Jump to content

Police Dog Attacked During Raid


BC4ME
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah right alpha rofl1.gif

Strange dog comes into property (fullstop). Aforementioned + acts aggressively? I think the majority of dogs would try and take it out.

Police officer probably has head up kolo anyway, historically we know by now that we know f all when it comes to media reports on dog breeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 4:54 AM, Jade~Harley~Bella said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 3:47 AM, Telida Whippets said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 3:43 AM, Jade~Harley~Bella said:

Just watching the video now... apparently they were "greeted by two vicious dogs"... a Pit Bull and an "ArmStaff cross" :laugh: gotta love the media.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/queensland/a/-/newshome/13051266/hero-police-dog-attacked/

He only has visible injuries to his leg and will be back at work in two weeks.

F11 I'd like to know how they came to the conclusion with the breeds as well?!

Maybe they asked the owner?? He was there after all.

I dunno, he didn't seem to open for discussion when the reporter shoved a mic in his face asking if his dogs were dangerous :laugh:

Yes he seemed to be gesticulating in an odd manner, perhaps it was the sign language for Arm-staff

Edited by Boronia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 9:24 AM, Boronia said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 4:54 AM, Jade~Harley~Bella said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 3:47 AM, Telida Whippets said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 3:43 AM, Jade~Harley~Bella said:

Just watching the video now... apparently they were "greeted by two vicious dogs"... a Pit Bull and an "ArmStaff cross" :laugh: gotta love the media.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/queensland/a/-/newshome/13051266/hero-police-dog-attacked/

He only has visible injuries to his leg and will be back at work in two weeks.

F11 I'd like to know how they came to the conclusion with the breeds as well?!

Maybe they asked the owner?? He was there after all.

I dunno, he didn't seem to open for discussion when the reporter shoved a mic in his face asking if his dogs were dangerous :laugh:

Yes he seemed to be gesticulating in an odd manner, perhaps it was the sign language for Arm-staff

lol if it is, I must of missed that lesson ;) haha

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 10:45 AM, Alyosha said:

Those poor model citizens... having nasty police invading their home... :rolleyes:

My dogs would tear their police dog to pieces if it came on my property as well. The police can raid your house if some anonymous person makes up a lie that you have drugs there or if they "think" they smell weed. Its pathetic and good on that guy for having dogs that protected his property. I'm not saying he wasn't dumb though but the police should think before they act, not checking for other dogs before bringing a police dog onto a property? Well the dog copped it lol

Edited by cybergenesis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 10:47 AM, cybergenesis said:

My dogs would tear their police dog to pieces if it came on my property as well.

God knows, you've given them enough practice on each other. :( A dog killing Labrador.. I'm sure your heart would just swell with pride. :rolleyes:

Seriously, get your hand off it. No one's impressed. Any idiot can own a dog aggressive dog.

  Quote

The police can raid your house if some anonymous person makes up a lie that you have drugs there or if they "think" they smell weed. Its pathetic and good on that guy for having dogs that protected his property. I'm not saying he wasn't dumb though but the police should think before they act, not checking for other dogs before bringing a police dog onto a property? Well the dog copped it lol

Oh yeah, hysterically funny. :dropjaw:

And they wonder why cops shoot dogs... Based on this kind of sentiment a 'shoot on sight' policy appears justified.

Edited by Telida Whippets
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 10:47 AM, cybergenesis said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 10:45 AM, Alyosha said:

Those poor model citizens... having nasty police invading their home... :rolleyes:

My dogs would tear their police dog to pieces if it came on my property as well. The police can raid your house if some anonymous person makes up a lie that you have drugs there or if they "think" they smell weed. Its pathetic and good on that guy for having dogs that protected his property. I'm not saying he wasn't dumb though but the police should think before they act, not checking for other dogs before bringing a police dog onto a property? Well the dog copped it lol

Maybe you could choose other ways to construct the what you mean as i get what you're saying but it doesn't come across that way... You may not like the police or why they raided the house and most people agree that the dog getting injured was tough sh@t, territorial and not newsworthy, as many dogs would've done that, including mine.

Just try saying it without making me think you're from the same kind of ilk that the police raided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 11:21 AM, Telida Whippets said:

And they wonder why cops shoot dogs... Based on this kind of sentiment a 'shoot on sight' policy appears justified.

Shoot pets?? just 'cause they attacked a police dog..???? hardly justified. Pets don't chose their owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 11:46 AM, geo said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 11:21 AM, Telida Whippets said:

And they wonder why cops shoot dogs... Based on this kind of sentiment a 'shoot on sight' policy appears justified.

Shoot pets?? just 'cause they attacked a police dog..???? hardly justified. Pets don't chose their owners.

And yet we've just had people say that any police dog that enters their premises is mincemeat. Are you saying the police shouldn't be able to use a dog as and where they deem necessary because there might be 'pets' on the premises or that they should just stand by and watch their dogs ripped up by resident dogs?

Those dogs were secure inside the house until the owner bolted out the back door and the dogs followed.

What are the police supposed to do?? Take their chances? It took OC spray and tasers to deal with those two dogs.

Edited by Telida Whippets
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 11:54 AM, Telida Whippets said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 11:46 AM, geo said:
  On 02/03/2012 at 11:21 AM, Telida Whippets said:

And they wonder why cops shoot dogs... Based on this kind of sentiment a 'shoot on sight' policy appears justified.

Shoot pets?? just 'cause they attacked a police dog..???? hardly justified. Pets don't chose their owners.

And yet we've just had people say that any police dog that enters their premises is mincemeat.

Those dogs were secure inside the house until the owner bolted out the back door and the dogs followed.

What are the police supposed to do?? Take their chances? It took OC spray and tasers to deal with those two dogs.

The way I read what he said was that ANY dog that did that (not just police dogs - like his dogs know the difference) would have the same result.

Any dog that came onto my property would face the same. Not because I have a meth lab in my garden shed and I am a criminal (I don't by the way) but because it is my dogs property and they will protect it and me from anything they see as a threat. Although I am pretty sure if it was just police, no dogs the cops would get covered in licks instead.

I'm just glad that the police agree that they were just doing their job and don't by into the media's usual verbal word vomit against "pit bull" type dogs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Quote
<br style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(238, 242, 247); ">And yet we've just had people say that any police dog that enters their premises is mincemeat. Are you saying the police shouldn't be able to use a dog as and where they deem necessary because there might be 'pets' on the premises or that they should just stand by and watch their dogs ripped up by resident dogs?

I'm not one to engage in should's and should nots, but as I say in every thread of this nature, the police are the ones wilfully endangering the welfare of these dogs, whether it be through exposure to pets and guard dogs or to the suspects themselves.

Edited by Lo Pan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 1:29 PM, Lo Pan said:
  Quote
<br style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(238, 242, 247); ">And yet we've just had people say that any police dog that enters their premises is mincemeat. Are you saying the police shouldn't be able to use a dog as and where they deem necessary because there might be 'pets' on the premises or that they should just stand by and watch their dogs ripped up by resident dogs?

I'm not one to engage in should's and should nots, but as I say in every thread of this nature, the police are the ones wilfully endangering the welfare of these dogs, whether it be through exposing them through pets and guard dogs or to the suspects themselves.

Yep. The dog is there to take the hit instead of a police officer. That's part of their role.

But if you're going to suggest that they recklessly put the dogs in harms way and don't give a toss about their welfare, that's a bridge too far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly think they do give a toss about their dogs, I'm sure most of the handlers feel great affection toward them. Not sure about the term 'reckless', I said 'wilful', which I don't think can be subject to a sensible objection.

Now is it 'reckless' to wilfully endanger an animals welfare? Not necessarily.

Edited by Lo Pan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2012 at 11:54 AM, Telida Whippets said:

And yet we've just had people say that any police dog that enters their premises is mincemeat. Are you saying the police shouldn't be able to use a dog as and where they deem necessary because there might be 'pets' on the premises or that they should just stand by and watch their dogs ripped up by resident dogs?

Those dogs were secure inside the house until the owner bolted out the back door and the dogs followed.

What are the police supposed to do?? Take their chances? It took OC spray and tasers to deal with those two dogs.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I think the other posts sum it up though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...