patrick.net

What a cunt.

I do actually believe in severe punishment for this. On the grounds that people like this are about 5 seconds from killing a human.

Too bad the neighbor didn't have a gun of his own.

Keep your dog on a leash would have prevented this. I blame the irresponsible dog owner. It should be OK to shoot any dog that enters your yard, especially a pit bull.

Black Lives Matter. Black Dogs Matter, too. Sick.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

On the grounds that people like this are about 5 seconds from killing a human.

I was thinking the same thing.

zzyzzx says

Keep your dog on a leash would have prevented this. I blame the irresponsible dog owner. It should be OK to shoot any dog that enters your yard, especially a pit bull.

Not in this situation. They man was clearly not acting in self-defense, but rather in spite. This is absolutely clear from the video and the police agree. They explicitly said any self-defense claims would not hold.

Sure, shooting a dog in defense is acceptable as the lesser of two evils. This was not what this particular person did. Here is the sequence of events.
1. The man harassed his neighbor for unknown reasons.
2. The man got into an argument with the neighbor.
3. While this happen, the dog went onto the man's property behind the opened gate in order to greet other dogs.
4. The man saw this and went onto his property. You don't do that if you fear the dog.
5. The man closed the gate for the sole purpose of trapping the dog on his property.
5a. You don't do that if you are concerned for your safety.
5b. He was probably trying to instigate his neighbor into trespassing on his property to get the dog so that he could either shoot his neighbor and claim self-defense or have his neighbor arrested. Either way, his intentions were criminal.
6. The man shot the dog when the dog did NOTHING to provoke an attack. The dog was not acting aggressively at all.
7. The dog lied injured, perhaps dying, on the property unable to even move.
8. The man kept threatening to shoot the dog again just to inflict emotional harm onto his neighbor who was telling the man that he's recording everything.
9. Then the man shot the dog a second time even though it was completely incapacitated. This was cold-blooded murder. The only motive for this shooting was to inflict grave emotional harm on his neighbor.

This man is a danger to the entire community. He should be locked up for 20 years. He should never again be allowed to own or possess a gun. He should not ever be allowed to contact or interact with the neighbor or the neighbor's family or guests. And his house and all his possessions should be awarded to his neighbor to compensate him for the emotional damage inflicted by this despicable coward.

If it weren't Unconstitutional, I'd even go with this guy having his fingers chopped off so he can never wield a weapon again.

Intent matters, and there is absolutely nothing more disgusting than someone who kills and inflicts other physical and emotional harm out of pure spite. Such people simply cannot be accepted into society. Such spite and hatred violates the very foundations of society.

That's a deranged individual. The law is not going to be as severe as it should be.

Wonder if there will be "The Pissed Off" consequences to his action.

YesYNot says

That's a deranged individual. The law is not going to be as severe as it should be.

That's what civil suits are for. He should lose his house.

HEY YOU says

"The Pissed Off" consequences

?

This guy should also forever be made to wear the cone of shame.

Yeah, Dan's #1 and #2 are important context: Crazy McDaisy was taking pics of his neighbor's guests getting out of the car. The dogowning neighbor didn't like it and told him to knock it off. In the argument, that's when the dogowner lost control of the dog.

Had the crazy guy not distracted the dogowner with his whacky behavior, the dog wouldn't have gotten loose.

Dan8267 says

That's what civil suits are for. He should lose his house

The value of the dog is pretty close to nothing on the open market, and that's the most the Owner should potentially get in any settlement.

Booger says

The value of the dog is pretty close to nothing on the open market, and that's the most the Owner should potentially get in any settlement.

Wtf are you talking about ? Obviously a troll of Dan. There are many different types of value. People have won civil damages in the 7 figures for intentionally harming a person's emotional well being by doing lesser acts against a person. The dogs value to the guy, and what the loss means to him have absolutely nothing to do with the market value of the dog.

You have to wonder what the history is between these people. I guess if the Pitbull had previously killed some neighborhood dogs would be the only reason I can think of that might come even remotely close to being a defense for that behavior.

Booger says

Dan8267 says

That's what civil suits are for. He should lose his house

The value of the dog is pretty close to nothing on the open market, and that's the most the Owner should potentially get in any settlement.

Not true at all. To most people, a family dog is part of the family. Most juries would be so outraged by such a blatant murder that they would award a very high emotional distress damages as well as very high punitive damages. The last thing this guy will want to face is a jury in which at practically every member has a family pet or did so growing up. Every one of those juries will image what it would feel like if this crime happened to them. Every one will think of how they would have to explain their family pet's murder to their children. And every one will want to nail this guy to the wall.

Several countries eat dogs. Hell, Obama eats dogs. I say bomb all dog eating countries back to the stone age. Oh, that's right, they already are in the stone age.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

What a cunt.

I do actually believe in severe punishment for this. On the grounds that people like this are about 5 seconds from killing a human.

Too bad the neighbor didn't have a gun of his own.

Dogs do not have human rights. As gross as this behavior is, animal cruelty and criminal discharge are the most he could be charged with.

If the dog owner shot the man w his own gun he'd go on trial for murder.

Not if he was real careful about it and just shot his nuts off...

CBOEtrader says

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

What a cunt.

I do actually believe in severe punishment for this. On the grounds that people like this are about 5 seconds from killing a human.

Too bad the neighbor didn't have a gun of his own.

Dogs do not have human rights. As gross as this behavior is, animal cruelty and criminal discharge are the most he could be charged with.

If the dog owner shot the man w his own gun he'd go on trial for murder.

Dan8267 says

This is why I don't buy the argument that any "law abiding" citizen should be allowed to have a gun simply because he hasn't yet committed a crime (or hasn't been caught, prosecuted, and convicted of one).

What? You couldn't have picked a better situation? How about the 62 people who got shot in Chicago over Easter weekend? How about the millions shot by atheist dictators around the world?
/troll on

Quigley says

What? You couldn't have picked a better situation?

This is hardly the only example I have ever given about why guns need to be restricted. The whole mass shooting has been stated many times. The response is always the same. The common man with no criminal record needs to have a gun because criminals do, and he's safer that way. And yes, the pro-gun side ignores the fact that many mass shootings have been committed by people with no criminal history. However, the video in this thread demonstrates that the common man, himself, is also an asshole and largely because he has a gun.

CBOEtrader says

Dogs do not have human rights. As gross as this behavior is, animal cruelty and criminal discharge are the most he could be charged with.

I think there are laws against unlawful discharge of a firearm that may apply, possibly laws about threats with a firearm.

I imagine the local DA is wagging his tail at the good publicity he'll get and combing for every law in the book that can be thrown at the guy.

On the civil side most of what this guy owns, including his firearm, is about to be auctioned off to pay damages.

Dan8267 says

There should be a very high standard of mental and emotional maturing before being allowed to possess a gun. This is utterly inexcusable. They guy should get 20 years in prison without possibility of parole and he should lose his house to the dog's owner. This is a most despicable display of human nature.

What a sick SOB.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

There should be a very high standard of mental and emotional maturing before being allowed to possess a gun. This is utterly inexcusable. They guy should get 20 years in prison without possibility of parole and he should lose his house to the dog's owner. This is a most despicable display of human nature.

What a sick SOB.

I hope a couple of pit bulls bite his dick off.

Yeah, apparently there are a bunch of CA negligent discharge and animal cruelty laws that are "Wobblers", and can be a felony or misdemeanor. I think Cali has a minimum 16 months incarceration for a felony count...

Also Penal Code 417 carries a mandatory incarceration period, and it's not necessary that you point the weapon at a bystander to be charged with it, it seems that threatening, screaming, etc. while bearing a firearm are more than enough for a conviction. This would be in addition to the negligent discharge.

The dogkiller is in deepshit, the DA knows he is gonna get his face on TV and is going to be as tough as possible knowing no jury is going to have sympathy for this guy.

CBOEtrader says

Dogs do not have human rights.

However, they do have animal rights.

BlueSardine says

As gross as this behavior is, animal cruelty and criminal discharge are the most he could be charged with.

How about endangering the public, making terrorist threats, and theft (by capturing the dog). Add that to animal cruelty and unlawful discharge of a weapon and we're talking years in prison.

The civil lawsuit could also leave him penniless for life, and rightfully so.

Strategist says

What a sick SOB.

Strategist says

I hope a couple of pit bulls bite his dick off.

If this guy were an off-duty cop, you'd be defending him, whereas I'd still be saying the exact same thing.

I can see it now. You'd be saying it was all the dog owner's fault, that the cop did nothing wrong, that he had the right to defend himself and his property, that the dog was unlawfully trespassing and probably high on drugs.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Also Penal Code 417 carries a mandatory incarceration period, and it's not necessary that you point the weapon at a bystander to be charged with it,

I'd go even farther. Threatening a person's dog is essentially an act of terrorism. The man was trying to terrify his neighbor. Deterring this is the very spirit of anti-terrorism laws.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

I hope a couple of pit bulls bite his dick off.

If this guy were an off-duty cop, you'd be defending him, whereas I'd still be saying the exact same thing.

I can see it now. You'd be saying it was all the dog owner's fault, that the cop did nothing wrong, that he had the right to defend himself and his property, that the dog was unlawfully trespassing and probably high on drugs.

ha ha ha.
If a cop shot that asshole, I would be defending him.

Dan8267 says

I'd go even farther. Threatening a person's dog is essentially an act of terrorism. The man was trying to terrify his neighbor. Deterring this is the very spirit of anti-terrorism laws.

Dan, we finally started knocking some sense into you. Aren't you glad?

Strategist says

If a cop shot that asshole, I would be defending him.

So would I, but would you condemn the cop that shoots someone's dog?

Strategist says

Dan, we finally started knocking some sense into you. Aren't you glad?

My political philosophies have always been consistent.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

If a cop shot that asshole, I would be defending him.

So would I, but would you condemn the cop that shoots someone's dog?

Hell no. You don't shoot a dog for sport. I would treat him like a terrorist.

Strategist says

Hell no. You don't shoot a dog for sport. I would treat him like a terrorist.

Then start doing so. The police needlessly and heartlessly murder thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dogs every year. This happens only in the United States. Other nations also have dogs but not the slaughter rate the U.S. has.

https://puppycidedb.com/

US police shoot dogs so often that a Justice Department expert calls it an “epidemic”

The exact number of dogs killed by law enforcement officers is difficult to quantify because there is no official record of these deaths across American agencies. Laurel Matthews, a program specialist with the US Department of Justice’s community-oriented policing services office, says fatal encounters are an “epidemic” and estimates that 25 to 30 pet dogs are killed daily by police.

Police Kill Nearly 25 Dogs Each Day

 Law enforcement’s treatment of dogs is just a symptom of the militarized policing so many of our neighborhoods are subjected to.

The death of Seven is just one example of an increasingly common phenomenon known as “puppycide”—the killing of pet dogs by law enforcement. The Department of Justice estimates that nearly 25 dogs are killed by law enforcement every day in the United States, which makes a total of 10,000 per year. The circumstances of each encounter are different, as are the breeds of dog, from Labrador retrievers to pit bulls to Chihuahuas. But the stories are woven with common threads—the rush to violence, abuse of power, fear, and carelessness. The treatment that the Harrises, an African-American family whose home was in the heavily policed Northeast neighborhood of Hartford, received at the hands of the officers is also a reflection of law enforcement’s behavior in communities of color across the country. Certainly, there are encounters involving genuinely dangerous dogs, but the scale of this phenomenon seems to speak to larger problems in law enforcement.

Programmed to Kill: The Growing Epidemic of Cops Shooting Dogs

Prepare to be outraged.

A dog is shot by a police officer “every 98 minutes.”

The Department of Justice estimates that at least 25 dogs are killed by police every day. 

The Puppycide Database Project estimates the number of dogs being killed by police to be closer to 500 dogs a day (which translates to 182,000 dogs a year).

Because not all police departments keep track of canine shootings, these numbers vary widely. However, whatever the final body count, what we’re dealing with is an epidemic of vast proportions.

The so-called “dangerous” breeds of dogs aren’t the only ones that are being killed in encounters with police either.

Essentially, police can shoot your dog for any reason or no reason at all. What’s more, the general consensus from the courts thus far has been to absolve police from charges of wrongdoing.

Outraged yet?

Not to worry. I’m just getting warmed up.

Spike, a 70-pound pit bull, was shot by NYPD police when they encountered him in the hallway of an apartment building in the Bronx. Surveillance footage shows the dog, tail wagging, right before an officer shot him in the head at pointblank range.

Arzy, a 14-month-old Newfoundland, Labrador and golden retriever mix, was shot between the eyes by a Louisiana police officer. The dog had been secured on a four-foot leash at the time he was shot. An independent witness testified that the dog never gave the officer any provocation to shoot him.

Seven, a St. Bernard, was shot repeatedly by Connecticut police in the presence of the dog’s 12-year-old owner. Police, investigating an erroneous tip, had entered the property—without a warrant—where the dog and her owner had been playing in the backyard, causing the dog to give chase.

Dutchess, a 2-year-old rescue dog, was shot three times in the head by Florida police as she ran out her front door. The officer had been approaching the house to inform the residents that their car door was open when the dog bounded out to greet him.

Yanna, a 10-year-old boxer, was shot three times by Georgia police after they mistakenly entered the wrong home and opened fire, killing the dog, shooting the homeowner in the leg and wounding an investigating officer.

Payton, a 7-year-old black Labrador retriever, and 4-year-old Chase, also a black Lab, were shot and killed after a SWAT team mistakenly raided the mayor’s home while searching for drugs. Police shot Payton four times. Chase was shot twice, once from behind as he ran away. Mayor Cheye Calvo was handcuffed and interrogated for hours—wearing only underwear and socks—surrounded by the dogs’ carcasses and pools of the dogs’ blood.

In another instance, a Missouri SWAT team raided a family home, killing a 4-year-old pit bull Kiya. Believe it or not, this time the SWAT raid wasn’t in pursuit of drugs, mistaken or otherwise, but was intended “to check if [the] home had electricity and natural gas service.”

These are not isolated instances. We’re dealing with an outright epidemic.

A Reason investigation reveals widespread, unchecked violence against pets during drug raids—including two officers who have shot more than 100.

According the lawsuit, Smith tried to tell the officers she was putting her dogs away, and placed two in the basement and one in the bathroom. As the officers burst into the house, Debo slipped back upstairs. The officers shot it as it sat down by Smith. Next, they charged into the basement and shot Mama, who was pregnant and backed into a corner. Finally, they moved onto the bathroom, where Smoke was closed in.

One of the officers cracked the door open, peeked inside, and closed it again. "Should we do that one, too?" the officer asked, according to the lawsuit, before two of them fired through the closed door, killing Smoke.

I could go on and on for hours, but I think I've demonstrated that police murders of non-threatening dogs is an epidemic and that the police are never held accountable for their illegal actions. So Strategist, if you are actually honest about treating these terrorists like what they are, then you should be damn outraged right now.