Ugly - There is no excuse for this gun being fired!

[RAL]

I have followed this case in the press for a week now. There is no excuse for the officer to have fired his gun IMO. Officers had been on the scene for more than an hour often with their backs to the two dogs without concern. The dogs were running around, not threatening anyone. Officer's could have placed the dogs in the house (access from garage), the fenced back yard (access from garage), or simply closed the garage with the dogs inside. IMO there is no reason to shoot a dog that is being held by a catch pole and trying to retreat.

I am glad the neighbor filmed it, as the officer lied about the incident. I am sad that officer has tarnished the good reputation of other wonderful, thoughtful, kind, helpful officers across this nation.

Commerce City officer charged in dog's death | Video | 9news.com

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Crowman]

Not much one can say............

[oneshot]

I only saw one dog.

There are a lot of what ifs.........

What if the officers put the dog in the house as you say.
Then the owner calls and accuses them that they did something inside, or took something.
Most people on one hand would be glad they put the dog inside, but OTOH sue the city for the officers entering their home.
What if they put the dog inside the garage, and shut the door.
Maybe the dog doesn't like being in the garage alone and rips the place up.
They should have taken the dog by whatever means possible, like they used to do in the old days and make the owner come and get it to the tune of say $300.
Maybe that would ensure the owner keeps the dog(s) put up, instead of letting them run loose.
Ultimately the owner was negligent.
Yes the officers did some stupid things, and shooting the dog MAY have been one of them.
We were not there. You can have the owner and one or two neighbors say the dog was a saint, but the rest of the neighborhood say the dog was a holy terror.
YMMV

[rammerjammer]

All you have to see is that the dog is in restraints and attempting to move away from the coward, not attack him before the shots were fired. Throw the book at him.

[Crestwood1001]

Cowardly act. Don't try to make excuses for them not putting the dog somewhere. They could have taken the dog and charged the owner, but he decided to shoot the thing 5 times, inexcusable. Hope he feels the full extent of the law


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[retsupt99]

I didn't see an officer being attacked by a dog...rather a dog already captured and retreating.
If convicted of a 'felony' this officer's access to guns is all over.

A video does not necessarily tell all, but you do get the idea.

[Darrow75]

I only saw one dog.

There are a lot of what ifs.........

What if the officers put the dog in the house as you say.
Then the owner calls and accuses them that they did something inside, or took something.
Most people on one hand would be glad they put the dog inside, but OTOH sue the city for the officers entering their home.
What if they put the dog inside the garage, and shut the door.
Maybe the dog doesn't like being in the garage alone and rips the place up.
They should have taken the dog by whatever means possible, like they used to do in the old days and make the owner come and get it to the tune of say $300.
Maybe that would ensure the owner keeps the dog(s) put up, instead of letting them run loose.
Ultimately the owner was negligent.
Yes the officers did some stupid things, and shooting the dog MAY have been one of them.
We were not there. You can have the owner and one or two neighbors say the dog was a saint, but the rest of the neighborhood say the dog was a holy terror.
YMMV

Did you actually watch he video?! The dog was being restrained. That cop had absolutely no reason to fire! All of your "what ifs" are bogus and saying "shooting the dog MAY have been" a stupid thing is in itself a stupid thing to say. This cop is a low-life scumbag and at the very least should lose his job and pension. Not only was the shooting unjustified, from looking at the uncut footage on YouTube, he may very well have endangered his fellow officers when he fired.

[Dangerfield]

5 shots to a defenseless, restrained animal. I think the shooter should spend more time at a shooting range. He can get his "gun-off" there.

[rmxer85]

Uncalled for.

If this had been proven serial killer, in handcuffs, would anyone consider this justifiable?

[1MoreGoodGuy]

He shot a restrained dog 5 times and then lied about how it happened because he didn't know he was being filmed.

Give him the maximum sentence.

[Richard58]

Excessive force on the dog after the animal was under control by the restraint pole.

[JJVP]

5 shots to a defenseless, restrained animal. I think the shooter should spend more time at a shooting range. He can get his "gun-off" there.

I think the shooter should not be able to own or posses a gun, much less shoot one ever again.

[wingit]

I don't even like dogs and I think this guy was wrong. Hope they throw the book at him.

[RAL]

I have been told by people at the scene, that the dog did not even start barking until after they used a taser on it. In other, longer clips you can see the dog retreating any time someone approached it. It retreated far into the garage before they got it with the catch pole. It was probably cornered and still the dog did nothing to anyone.

I am so glad it was filmed because if it hadn't been, no one would have believed the callous actions that took place in that neighborhood.

This incident took place in a Denver suburb. Literally thousands of dogs with a similar appearance have been forcibly seized from people’s homes. The dogs have done nothing to anyone. Even service/assistance dogs have been confiscated. Denver has had to pay more than a million dollars to defend its actions in court.

This same action has taken place many times in Denver. This is the first time it has been caught on video. I am hoping the killing of this dog will put an end to the insanity in Denver.