. I’m willing to bet very few people are shooting dogs for fun where the absolute majority is in defense of self or property.
Anecdotally the only civil action I’ve heard of is the Nashville case this past year of the guy shooting an off leash German Shepard
Cops absolutely shoot dogs for fun.
Oh wait, you said “people” nvm
“Just being scared … regular people need more”
Nope. Self-defence laws apply equally to police and non-police. You are confusing the difference in favoribility towards a LEO’s perspective and the general expectation that they do not disengage, with having a different actual standard. (Or more likely uncritically accepting whatever lunatic opinions you read on social media).
Is this what the article says? You’re not wrong that police need far more oversight, but im having problems with this article and it’s reporting on the very real problem of police.
I am pointing out that dealing with animals falls under animal control. Not police officers. The exception being an in progress attack and even then a gun probably isn’t the best choice considering the animal would be next to/on the person it’s attacking.
The article points out that the reason is unclear. Based on what we know about how police offers act, how police departments respond, what punishments they face, and how they update their procedures/trainings, it draws a clear conclusion.
Well thats a bunch of bullshit. The reasons are exceedingly clear. To minimize the chances the dog will attack; to inflict trauma and anguish on the citizen; and to be a big fuckin idiot man with a gun and a teeny-tiny little cop pee-pee.
Quotes source
???
This is speculation because it’s reporting on the possible reasons for this estimated amount of pets killed by police. The title says 10,000 are killed a year but talks about estimates. The title is misrepresented.
Agree on the animal control part but most municipalities skimp or forego animal control.
They’re also not counting all the dogs that had guns in their mouths, or were carrying crack cocaine.
I think they’d just hire that dog for that
Having been bit multiple times with blood loss I’m less inclined toward this joke, though I understand
We get it. You got attacked by a dog so it’s totally cool for all dogs to get shot by cops
Well, yeah. Dog favoritism is simply emotional specieism, there are far stronger arguments towards the permissibility of arbitrary killing of dogs than say pigeons.
Not gonna lie, i am uncomfortably laughing at the idea of the news reporting “Police kill 1000 pigeons every year”
What an absolutely smooth-brained take lmao.
You’re the kind of person that thinks North Korea is a democratic republic because it has it in the name DPRK
What are you even talking about? I’ve seen videos of cops shooting at dogs wagging their tails. I’ve seen cops shoot at small dogs and accidentally hit the owners. Here’s just one of many videos, see if you can watch it without being disgusted by these pigs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D1wzZU14h0
I’ve seen videos of dogs mauling other dogs, children, grown men. Anecdotal videos are not data. Again, we both agree cops overuse force because there’s no consequences for them, but the question is does this article lump legitimate use of force on a dangerous animal with the overuse of force?
Edit: I did read the article and all it says is that we need to actually start recording data about this. I have great issue with the title of the article and the varied estimates it’s reporting on.
Removed by mod
Of course there are some dangerous dogs. But we have seen dozens of videos of cops shooting tiny harmless dogs, or missing dogs and hitting people behind the dogs, or keeping people from bringing dogs who were just shot to the vets, and yet somehow the cops are never arrested or convicted for their actions.
You claimed that “police force is often necessary” but actually you have not provided any evidence. Is it “often” necessary? Maybe it’s only “occasionally” necessary. We can speculate, but without data, we just don’t know.
Videos are anecdotes not data, which this article is reporting on.
https://youtu.be/h2CplwwodEs?si=MUBcBdOt5apIw1Y2
Here is a video of dogs mauling a man and cops shooting them to stop it. There’s a lot of videos of this nature, just as I’m sure there are videos of cops overusing force as you claim but do not provide evidence for. My inquiry is about this article drawing the 10,000 dogs a year conclusion without parsing the reasons behind it, which it seems it does not.
Human lives are always above a non-sapient animals because otherwise you are some degree of a misanthropist. Misanthropy breeds contempt and contempt breeds hate.
The phrase “not provided any evidence” is applicable to your entire post as well.
We all agree dogs can hurt people and cops can kill harmless dogs. But you made a claim about the /frequency/ of incidents without any data to support it. That was irresponsible of you, especially because you were criticizing the article for a similar reason. Please do better next time.
And this is important. If cops are mostly killing dangerous dogs and occasionally killing harmless dogs, then we might be sympathetic to their occasional mishaps, provided that reckless and careless officers are properly reprimanded or prosecuted when they violate policy or law. But if most of the killings are unnecessary, we are less likely to sympathize.
Archive link.
Thank you dawg
Dogs kill very few people a year. Owners should certainly face stiff consequences for failing to control puppers, tho.
deleted by creator