Man Arrested Trying to Save His Dog

Off Topic
61

[quote]Bootsie wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
Bootsie wrote:
I have to defend these cops. The thing they did wrong was not put the owner in handcuffs and in the back of his car from the get go. If you have to push someone back because they wont listen to you, thats enough right there to detain him.

It should have never come to that guy making a dash for the lake and the cops tackling him. Second, if the cops let that guy in the water, and he so much as caught a cold, he could and probably would sue the department and win. As a cop, I am not going to risk my life or my career for a dog.

ive owned dogs, and i loved them, but i still would rather be the one living at the end of the day. This situation was jacked up from the begining, and is one of the situations where calling the cops made it worse. at the end of the day, the dog is still alive and the DA is probably not going to file charges on the guy.

I totally agree with everything (except the bolded part.) Cops were in a tough situationthere , but they weren’t helping themselves either. And bottom line, the dog got saved. The guy’ll pay a fine - failure to obey, or disorderly - and that’s probably it

I know people who feel the same way about their dogs as you do. While I may not neccesarily agree, I can see where they are coming from and respect it. However, whether people agree with it or not, society and the law looks at a dogs life as less valuable then a humans. Courts have stated that if a person is pointing a gun at a dog, as a cop we can not use deadly force to protect the dogs life.

However, if a person is pointing a gun at another person, then we can use deadly force. People may not agree with that, i know some of my friends dont, but its still the law. How it relates to this video, the guy should have realized he values his life as much as his dogs, and never called the police. Or, call the police, and while they are enroute, jump in and try to save the dog.

when the police arrive and see a person in the freezing water, I guarentee they wouldnt have just been standing around (unless it was that fat lady, then they might have just stood around). [/quote]

Oh I get it, I’m just saying I disagree witht eh law and find it morally indefensible. Wouldn’t be the first law like that tho… (I mean neither the first I’ve disagreed with, nor the first to be morally indefensible)

62

[quote]matsm21 wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:

Yes, I treat my dog as I would treat my child. Is there a problem with that?

yes. your values are fucked up. If a dog and your baby are both facing imminent danger and you can only save one, who do you save? It’s amazing the convoluted philosophical arguments some of these college students make.

And if they are not students, they have no excuse, because they are already in the real world and just don’t get it.

[/quote]

Not to speak for him, but he’d probably save his kid because there’s an actual BLOOD relation there - the same as if his kid and his friend were both in icy water he’d save his kid first - is that a “fucked up” value system?

Now put his dog and a total stranger in the water and he saves his dog. What is inconsistent about this?

63

you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

64

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

They have no right to keep me alive if I choose not to live. Ever heard of a DNR order?

You have a right to be an idiot and risk your life. Much more so in order to save a valued, irreplaceable friend.[/quote]

Well, yes they do. If someone wants to commit suicide the police(and other agencies as well) have an obligation to step in and prevent it if notified. In the case of the dog, the reasoning is more a product of our litigious society and the fact that the white trash family in the video would sue the local municipality if the dumbass died.

In the world you imagine in your head where everyone does their own thing and never affects anybody else, it’s fine for the police to let you jump in the water. That’s not the world we live in though. They don’t do what they do because they want to tell people what to do. There are reasons.

65

[quote]matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?[/quote]

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?

66

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?[/quote]

Wouldn’t even think twice about it.

67

I will say that it’s pretty amusing that no matter which side of this debate you stand, everyone seems to agree that this family is white trash :slight_smile:

68

[quote]matsm21 wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:

They have no right to keep me alive if I choose not to live. Ever heard of a DNR order?

You have a right to be an idiot and risk your life. Much more so in order to save a valued, irreplaceable friend.

Well, yes they do. If someone wants to commit suicide the police(and other agencies as well) have an obligation to step in and prevent it if notified. In the case of the dog, the reasoning is more a product of our litigious society and the fact that the white trash family in the video would sue the local municipality if the dumbass died.

In the world you imagine in your head where everyone does their own thing and never affects anybody else, it’s fine for the police to let you jump in the water. That’s not the world we live in though. They don’t do what they do because they want to tell people what to do. There are reasons.

[/quote]

And I would disagree as much with them suing the cops if he died. “To avoid a lawsuit” isn’t legal authorization for actions though. Besides, if the dog had died, you think they wouldn’t have sued?

It’s a sad world if police are having to start basing policies on suing avoidance rather than the law.

Some do some don’t, depends on the cop. Unfortunately I think the people that get into it for the right reasons are in the minority. However, my experience isn’t conclusive evidence.

If we are going to make it a crime to do something stupid, we are going to have serious over crowding problems in jails.

69

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
I will say that it’s pretty amusing that no matter which side of this debate you stand, everyone seems to agree that this family is white trash :-)[/quote]

Thats a good point, the dog may have been worth more than his kids.

I think that statement makes me a bad person.

70

[quote]Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?

Wouldn’t even think twice about it.[/quote]

Remarkably cold-hearted. With friends like you, who needs enemies, huh?

71

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?

Wouldn’t even think twice about it.

Remarkably cold-hearted. [/quote]

See, I think the same thing about anyone who would choose an animal over a human. I guess there are PETA freaks who would probably agree with you.

I suppose you would have no problem with me saving a cat instead of your child (or brother, sister, best friend, etc.)?

I honestly can’t even figure out how someone could even consider this to be a choice.

72

It’s not just the police, but every government agency that makes policies based on the consequences of things. It’s more society then an individual agency. I think we’re getting into college kid philosophy now though.

Oh, and it’s not “to avoid a lawsuit” It’s to avoid someone creating a dangerous situation not only for themselves, but for anyone attempting to rescue them. It would not be prudent to let that guy jump in the water. He didn’t get locked up for that one action either. It was other actions that caused him to be arrested

73

You’re using a straw man argument and putting words in my mouth to change the argument to suit what you believe. First off, I dont have a child, so my dog IS my baby. I’ve raised him since he was a puppy. It’s not an arguement of MY KID and SOME dog. It’s my dog, or someone standing in front of me telling me I can’t go to him. Yes, I’d risk my life for my animal. He would, and has, done the same for me.

When I was out on my own growing up, he was the only one that stood by me, unconditionally. You didn’t, no other human did. I somehow doubt that if I was on the street and you saw me, you’d do shit to help me. My dog was the only thing I could rely on through some very dark points in my life. As such, I’d do my best to return the favor, whether or not the person in front of me had a gun or not.

Put you and my dog in the water, same time to live, yea, I’d do my best to try to save you, even risking my own life to pull you free. AFTER my dog was out of the water.

74

[quote]threewhitelights wrote:

matsm21 wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:

Yes, I treat my dog as I would treat my child. Is there a problem with that?

yes. your values are fucked up. If a dog and your baby are both facing imminent danger and you can only save one, who do you save? It’s amazing the convoluted philosophical arguments some of these college students make.

And if they are not students, they have no excuse, because they are already in the real world and just don’t get it.

You’re using a straw man argument and putting words in my mouth to change the argument to suit what you believe. First off, I dont have a child, so my dog IS my baby. I’ve raised him since he was a puppy. It’s not an arguement of MY KID and SOME dog. It’s my dog, or someone standing in front of me telling me I can’t go to him. Yes, I’d risk my life for my animal. He would, and has, done the same for me.

When I was out on my own growing up, he was the only one that stood by me, unconditionally. You didn’t, no other human did. I somehow doubt that if I was on the street and you saw me, you’d do shit to help me. My dog was the only thing I could rely on through some very dark points in my life. As such, I’d do my best to return the favor, whether or not the person in front of me had a gun or not.

Put you and my dog in the water, same time to live, yea, I’d do my best to try to save you, even risking my own life to pull you free. AFTER my dog was out of the water.

[/quote]

I’m with you on this. I was out on my own fresh out of college over 400 miles away from any friends or family when I found my dog under a truck at work. He loves me unconditionally, saved me from a lot of drinking, and really was my best friend. Screw the people that think it’s not right to reciprocate that kind of love.

Maybe the people that have kids have something better than that kind of friendship, but that doesn’t make it less valuable to those of us that don’t.

Then again, I wouldn’t have waited till the cops showed up to try to do something.

75

Bud, that’s fine, go save your dog. Just don’t call the police, and then get angry when they attempt to do it the safest way possible THEN engage them in an altercation and run like a lunatic into the water.

76

[quote]matsm21 wrote:
Bud, that’s fine, go save your dog. Just don’t call the police, and then get angry when they attempt to do it the safest way possible THEN engage them in an altercation and run like a lunatic into the water.[/quote]

No one is saying that what the guy did was smart. We’re just saying the cops weren’t very smart either.

77

[quote]matsm21 wrote:
Bud, that’s fine, go save your dog. Just don’t call the police, and then get angry when they attempt to do it the safest way possible THEN engage them in an altercation and run like a lunatic into the water.[/quote]

First, I agree, the guy is a dumbass, but the cops weren’t much better.

Second, the cops weren’t attempting anything, they were waiting.

Third, the safest for whom? Not the dog. Not the rescue guys (they were already going to be going out on the ice for the dog). The guy is the one really taking all the risk and that’s his prerogative, plus the rescue guys were already on the way so I don’t think the chances of him seriously getting hurt were all that high.

78

what should they have done? They called the ice rescue team. Maybe they could have talked him down better?? I don’t know about locking him up, then again we cannot really see what happened in the struggle down by the water.

79

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
Bud, that’s fine, go save your dog. Just don’t call the police, and then get angry when they attempt to do it the safest way possible THEN engage them in an altercation and run like a lunatic into the water.

First, I agree, the guy is a dumbass, but the cops weren’t much better.

Second, the cops weren’t attempting anything, they were waiting.

Third, the safest for whom? Not the dog. Not the rescue guys (they were already going to be going out on the ice for the dog). The guy is the one really taking all the risk and that’s his prerogative, plus the rescue guys were already on the way so I don’t think the chances of him seriously getting hurt were all that high.[/quote]

The police made notifications to do it the safest way possible.

Ice rescue is dangerous. It’s not like they are out there for the dog and will just swing by the guy, grab him and head in.

So I guess the question is, if you were the police, would you let that guy run into the water at that point in time?

80

First, I agree, the guy is a dumbass, but the cops weren’t much better.

Second, the cops weren’t attempting anything, they were waiting.

Third, the safest for whom? Not the dog. Not the rescue guys (they were already going to be going out on the ice for the dog). The guy is the one really taking all the risk and that’s his prerogative, plus the rescue guys were already on the way so I don’t think the chances of him seriously getting hurt were all that high.[/quote]

Your first point is right on, your second point is correct as well.

But like I stated in my other post there are people trained with the right equipment to go into freezing water to conduct a rescue. For this type of situation police are sent to be used as crowd control, witness interview and for points of reference. This way we can get several points of reference so we know where to go in the water.

And for those that are asking why didn’t they reach with a stick or branch, I haven’t seen to many dogs trying to keep their heads above water grab a stick.