- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Police Officer Attacks Child
Posted on 5/18/16 at 8:56 am to SabiDojo
Posted on 5/18/16 at 8:56 am to SabiDojo
1) Euthanize the dog immediately.
2) Charge officer responsible for its care with criminal negligence.
3) Boy and his family needs to take the human officer and his department to the cleaners in civil court.
2) Charge officer responsible for its care with criminal negligence.
3) Boy and his family needs to take the human officer and his department to the cleaners in civil court.
2
Posted on 5/18/16 at 8:59 am to ManBearTiger
quote:
1) Euthanize the dog immediately.
Probably won't happen and probably shouldn't happen.
quote:
2) Charge officer responsible for its care with criminal negligence.
Probably won't happen and probably shouldn't happen.
quote:
3) Boy and his family needs to take the human officer and his department to the cleaners in civil court.
Probably will and probably should happen.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:03 am to Huey Lewis
Honestly if it was my child I would protect my child first over any dog, police K-9 or not.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:07 am to SabiDojo
I've never RA'd anyone.You may be the 1st with that Thread Title. 
This post was edited on 5/18/16 at 9:36 am
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:08 am to Huey Lewis
Why shouldn't the handler be responsible? He was negligent in his responsibility to properly secure a dangerous weapon. He's 100% at fault
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:09 am to tidalmouse
It's an accurate title.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:10 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
The fact that it's a police K9 is irrelevant in that scenario because the dog isn't under the control of a handler acting in an official capacity. In the OP scenario it's simply a dangerous dog that has gotten loose and is attacking a child.
You're ignoring the point.
Police like to call the dogs actual police officers as a way to increase the charges. They will only use this when it suits them best, not when they themselves abuse the animal.
The idea is they are able to arbitrarily decide when to use the charge and they will only use it as a way to increase the charges.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:10 am to TJGator1215
quote:
Why shouldn't the handler be responsible?
The handler is a police officer as well, any action or inaction on his part was for fear of his own personal safety. He did what he needed to do to go home to his family.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:11 am to SabiDojo
Apart from the bad title...
What if the dog was restraining the child like in its training.
Would a person know the difference between a trained canine take down vs an actual mean dog attack?
What if the dog was restraining the child like in its training.
Would a person know the difference between a trained canine take down vs an actual mean dog attack?
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:15 am to tidalmouse
quote:
I've never RS'd anyone.You may be the 1st with that Thread Title.
Look at the link at the bottom of page 2 sabi posted in this thread.
This post was edited on 5/18/16 at 9:16 am
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:16 am to TJGator1215
quote:
Why shouldn't the handler be responsible? He was negligent in his responsibility to properly secure a dangerous weapon. He's 100% at fault
P.O.L.I.C.E.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:17 am to Pectus
quote:
What if the dog was restraining the child like in its training.
Not that different than the scenario in the OP. Both cases involve a poorly trained animal. A properly trained dog should not act unless the handler tells it too.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:18 am to SabiDojo
Good thing the K9 wasn't an American Staffordshire. Then that pitbull would have killed the kid.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:20 am to iwasthere
quote:
Good thing the K9 wasn't an American Staffordshire. Then that pitbull would have killed the kid.
Good point. I'm sure we will hear that at the police presser.
This post was edited on 5/18/16 at 9:20 am
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:30 am to Scooba
quote:
Aren't most K9 officers housed in community kennels?
There is no standard for training, certification, handling, or housing or housing police dogs.
Each little podunck town w/ a canine does whatever they want.
This is why their "alerts" are false so often.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:40 am to tigerpimpbot
I stand corrected.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:41 am to SabiDojo
Fix your thread title a-hole. This isn't buzzfeed, you don't get points for clickbait.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:52 am to ManBearTiger
quote:too soon. The dog should first be suspended with pay pending an internal investigation.
1) Euthanize the dog immediately.
Posted on 5/18/16 at 9:57 am to TJGator1215
quote:
Why shouldn't the handler be responsible? He was negligent in his responsibility to properly secure a dangerous weapon. He's 100% at fault
The handler is responsible but his actions probably don't rise to the level of criminal negligence.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News