I agree with the officer he was going to the aid of his partner. The dog was doing his job. If the suspect would not have ran he and the dog would both be alive today. I would have done the same thing.
Henlee: I see the point in your argument. Human life must we weighed over that of canine. To your question above, I think context is always needed, although in the eyes of the law you would be arrested for manslaughter. Do I think some would risk this, yes. Someone brought up hurricane Katrina as an example, people literally drowned to death rather then leave their domesticated animals. Most of the time firefighters have to ensure people that they can take their pets otherwise they would risk staying in a fire zone! Like many on this forum it is not a black and white for me to say human life over canine and I work in human medical research!
Humans are flawed, many can commit horrible crimes. Young children and animals are inherently innocent and/or do things purely out of instinct. There is a special place in hell for adults who commit crimes against these two groups. Dogs are never manipulators, liars, criminals, or inherently try to cause personal harm for no reason. If someone was to stab my dog and I had access to a weapon I would use it, knowing that I would likely become a felon and go to jail (ending my career). Most of the people that have field retrievers would probably do the same. We don't invest obscene amounts of time, effort, and money into something that we don't take as sacredly as life itself.
Others feel very differently about their dogs. Kenneled in the backyard as an outside only dog that is walked once a month comes to mind. I am sure if their dog was shot they would view it more as loss of personal property. I do not view my dog as property (even though the law does). My car is property, I like it, but if someone slammed into the side of it I would not be devastated. If someone accidentally dented it, I probably wouldn't even be particularly mad. However, if someone hit my dog...you better run and run fast! My dog is my family period. A attack on her is one on me. I know the consequences given the current law, but would gladly violate them knowing the consequences.
You fight for what you personally hold dear. For me that is my family, which includes my dog, and close friends. Everything else is just stuff.
As to your last statement....that's just a downright mean and nasty thing to say. It obviously wasn't necessary. You certainly don't need to agree with me, in my point of view that I think it would have been preferable to find a non-lethal way to end the particular conflict in question (if it were possible), we are all adults having a discussion. Not all of us will agree. However, that kind of talk is just wacky. Dial it down.
enforcement across the country, even double action was slow firing and then police became outgunned" by the bad guys. Semi-auto sidearms are now the duty weapon of most police agencies with upwards to a clip of 15 and perhaps one in the chamber. One is taught to fire their weapon until the threat is diminished. Now I suppose if one watched enough TV (some bad guys fire their weapons sideways LOL) and in the heat of total chaos (many arm chair folks and Monday morning quarterbacks) have never experienced , well perhaps it would be a perfect world. I assure you folks it just aint..Not on a crusade as there are defects in any profession, but considering that there are estimated to be upwards to 800,000 law enforcement personnel in the United States , it isn't too bad a record for misbehavior or perhaps unjustified shootings. I frankly don't know why anyone would want the job as a police officer in this day and age. I have a grandson who is seeking jobs in the field now, and think as a college graduate he could seek another line of work. I spent 32 years as a cop, 3 years during that time as a K-9 handler in a urban setting. Several dangerous situations with my K-9 partner, one a firefight with jewelry store armed robbers, who without hesitation would kill my K-9 partner. Anyway my two cents on the topic and agree with John, back to my retrievers before it gets into potus...
I realized some years ago that I do not believe in the inherent value of human life. The lives of many humans are of value to me, but the lives of many others are not. In fact, realistically, society has come to that conclusion too. One can legally use deadly force in some instances to protect property. Game wardens in Africa can shoot to kill to protect certain animals (Gorillas being the first one that comes to mind). Millions have been killed for ideas. I have been around BIG male dogs all my life and have had to dive into more than one dog fight to keep my dog from being injured. When something or someone is attempting to harm a member of my family (and such are my dogs) I tend to become a lion and will put my entire 6'2" 230lbs into action. If I thought I couldn't save my family member without using deadly force (be it a gun, blade, club, or my bare hands) whatever, or whoever is doing the attacking will be in real danger. About 30 years ago my brother made the mistake of interfering with me defending my dog and after I slammed him into the wall we didn't speak for about 2 years. DON'T mess with my dogs or with me if I am in the defense of them or my family.
Let me repeat, I don't believe in the inherent value of human life. Perhaps that's why I try to behave myself, be productive, and not give folks a reason to make that judgement about me.
Sorry you were offended, but I was making a point. I have close, lifelong friends that would go instantaneously from friend to mortal enemy if they were intentionally attempting to harm a member of my family (and as I said, such are my dogs).
Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state.
Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
Gig'em Aggies!! BTCO'77HOO t.u.!!
My religion teaches me that human beings are made in God's image and are of inestimable worth for that reason.
That means I am of inestimable worth to God. That means, self-defense is not immoral (or unChristian.)
Stay with me here... I'm about to make a leap in logic but one I think is reasonable. Someone who wantonly kills and tortures animals has to have a very warped view of the worth of all sensate beings. (We've had a horrible situation here where a crazy man was "adopting" dogs from the shelter and decapitating them.) Such people are threats to human life. (The crazy man will be locked up once he's declared incompetent.) Someone killing or maiming my dog in front of me is a threat to me. He is, in effect, going through my dog to get to me.
I will stop him. If I (happily) have a gun... I would use it. (I have a concealed carry permit and so I am saying that I know I'd be trying to kill him, not wound him.) If I didn't have a gun, I'd do what I could without it knowing I'd probably end up very injured. (But again, how does letting my dog die keep me safe?)
So I think it's possible to hold a very high view of the value of human life, while at the same time justifying taking human life to protect our dogs, i.e., when it could legitimately mean I'm protecting myself or other humans. It is a matter of the context, of course.
I believe, in this instance, once the dog was stabbed, he was fighting for his life. There should be no expectation that this dog would OUT. However... I would expect that police dogs who interact with the public would be under better control than you describe. When a subject is down and passive (as much as he can be while curled up and protecting his head and screaming) then that dog should OUT on command.
Am I wrong?