And the "good name" & reputation of LEO's takes another negative hit !!! And they make a few new enemies !!!

... Gun Down Family Dog for ‘Trotting’ in Their Direction

Uh-huh....sure.

Since there is no video posted of the “family dog trotting in the direction of the cop” before the cop shot it, I will therefore post the video of another “family dog trotting out a door in the direction of a cop” before the cop shot it.

Uh-huh

The story Anti-Media told and you posted here had no video. I cannot help but wonder if Anti-Media would have written the same judgmental story with great condemnation about the cop shooting the dog in the video I posted....had no video been available to dispute their version.

If Anti-Media had also written a story on that incident in the video I posted and no video was available....I can just imagine the headline would read something like this:

Cop shoots dog after lovely family dog, friendly wagging his tail, warmly greeted the mean old cop illegally knocking on the door.

In doing a story about the incident in the video and with no video available, then Anti-Media would make the good name of cops take another negative hit while Anti-Media and the few shitheads who promulgate their yellow journalism crap would take measures to try and insure that cops would make a few new enemies.

I am hear to tell you that you should not trust the yellow journalism garbage these anti-cop-hating sites put out. Their sole agenda in life is to get as many people hating cops as possible and promote anarchy. Somehow they manage to find a some dolts who gladly assist them in the effort toward their goal. More than not trusting their crap, you should not spread it. If it is shit that you so desperately want to spread...the go find yourself a big barnyard and have at it.

There ...

" Since there is no video posted of the “family dog trotting in the direction of the cop” before the cop shot it, I will therefore post the video of another “family dog trotting out a door in the direction of a cop” before the cop shot it. "

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Which your video is not the same incident. Hell, we don't even know if it is even in the same state, as the incident in the OP.

Therefore, it is irrelevant, and immaterial !

It is just another example of your BS agenda, BLUE JOURNALISM.

You constantly proclaim to be so concerned with Truth, yet in this case you present a video to prove your point, and that video is another incident, not the one in question.

In the real world that would be considered fabricating evidence !

Your credibility, and your agenda just took a HUGE hit !!!

You truly are an embarrassment to the members of this forum !!!

You should be ashamed !!!!

Oh, my goodness….looka here, Deckard. We have another friendly little pooch trotting towards some cops and heavens forbid….those nasty old cops shoot that beautiful yet helpless little creature of God’s creation.

The moral of any story about a dog trotting towards a cop : “Don’t ever trust for a single minute that the dog will stop trotting …”

Great use of Body Cam, hopefully it will stop any criticism at the Officers involved.

These was the owner's comments after seeing the video: “To me, it sounded like you [the officer] saw the dog, he came up, he came down, then you shot him. But, what I just saw was, the officer was backing up, almost all the way against the wall over there, and the dog was still jumping up. So, I would've done the same thing. I swear I would've."

O'Hare says, after seeing the video, he doesn't blame the officer. While still devastated about his loss, he just wants to apologize.

"I'm sorry from the bottom of my heart that that police officer had to deal with that," said O'Hare. "I'm sorry, I'm really sorry. I wish I could take it back."

The owner of the dog changed his story after “what he just saw” on the video.

We can only wonder how many other cop-shoots-dog bad cop stories would also change if there had been a video.

How many ….

I found the video in Post #2 on YouTube. I just discovered a story describing the incident. This story was printed and the dog owner’s remarks in the story were made before the dog owner saw the video.

This story was taken from the Idaho Press Tribune.

This screen capture from a second officer’s CopVu cam shows two dogs jumping up on a Nampa Police officer moments before he shot one of the dogs in self defense.

NAMPA — Police Department officials released video footage of the officer who shot a dog Monday evening.

Officers were called to the home to check on the welfare of two children, Deputy Chief Craig Kingsbury said at a press conference Wednesday. Upon knocking on the slightly-ajar door, two dogs attacked one of the officers.

The videos shows the officer firing his weapon three times at close range, severely injuring the dog, Junior. Officers transported the animal to a veterinary hospital, but the dog died en route.

Larry Carver, brother-in-law of the dog’s owner Anthony O’Hare, said the first gunshot hit Junior in the leg, dropping him to the ground.

Two more shots were fired, one in the dog’s stomach, which killed him. The Idaho Press-Tribune requested comment from O’Hare, but did not receive a reply Wednesday evening.

“I can tell you he’s not heartless,” Kingsbury said of the officer who shot the dog. “This bothered him, and it bothered several other members of this agency. A lot of us are dog lovers.”

The second dog fled when the shots were fired, Sgt. Tim Randall said. Officers don’t know if it has since returned to the home. A dog was barking inside the residence Wednesday evening when the Press-Tribune spoke with Carver.

The welfare check was otherwise routine, Kingsbury said, and the caller’s concerns, when investigated, were unfounded.

Carver, who ran outside just after shots were fired, believes the situation could have been handled differently.

He questioned why the police didn’t use the “mace” they had on them on the dog instead.

“I just didn’t understand that and they were here to do a welfare check, and they’re firing guns,” Carver said.

Pepper spray from the belt of the officer who shot the dog was punctured by apparent bite marks.

Randall said that while it’s acceptable to have dogs for protection, it’s important to understand the liability that goes along with it.

“They need to be careful to make sure that the dog doesn’t come into contact with the wrong person,” Randall said. “Whether that’s keeping the door locked, or a good fenced yard, a secure yard that’s well-signed.”

The two videos were taken by the officers’ CopVu cameras, small devices that clip to their uniforms shirts and are activated with a simple slide motion. All Nampa patrol officers wear the cameras and activate them any time they interact with members of the public.

Notice the distinct difference in the way that J Funk, reporter for the Idaho Press Tribune, structured the descriptive narrative for his story published in a small hometown newspaper….Then compare that to the one the cop-hating agenda driven staff member for Anti-Media descriptively structured for his article in a Web publication? Do you notice the different style and methodology? I do….I definitely do. J Funk did what a reporter was supposed to do to meet proper and ethical journalistic standards….that being to stick to giving the: Who, Where, What, When, Why and How. The staff writer for Anti-Media structured and composed his article in such a manner so as to try and convince readers that here are some more cops that are assholes just like all the rest of cops. Looks as though he succeeded in doing that….in a couple cases here. On the other hand, that was a damned fine job by J Funk. Doncha think? Sure….you must, after making the comparisons.

Your cop-worship knows no bounds.

You whine when there is a video showing cops killing docile family pets, then when there is no video, you whine about that and then post a completely unrelated video of a completely different event in a futile attempt to defend the badged cowards.

Un-fricking real!

Hell, we don't even know if it is even in the same state, as the incident in the OP.

Therefore, it is irrelevant, and immaterial !

Gatlin really has shown his complete dishonesty here.

It is just another example of your BS agenda, BLUE JOURNALISM.

Great term - "Blue Journalism". It fits his posts on this thread perfectly.

You constantly proclaim to be so concerned with Truth, yet in this case you present a video to prove your point, and that video is another incident, not the one in question.

In the real world that would be considered fabricating evidence !

Apparently he leaned how to do that from watching some (not all) cops do the same thing.

I found the video in Post #2 on YouTube. I just discovered a story describing the incident.

Irrelevant spam.

Hypocrite.

You may call it irrelevant if you want to. Mox Nix to me. The video and the picture below clearly shows what can happen to a cop if the cop doesn’t shoot a dog trotting towards him. These two dogs came trotting out of a door towards the cop and attacked the cop.

When a dog comes trotting at a cop, I have absolutely no problem with the cop shooting the dog.
And a cop doesn’t either and that is what matters....not what you think matters.
It’s too bad if you have a problem, because it’s your fucking problem....learn to live with it.
Since there is nothing you can do about it....except of course continue to whine.
Shooting the dog in the article you posted was highly justified.
I hereby officially declare this CASE IS CLOSED forever on LF....judgment so rendered.
You must now stand in front of your computer as I leave the thread ...

" I hereby officially declare this CASE IS CLOSED forever on LF....judgment so rendered. "

Gee, this is news to me ! I did not know that Tater has taken over LF, and now he is in charge, and not Stone. I guess Tater fired Stone.

Damn, this place is deteriorating at an accelerated rate !!

I guess it is time to change the name to something appropriate, like " Taters Turd Bowl ".

Oh well, Stone it used to be a good site when you were running it!! But no more now that Tater is in charge.

When a dog comes trotting at a cop, I have absolutely no problem with the cop shooting the dog.

So, in your opinion, cops have the right to shoot any dog no matter how docile or friendly or no matter no small they are.

And a cop doesn’t either and that is what matters....

And there's the problem in a nutshell. According to you, it's open season for any cop to shoot a dog for any reason at all.

I hereby officially declare this CASE IS CLOSED forever on LF....judgment so rendered.

Not by a long shot - who the hell do you think you are? Your utter hubris and self-aggrandizement only displays your rampant insecurity.

You've embarrassed yourself on this thread by posting completely irrelevant videos of events that had nothing to do with the article - the same thing that you accuse others of doing. That's called hypocrisy.

" I hereby officially declare this CASE IS CLOSED forever on LF....judgment so rendered. "

Gee, this is news to me ! I did not know that Tater has taken over LF, and now he is in charge, and not Stone. I guess Tater fired Stone.

It's hard to believe that Gatlin could become any more of a pompous ass, but on this thread he has sunk to an all-time low. According to Tater, a cop can shoot any dog at any time because - he's a cop and the reasons for that decision must not be questioned or criticized.

Cop-worship at its most disgusting.

When a dog comes trotting at a cop, I have absolutely no problem with the cop shooting the dog.

So, in your opinion, cops have the right to shoot any dog no matter how docile or friendly or no matter no small they are.

No, that is not my opinion.

And a cop doesn’t either and that is what matters....

And there's the problem in a nutshell. According to you, it's open season for any cop to shoot a dog for any reason at all.

That is not according to me.

... who the hell do you think you are?

I am GATLIN.

I repeat: THIS CASE IS DEFINITELY CLOSED.

Goodbye ...

" I am GATLIN.

I repeat: THIS CASE IS DEFINITELY CLOSED. "

So says Tater Gatlin ! LOL, he has declared from his throne !!

ROFLMAO !!!

Hey Stone, did you know that you had suffered a coupe, that Tater had deposed you and took over ? I am amazed at the audacity of this clown !

Damn, he really believes he is in charge here at LF !! I have suspected he was about to come unhinged, but did not realize he would get this delusional ! Every day he is more & more of an embarrassment to himself, and to his friends here ! He is on a path to turn this site into a joke !

This is just too funny !!

Wonder what is next ? We will probably hear reports of a nut wearing a cop costume, stopping cars in front of his house, screaming " I am Gatlin, I am a cop, you are under arrest " Then he will get his ass kicked ! LOL

Tater has totally flipped out. Someone in his family should get him treatment in a mental institution. I can see him in a ward with Hillary. Both in straight jackets. Hillary babbling that " I am Hillary, the President of the United States ". Beside her is Gatlin screaming " I am Major Tater Gatlin, I have a badge, I am God ! If anyone here objects, I will shoot you, and your dog, or your cat. You will do exactly as I say. I am head cop here !! "

This clown is just getting sicker every day !!! (and funny )

For his sake, his family needs to get him mental health treatment, before he hurts someone, or himself !

Pitiful !

Your video is bullshit and has nothing to do with this case. If the cops didn't have a search warrant they are wrong.

Why do you make so many excuses for wrongdoing by cops?

Oh well, Stone it used to be a good site when you were running it!! But no more now that Tater is in charge.

Gatlin can say whatever he wants. That doesn't make it true.

" Gatlin can say whatever he wants. That doesn't make it true. "

Oh, I think most here agree ! But someone better tell Tater. He seems to think otherwise !

" Gatlin can say whatever he wants. That doesn't make it true. "

Oh, I think most here agree ! But someone better tell Tater. He seems to think otherwise !

Tater has gone beyond thinking that cops are gods and now believes he IS God.

If the cops didn't have a search warrant they are wrong.

That statement within itself is factually wrong. I will explain why.

The cops needed no search warrant and they were right assuming they had either “probable cause” or there were “exigent circumstances” or both, for them to enter the property. That is a decision the cops can lawfully make. It is reserved for them to make and not for someone trying to be ”Monday Morning Quarterback” after reading an article filled half-truths and innuendos.

Probable Cause and Exigent Circumstances:

One exception to a search warrant requirement is known as “probable cause” and is used when it is to believed the search will uncover criminal activity or contraband.

Another exception to a search warrant requirement is known as “exigent circumstances”. This is really a secondary exception to probable cause in that if an officer has a reasonable belief that evidence may be lost or destroyed in the time it takes to get a warrant, then they can legally search for or seize the evidence. Again, this typically applies if the officer already has probable cause, but is an exception worthy of its own category.

Colorado state troopers Watkins, Talbot, and Fuller investigated a car crash involving Doyle’s son, Porter Williams. After running the registration, the vehicle came up as belonging to Williams’ father, who lives on the same road as Doyle and Anderson. With this in mind, is there any question that the Colorado state troopers did not have both “probably cause” and “exigent circumstances.” I think the did have and see no way anyone can argue they did not. But I will be pleased to listen.

Why do you make so many excuses for wrongdoing by cops?

I never make excuses for cops when wrongdoings are PROVEN. What you may perceive as “excuses” is that I do try to keep idiots from jumping to the wrong conclusions without ALL facts being available to them and making spontaneous faulty judgments after reading only one side of stories. The side cop-hating journalist want you hear. But, try and hard as I may….I never seem to succeed in preventing some people going off the deep end. Can you imagine why this is?

Your video is bullshit and has nothing to do with this case

The video was not bullshit, eh? Well, I think your erroneous deduction and response is bullshit. It shows that you clearly missed the purpose of the video. Therefore, I will attempt to explain my reasoning for injecting the video to you, then perhaps you can see it differently. If not….then so be it.

The purpose of the video was to show a correlation as to what can happen, and did happen, when a cop does not shoot dogs “trotting” towards him….in the video, that cop was severely mauled. Therefore, by presenting the video I was striving for a close parallel and relative analogy to a type of cause and effect presentation.

The article said the dog was “trotting” towards the officers and the video showed what can happen, and did happen, with dogs trotting towards an officer and are not shot.

The cop in the video did not know the dogs trotting towards him were going to attack and severely maul him....or, it’s a damned sure bet he would have shot the dogs as they were trotting towards him. >[? The cop in the article did not know if the dog trotting towards him was going to attack and severely maul him or not....so, he did not delay like the cop in the video, he shot first as a protective measure.

I was relating video to cause and effect….”Principle of Causation”….when consciously and with purposely injecting the video into the discussion. I apologize for you not understanding that.

That is the best way I can explain it to you. If you still don’t understand, then there is nothing more that I can say about it except that you have your opinion which I respect along with the right for you to hold it.

GrandIsland: Did I get it wrong on the search warrant part?

You….yes, YOU….stop with the damned whining and acting babylike.
Quit you silly assed crying and running to momma to beg for protection.
I clearly told you THIS CASE IS CLOSED. Damn it, YOU....best get that.

" I clearly told you THIS CASE IS CLOSED. Damn it, YOU....best get that. "

LOL !! Is that supposed to make me scared ? That will be the day !!

What you say does not mean shit !! Because, with your narcissistic personality, YOU ARE SHIT !!

And if I don't " get it ", what are you going to do ? Let me guess, you will stamp your widdle feet, then scream and cry " I am the great, wonderful, all knowing, Major Tater Mr Perfect Gatlin. " Better known here at LF, as the site idiot, asshole, cop sucker !!!

You need to take a clue, and STFU before you embarrass yourself, and your friends here any more !!

You are no more a threat to me than a snake I shot a couple years ago.

Gatlin, you really need to grow up and be a man, and quit living in that fantasy world you live in !

You have become the big joke here at LF

GrandIsland: Did I get it wrong on the search warrant part?

IMHO, partially.

Probable cause is used to request a warrant... not in place of one. Whenever possible, a warrant should be requested as a general rule, outside of searching people incident to arrest or items in plain view.

For searching homes or even crime scenes areas and sometimes parts of vehicles, warrants should be utilized. Why chance or risk the loss of evidence if you have the time to acquire a warrant for extra protection? Nothing worse than losing a good case with thousands of man hours, and letting a criminal scumbag get away with his crimes... because of a judicial ruling not in your favor. There is only ONE exception... and that is "exigent circumstances”. Like no time to get a warrant because evidence is being destroyed... fuck DickTard and his libtarded ilk, go get your evidence forthwith.

... There is only ONE exception... and that is "exigent circumstances”. Like no time to get a warrant because evidence is being destroyed... fuck DickTard and his libtarded ilk, go get your evidence forthwith.

Thanks....I went with the "exigent circumstances.”

Like no time to get a warrant because evidence is being destroyed... fuck DickTard and his libtarded ilk, go get your evidence forthwith.

GI, you neglected the selfish bad cop that steals or lies or otherwise compromises the entire concept of a jurisprudence system. Nope there are so many cases cited wherein a bad cop compromises the integrity of the system of governance, we just don't believe you.

Go screw yourself, in other words.

1) you neglected

2) we just don't believe you.

1) I didn't "neglect" anything cock gobble.

2) who's "we"? You and the other banned FR posters? Wow... lol

1) I didn't "neglect" anything ...

Are you saying that there are no "bad cops" at all in the USA?

2) who's "we"? You and the other banned FR posters? Wow... lol

Patriots of all creed, flesh and creator- based gumption; all believing in an almighty creator and a social mechanism to support and maintain the intrinsic value of the US Constitution beyond you dancing daily in a tutu on this chit-chat channel.

...beyond you dancing daily in a tutu on this chit-chat channel.

Plus, he plays road-crossing guard for the local elementary school children crossing the street.

You forgot to mention that, Bucky.

Are you saying that there are no "bad cops" at all in the USA?

Not at all. There are plenty of them. What I was saying was, criminal activity by a cop needs to be judged by a jury of that cops peers before he/she is guilty... and that's not my fucking job to point them out.

Douche neck.

In no way was I attempting to identify all of characteristics. The mole lives in his mother's basement; he has over 50,000 primers all grown over with green&black mold. She/it claims it keeps them sparkling clean with a solvent: brasso.

Plus, he plays road-crossing guard for the local elementary school

That retard doesn't need any help from you, dick dribble.

What I was saying was, criminal activity by a cop needs to be judged by a jury of that cops peers before he/she is guilty.

The concept behind "peer" review within a jury panel was not limited to a pile of trash called, "cops." The concept was about the citizenry to take effective and efficient action for review so we can benchmark performance of ALL government to include cops.

Man, you don't know shit about what you are posting. Give it up.

he plays road-crossing guard for the local elementary school children crossing the street.

If your lawyer is a road-crossing guard in a tutu, you're gonna do some time!

behind "peer" review

You ain't nobody's "peer", you're lower than Mexican shit... about 400 miles lower. lol

OK, so you think you are smart in throwing a stupid comment @me. But lQQk @yourself. Wasn't that a stupid comment originated by yourself? Of course you must say "YES."

Ba Ba Bucky... I'm busy watching The Hateful Eight. I haven't the time for your shenanigans.

I haven't the time for your shenanigans.

Don't we want to share data and concepts so that we can learn from each other; so that we are more aware of the world around ourselves; so that we have improved survival skills and become more successful in life for all our family, friends and others?

Sumtymes I am amazed @you.

Don't get all weird, Bucky. Toughen up.