Lagrange Missouri Police. What do ya'll think about these 2?

the dog seemed like it was calming down when the assbag shot it. i bet he felt proud about shooting a dog that was standing completely still while having a cord warped tightly around his neck that was attached to a pole

 

Again we do not know what happened before the camera. That being said here is my take.

I think this is a training issue. It appears the dog was running with a broken chain and the officer parked the truck tire on it to stop the dog. (Good Move) The backup officer has a taser drawn most of the time (Good Move). The Primary officer gets the loop on the dog and gets it cinched down, the problem is you can't hold onto the end of the catch pole, as due to leverage the dog (especially a Pit Bull) will be able to out muscle you. You have to move down the pole to control the dog. I don't see where the officers had a cage to place the dog, or what they were going to do with the dog once it was on othe catch pole, but who knows. I don't believe the officers were setting out to harm the dog, but once it was on the end of the pole they could not control it, and could not let it go, so the decision was made to put the dog down. Could it have been avoided with some better training and planning...maybe. The officers are not high-fiving or laughing, they quickly cover the dog with a sheet. The officer is visibly upset at the end, and it is a shame he felt his only option was to shoot the dog. I don't think the officers should lose their jobs, nor face criminal charges as there is no evidence of ill intent. Again maybe some more training would have helped the situation.

Just my $.02

 

When he was sitting there with that taser out, and the dog was running around freely, at least that's what it looked like to me, my thought was, why the hell do you have a taser out? If that dog decides that its coming for you, do you trust your taser to save you? Not me. Small moving target, two prongs spreading apart as they approach small moving target, both have to hit to have any success. Not a taser day imho. Everyone has there own boundaries but I'm not getting my a$$ chewed off for no dog.
We don't have those poles to catch a dog, and probably a good idea. I work in a city of well over 200,000 and we don't even have them on 24/7, but I would imagine that a township, or a place with a few thousand people would most likely not have an Animal Control.

 

http://www.hannibal.net/news/x1600620381/LaGrange-dog-owner-vows-to-fight-for-law-changes

 

I understand what you are saying but its not difficult to control a dog laying down wagging its tail(The dog was lying down because she was shot once in the chest, I hadn't know this when I made the original post). When you respond to a dog call you have what you need to handle the situation. They had a catch pole, so they knew what was up. If they didn't intend harm then what were they going to do with any dog on the end of a catch pole I have never met one that particularly liked being on them.
I have a post above with more details from the officers superior.

Every time I have encountered a vicious dog it was on the attack and never like that. That dog was submissive. I have put down vicious dogs before but there was no doubt an any anyones mind, and it wouldn't have taken but 1 minute on a video. All I am saying is a vicious dog is just that vicious.

 

Thank you for that I hadn't run across that one.
Here it is.
LaGrange dog owner vows to fight for law changes


Photos



CONTRIBUTED

LaGrange Police Officer Doug Howell struggles with a dog moments before he shot the animal on March 31 in this scene from a camera inside a police car.

By BRENT ENGEL





Hannibal Courier-Post
Posted Jun 17, 2010 @ 02:46 PM
LaGrange, MO —
A LaGrange man who drew national attention after video showing police killing one of his dogs surfaced on the Internet vowed Thursday to seek changes in the law.
Judge Fred Westhoff fined Marcus Mays $50 for failure to register a dog with the city and $100 for failure to have a leash or muzzle on a vicious animal. Mays also must pay court costs of $29.
“We can’t have dogs taking after young children or even adults,” Westhoff said. “It’s just not safe.”
Mays requested the bench trial and represented himself. Afterward, he said he will ask the city to revise its animal ordinances.
“I think if I get enough people together and raise a big enough complaint, maybe they’ll change it,” Mays said.
City Attorney Jeff Curl said he had hoped for a stiffer fine because it would have “sent a message” to dog owners to “follow the ordinance.”
Mays described the animal as an American bulldog, but authorities termed it a pit bull.
The dog, named Cammie, was shot to death on March 31 by Officer Doug Howell.
Video from part of the incident later was posted on YouTube, but it shows fewer than 10 minutes of the 68 minutes that Howell and Officer Jason Powell were on the scene.
The video which was not shown at Thursday’s hearing, was from a police car camera. Mays said a friend of his put it on the Internet.
The officers were responding to a call from LaGrange resident Mary Coleman that the dog had acted threateningly toward her and her daughter as they walked to a school bus stop.
“It was growling at my six-year-old,” Coleman testified. “I wanted my kid to be safe and myself to be safe.”
Mays pointed out that the dog could not have been too angry because Coleman chained it at her home while Howell and Powell went to get special equipment used in handling animals.
The video shows that at one point, the dog laid down on the street and remained motionless for a time.
Howell testified that the dog growled as he tried to load it into a truck, that it later broke free from a chain tied to the vehicle and eventually charged as he tried to capture it with a six-foot catchpole.
Powell described the dog as “aggressive” and “vicious.” Both officers had electroshock weapons, but did not use them because they said the effectiveness would have lasted only five second.
Howell said that he felt the only option to protect the safety of neighbors was to shoot the dog.
Howell fired one shot to the chest, which felled the animal. On the video, the dog can then be seen wagging its tail. Howell said he fired a shot to the head “because I didn’t want the dog to suffer.”
“I didn’t feel it was right how they handled that,” Mays said.
A neighbor of Mays, Frances Hamilton, testified that the animal had previously chased her husband.
Curl pointed out that Mays had pleaded guilty to animal abuse in 2007 and had been ordered not to own pets for two years. Mays argued that the circumstances did not warrant the punishment and that he had pleaded guilty only to avoid a court fight.
Cammie was just a pup when Mays got the female 18 months ago. He said the dog had never been aggressive.
Mays said he has four other dogs – three pit bulls and a mastiff. He said he did not register Cammie because doing so “slipped my mind.” The other four are registered, he said.
Howell and Powell have not been disciplined. Police Chief Dale McNelly said his department is working with the Humane Society of Missouri on additional training in dealing with unruly dogs. The city already has budgeted money for a new animal shelter.
City code defines vicious canines as “any dog(s) that has the appearance and characteristics of being predominantly aggressive” and any “dog(s) not in law enforcement service that has bitten a human being previously or attached another human being previously, whether such occurred within or without” the LaGrange city limits.
Even if his campaign to change the law in unsuccessful, Mays said the fight will be worth it.
“I don’t feel (Cammie) was vicious,” he said. “I feel I stood up for her.”

By no means am I standing up for the owners poor care of his dog just that this dog does not seem vicious to me.
The officer says the dog lunged at him while he was trying to capture it, I call that defense. Also the woman caught and chained this dog at her home while she was afraid? I just don't see that.
Oh and an animal must be deemed dangerious or vicious by a court not an officer on the scene. Not only that but the officers went to get the proper equipment......yet only thought of how to trap it and not contain it? They certainly need more training.
At the end of the day this falls on the owners head for not containing his dog!

Oh and I also hate the fact that the police decided the animal was a "pit bull" which isn't a breed over the owners knowledge of it being an American bulldog. Calling a dog a pit bull is like saying it was a hunting dog.

 

I've had to have a dog put down because of psychosis. It would violently attack any living thing near her out of the blue, and after a few minutes was back to normal. After a few trips to the hospital she had to be put down.

I'm not saying this was the case here, but a dog doesn't always have to be acting violently in that situation to be vicious.

 

Your right but you dog wasn't vicious it was ill. If this dog was ill call it that or say it was acting odd. However in a high stress situation where the dogs is cornered then I can't say that lunging or barking is grounds for it being vicious.

 

its been said before, but its really hard to tell based on the limited video with no audio. however, i cant help but feel that that cop is in the wrong and if that is indeed the case he should find himself jobless in the morning. now if that dog just finished mauling a child or has rabies, then i take back my statement. but based on what i see that was just wrong. really fucking wrong.

 

The dog had a leash on it just grab it. I have been on several calls where cops have said there is a vicious pit bull and when we arrived on scene the dog is sitting on the porch minding its own. We walk by to go inside and put the dog in a bed room so that we can go about our patient care. Some people just don't know how to deal with animals I guess. But I agree having a trained animal control unit available is very nice which we have we are just normally on scene before them.

 

Obviously, the owner should not be allowed to own any pets. Been in trouble for animal cruelty in the past, and fails to control his animal and lets it run free. Apparently he likes breeds that have the propensity to be trained to be aggressive, which would lead me to believe he may have a thing for aggressive dogs. If you are going to own an aggressive animal, keep it on your own property. That way it only attacks your own kids.

I think they should have shot the owner.

 

Like the 2 post above this one. nice.

 

Wait, did he shoot it twice??

 

that is f ---up man......
that cop should taKE a bullet....
the dog looked calm and on a leash already.....

 

he shot it in the chest and it went down. then it continued to move and wag its tail so he shot it in the head to put it out of his misery

 

In other words, the poor dog was suffering miserable.

 

Yeah after being shot the first time she probably was.

 

They handled the situation with ignorance to animal control but the simple fact is, no humans were hurt. Rookie cops but it's better than shooting a person and killing them. I'm a dog lover but dogs are not people. They are animals, period.

EDIT: Now this is a local person who I believe should be punished for her actions. She left her 2 year old German Shepherd locked in a dog crate and moved away, just let it starve to death.

http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/13362/FL/US/

Police added that there was a bag of dry dog food just a few feet from the dog's locked crate.

 

why didnt he just shoot it in the head the first time?