Any dog lovers? This dude got his dog shot by the cops just because he was recording

[WhiteMike]

I don't post in this section a lot, but damn i would be very pissed if this was my dog. The guy didn't even do anything wrong (that I can see) Other than recording them of course.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bv3zkPfU2TE

[Sinfix_15]

Very sad and unfortunate. The dog didnt understand what was happening and was just trying to protect his owner. The owner of the dog was smart to put the dog away before the cops approached, but unfortunately leaving the windows down was an oversight. It's sad to watch, but the cop is legally justified in his response. He made attempt to calm the dog prior to shooting it and didnt shoot it until it leaped at him.

The cops could have handled it better. I would have asked him to secure his dog before i talked to him or arrested him, assuming there was cause for an arrest, which i cant see one in the video.

A larger problem is that people continue to vote for politicians who enable the police to have the power over them that they keep complaining about.

[.blank cd]

Very sad and unfortunate. The dog didnt understand what was happening and was just trying to protect his owner. The owner of the dog was smart to put the dog away before the cops approached, but unfortunately leaving the windows down was an oversight. It's sad to watch, but the cop is legally justified in his response. He made attempt to calm the dog prior to shooting it and didnt shoot it until it leaped at him.What attempt did he make to calm the dog? I didn't see that in this video. Please point it out.


A larger problem is that people continue to vote for politicians who enable the police to have the power over them that they keep complaining about.What politician did we vote for that gave police the power that we keep complaining about?

[Sinfix_15]

What attempt did he make to calm the dog? I didn't see that in this video. Please point it out.

He reached out to the dog, they yelled at the dog, they made *some* attempt to either calm the dog or get the dog to back off. The shot was fired after the dog leaped at the officer.


What politician did we vote for that gave police the power that we keep complaining about?

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/rickungar/files/2011/11/300x192.jpg

[.blank cd]

This was apparently taking place while police were trying to secure a hostage situation in the neighborhood. The man was antagonizing the police, blaring his music, and yelling things of a racial nature. That's why he was (legally) detained.

It would seem to me that if you, and another officer, cannot control a minor situation like this without loss of life, then maybe you aren't suited for the police force.

[.blank cd]

He reached out to the dog, they yelled at the dog, they made *some* attempt to either calm the dog or get the dog to back off. The shot was fired after the dog leaped at the officer.Mace.

What does Obama have to do with a local police force?

[Sinfix_15]

This was apparently taking place while police were trying to secure a hostage situation in the neighborhood. The man was antagonizing the police, blaring his music, and yelling things of a racial nature. That's why he was (legally) detained.

It would seem to me that if you, and another officer, cannot control a minor situation like this without loss of life, then maybe you aren't suited for the police force.

The only thing i could understand him saying from the video is "thats a civil rights violation". Videoing the police is legal. Playing your music is legal. Being on the sidewalk is legal. Protesting (if that's what he was doing) is legal.

The dog leaped at the cop.... he doesnt have to wait until the dog bites one of his fingers off to respond to the threat. I personally would have made a much greater attempt to not shoot the dog, but that's not a decision i can make for another person. The dog leaped at him, he shot it.

[Sinfix_15]

Mace.

What does Obama have to do with a local police force?

It's a general statement to establishment as a whole. Obama is leading the way for the removal of your personal rights and civil liberties. This man is apparently complaining about the police raiding a home. Obama's policies open the door for the police and other government agencies to "raid your home" at their discretion.

[.blank cd]

It's a general statement to establishment as a whole. Obama is leading the way for the removal of your personal rights and civil liberties. This man is apparently complaining about the police raiding a home. Obama's policies open the door for the police and other government agencies to "raid your home" at their discretion.

But what does Obama have to do with the local police department? Everything in the video was legal, and was legal before Obama was in office.

[Sinfix_15]

But what does Obama have to do with the local police department? Everything in the video was legal, and was legal before Obama was in office.


Nothing. Just pointing out the irony of a black man complaining about alleged abuse of power by a government establishment when minorities predominantly vote to increase the power and authority of government establishments.


Return to topic, seeing the dog get shot makes me sad.

[RandomGuy]

Anyone read this article? Salinas v. Texas, right to remain silent, Supreme Court right to remain silent, Supreme Court Fifth Amendment, Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, constitutional right to remain silent, constitution right to remain silent, Nicholas Yarris - Slate (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_cou rt_right_to_remain_silent.html)

basically "the right to remain silent" is no longer upheld and even remaining silent can put you in peril.

[Sinfix_15]

Anyone read this article? Salinas v. Texas, right to remain silent, Supreme Court right to remain silent, Supreme Court Fifth Amendment, Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, constitutional right to remain silent, constitution right to remain silent, Nicholas Yarris - Slate (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_cou rt_right_to_remain_silent.html)

basically "the right to remain silent" is no longer upheld and even remaining silent can put you in peril.

All of our rights are under attack.

[.blank cd]

Anyone read this article? Salinas v. Texas, right to remain silent, Supreme Court right to remain silent, Supreme Court Fifth Amendment, Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, constitutional right to remain silent, constitution right to remain silent, Nicholas Yarris - Slate (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_cou rt_right_to_remain_silent.html)

basically "the right to remain silent" is no longer upheld and even remaining silent can put you in peril.

The headline is pretty sensationalist. Their opinion doesn't change much. You still have the right to remain silent. The fifth amendment is still very much upheld. Salinas went to the police station voluntarily, not under arrest, started answering questions, and stopped when they got to the incriminating ones. Then they arrested him on traffic tix to hold him there. If you consent to questioning by police, that is a WAIVER of your rights and his silence is tacit admission.

Moral of the story is: DONT TALK TO POLICE UNDER ANY FUCKING CIRCUMSTANCES.

[bu villain]

Can't see the dog video but I read the article and still don't understand how his right to remain silent was violated. My understanding is the right is there so that you don't have to answer questions, not so that people can't speculate about why you are silent. Also the fifth is not something you get to use as you see fit to present only the side you want people to hear. You can't give a sermon on the stand and then refuse to answer questions. You can either say what you have to say and respond to questions or plead the fifth, not both.

[C230K]

Almost every thread now has to be about blaming Obama.......whether its a dog getting shot or a gsr swap on a civic, somehow its Obama'a fault

[.blank cd]

Almost every thread now has to be about blaming Obama.......whether its a dog getting shot or a gsr swap on a civic, somehow its Obama'a fault

LMAO

[BanginJimmy]

Almost every thread now has to be about blaming Obama.......whether its a dog getting shot or a gsr swap on a civic, somehow its Obama'a fault

This only applies to Sinfix right?

[BanginJimmy]

Can't see the dog video but I read the article and still don't understand how his right to remain silent was violated. My understanding is the right is there so that you don't have to answer questions, not so that people can't speculate about why you are silent. Also the fifth is not something you get to use as you see fit to present only the side you want people to hear. You can't give a sermon on the stand and then refuse to answer questions. You can either say what you have to say and respond to questions or plead the fifth, not both.

Lois Lerner does not agree with you.


BTW, you can invoke your right to council or to remain silent at ANY time during questioning by law enforcement.

[.blank cd]

Lois Lerner does not agree with you.


BTW, you can invoke your right to council or to remain silent at ANY time during questioning by law enforcement.

Not really

[BanginJimmy]

Not really

yes, really.


Even if you have previously waived your Miranda rights, you can still invoke them at a later time.

[.blank cd]

yes, really.


Even if you have previously waived your Miranda rights, you can still invoke them at a later time.

If you initially waive your rights, they can use whatever you say until you invoke them, and according to this decision, your silence and invocation of your rights AFTER you've waived them can still be used against you, and since he wasn't under arrest, they didn't have to give him a Miranda warning.

[BanginJimmy]

If you initially waive your rights, they can use whatever you say until you invoke them, and according to this decision, your silence and invocation of your rights AFTER you've waived them can still be used against you, and since he wasn't under arrest, they didn't have to give him a Miranda warning.


The fact that you refuse to answer questions from police can always be used by police to frame their narrative.

I still dont see where anything I have posted isnt completely correct.

[Bacon]

The initial arrest had to do with the guy blaring his music too loud....which is against the noise ordinance in most places. I would be pissed too if it was my dog but what can you do? The dog made aggressive advancements towards officer because he was checking up on his owner and paid for it. That would be another charge to bring up on the guy if the dog bit an officer and no officer is going to wait until a dog bites before controlling the situation.

Sent from my Galaxy Note II

[ISAtlanta300]

Stupid dog owner puts his pet in jeopardy. I mean really? Secure your dog or don't bring it along. I feel really bad for the dog.

[bu villain]

Lois Lerner does not agree with you.


BTW, you can invoke your right to council or to remain silent at ANY time during questioning by law enforcement.

Perhaps I was unclear. You can invoke your right to remain silent at any time, that is true. I was actually talking about being on the stand. You can't plead the fifth and then choose to only answer your own lawyers questions. In this particular case though, the man chose to talk to the police. At some point during the conversation, he invoked his right to remain silent. The police didn't force him to answer after that point so I don't see how his rights were abridged.

[BanginJimmy]

Perhaps I was unclear. You can invoke your right to remain silent at any time, that is true. I was actually talking about being on the stand. You can't plead the fifth and then choose to only answer your own lawyers questions. In this particular case though, the man chose to talk to the police. At some point during the conversation, he invoked his right to remain silent. The police didn't force him to answer after that point so I don't see how his rights were abridged.

The Lois Lerner comment was about he doing exactly that in front of Congress. She was sworn in, made her opening statement, then plead the fifth when the panel tried to ask questions.


We are in agreement though about the limitations of the fifth amendment.

[bu villain]

The Lois Lerner comment was about he doing exactly that in front of Congress. She was sworn in, made her opening statement, then plead the fifth when the panel tried to ask questions.

I was referring to a criminal trial, not a congressional hearing which is what Lois Lerner was involved in. Although I am not as familiar with the rules of congressional hearings so perhaps I am wrong about that being the difference.