SSCC #346–Decatur

Decatur’s police chief said allegations of wrongdoing against two officers who fired as many as 13 shots during the Jan. 1 shooting and killing of a dog at Danville Park Apartments were “not sustained,” but the officers violated department policy by not activating their microphones.

So what, they couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn, is that really surprising for law enforcement?  No, but this isn’t acceptable, especially given the fear was over a dog.

Some residents of the apartment complex complained that the shooting, which sent at least one bullet through an apartment door, was unnecessary and put residents in danger.

“I think this is appalling, seeing what I saw firsthand as a direct witness,” said Patti Meadows, who said she called police Internal Affairs to complain following the incident. “They put others’ lives in danger. This was not an environment to pull guns out.”

Meadows said she was standing near the officers on an upstairs walkway when they opened fire. The boxer dog wasn’t being aggressive, she said.

Another witness, Hailey Brown, told The Daily she offered to put the dog back inside the apartment after officers opened the door and let it out.

Some time’s you have to quote a chunk to illustrate the whole problem.  Note the officers opened the door that let the dog out.  The owner offered to take the dog and lock it up, instead they fire 13 shots into an apartment complex with innocent bystanders  around.  While in a good shoot, officers are often protected from the danger of a shoot through, this would be a hard justification.  This story from Uncle today shows what should happen before officers discharge their weapons.

The deputy, a 23-year veteran of the department and 5-year police dog handler, took Gunner to the vet to explore “options available to curb his aggression,” police said. But while the deputy and the veterinarian were trying to attach a leash to the dog, Gunner leaped in a biting lunge toward the deputy’s face, and he blocked the dog with his forearm, the release said.

That was an aggressive dog that needed killing.  A dog looking at you does not equal aggression, though many officers seem to feel that is the case.  Unless it is obviously trying to bite you, suck it up there chief.  Even more than that, let the barn latch on your arm so it won’t take 13 bullets to hit it in a friendly rich environment.

I will say they at least scored a 38% hit rate, however that makes me believe the dog wasn’t as mobile or aggressive as they claim.  However this right here was the icing on the cake:

Taylor said he consulted District Attorney Scott Anderson, but they were both of the opinion that shooting into a residence was not a crime if there was no criminal intent.

Wonder if they would say the same thing if it wasn’t officer friendly shooting through a dog, but instead a non-anointed citizen shooting through Cujo.  We constantly hear about how we’re accountable for every bullet, and I’ve had conversations with friends whom I respect quite well and the above actually appears that it would hold true.  However they would put it to a jury to decide, doubly if you were dealing with a local choir boy where you passed the initial interview.

State Sponsored Criminal #346: John Doe

Because when you’re bummed you’re on duty on New Years, shoot someone’s dog to liven it up.  Leave your mics off then it’s your word against everyone else’s, don’t worry about safety though because there’s no criminal intent right!?

h/t The Agitator

TMM

TMM is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.

Many know his private name and information however due to the current political climate, many are distancing themselves due to the abandonment of Due Process.