Man arrested for filming cops...Cops end up shooting his dog dead. - Page 4
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Man arrested for filming cops...Cops end up shooting his dog dead.

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    No crime was committed, clearly, when the two officers looked several times at the man filming with the camcorder, but arrested Mr. Rosby for filming them with a low quality flip phone. Were this in my town, the officers would be fired and run out of town, at the least.
    The difference is, the idiot who was arrested was screaming and hollering at the cops throughout the video while they were out on a call. That's called obstruction. The fact the the other people recording DIDN'T get arrested proves that that's not at all why they were detaining him. If this officers would have been run out of town over this, I wouldn't want to live in your town.

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    Quote Originally Posted by jcreek View Post
    Like BIGJOHN said, two separate events. The dog can't differentiate between a legal and illegal arrest. It would have attacked the same way had they been arresting him on a felony warrant. The owner did not properly train the dog. If your going to use an animal as a defensive weapon it needs to be trained to know when you're in physical distress. This guy was not in any immediate physical danger.
    I think itís a pretty fine legal point. I also donít think itís going to make that much difference in any settlement because a dog is property and if the police are found liable they will only have to pay the property value of the dog, the big money (again assuming a settlement in Rosbyís favor) would come from a civil rights violation
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by jcreek View Post
    The difference is, the idiot who was arrested was screaming and hollering at the cops throughout the video while they were out on a call. That's called obstruction. The fact the the other people recording DIDN'T get arrested proves that that's not at all why they were detaining him. If this officers would have been run out of town over this, I wouldn't want to live in your town.
    Or maybe we could call it freedom of speech: the right to protest the government (police are an extension of the government) without fear of reprisal.

  5. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    Or maybe we could call it freedom of speech: the right to protest the government (police are an extension of the government) without fear of reprisal.
    And what is legal about protesting an active LE operation...or interfering with an operation? That's why there are laws on the books that address obstruction. Sometimes the sheeple have to be saved from their small minded selves.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone

  6. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dad45acp View Post
    And what is legal about protesting an active LE operation...or interfering with an operation? That's why there are laws on the books that address obstruction. Sometimes the sheeple have to be saved from their small minded selves.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
    I watched the video twice, and not once did I see Mr. Rosby do anything that prevented those officers from doing their job. They reacted to a non-issue with anger and initiated a violent confrontation. The dog did not attack until the officers became violent with a compliant and peaceful Mr. Rosby. The officers are in the wrong. I see false arrest, pointing a gun at a wrongfully arrested man, assault and property damage, maybe even inciting a panic as the crowd screamed and ran in fear of the two thugs with badges.

    I have a feeling that the officers were doing something illegal and were afraid that Mr. Rosby was going to catch it on film.

  7. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dad45acp View Post
    And what is legal about protesting an active LE operation...or interfering with an operation? That's why there are laws on the books that address obstruction. Sometimes the sheeple have to be saved from their small minded selves.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
    I watched the video twice, and not once did I see Mr. Rosby do anything that prevented those officers from doing their job. They reacted to a non-issue with anger and initiated a violent confrontation. The dog did not attack until the officers became violent with a compliant and peaceful Mr. Rosby. The officers are in the wrong. I see false arrest, pointing a gun at a wrongfully arrested man, assault and property damage, maybe even inciting a panic as the crowd screamed and ran in fear of the two thugs with badges.

    I have a feeling that the officers were doing something illegal and were afraid that Mr. Rosby was going to catch it on film.
    Then why did they not even remotely bother the guy filming the video you just watched... They didn't care that he was filming. They cared that he was screaming at them. He doesn't have to be physically stopping them from doing anything. If they are out on a call, and an unrelated party shows up and starts screaming at them, then doesn't leave when he's told too, that's obstruction. I see a justified detainment, and justified use of force for self defense.

  8. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    I watched the video twice, and not once did I see Mr. Rosby do anything that prevented those officers from doing their job. They reacted to a non-issue with anger and initiated a violent confrontation. The dog did not attack until the officers became violent with a compliant and peaceful Mr. Rosby. The officers are in the wrong. I see false arrest, pointing a gun at a wrongfully arrested man, assault and property damage, maybe even inciting a panic as the crowd screamed and ran in fear of the two thugs with badges.

    I have a feeling that the officers were doing something illegal and were afraid that Mr. Rosby was going to catch it on film.
    I didn't watch the same video as you then. No one I saw got violent. Just the dog. They were snappy putting the cuffs on the subject since he picked a bad day and a bad time to be a wangdong. Furthermore it is pretty bold to assume that filming was done under the presumption that the cops are doing something illegal when we have NO IDEA what kind of operation they were carrying out other than it was a high risk one since they entered the premises in a tactical formation. The guy was probably pissed that he'll have to buy crack another block down.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone

  9. Quote Originally Posted by muccione View Post
    First I like dogs, I have owned several Rotties, The detainment might be illegal. The cop had every legal right to shoot the dog. If I was him I also would have shot him, No way am I going to get bit. The owner should have secured the dog better. BTW... I also hate cops... I agree that Cops are becoming the criminals these days. but personal protection is just that, from ANY type of harm, person or animal, The dog was jumping and biting at him.
    So it's not ok to break into someone's house at night but it is ok to kill their dog it if tries to protect its home or owners?

  10. Quote Originally Posted by AndeyHall View Post
    So it's not ok to break into someone's house at night but it is ok to kill their dog it if tries to protect its home or owners?
    Are you serious? How is this ANYTHING like your statement. Someone breaks into my house and kills me its MURDER, Someone breaks into my house and I kill them its SELF DEFENSE. Please THINK before you post things, Your lame statement is about PRIVATE PROPERTY, The dog was killed on CITY PROPERTY. Again....THINK first

  11. Quote Originally Posted by muccione View Post
    Are you serious? How is this ANYTHING like your statement. Someone breaks into my house and kills me its MURDER, Someone breaks into my house and I kill them its SELF DEFENSE. Please THINK before you post things, Your lame statement is about PRIVATE PROPERTY, The dog was killed on CITY PROPERTY. Again....THINK first
    No, your statement was "personal protection is just that, from ANY type of harm". You were saying the police officer was ok in killing the dog even though the reason in which the dog attacked him was his fault to begin with. It's the same exact thing as my scenario. Both the officer and home invader are doing something way out of line and illegal, and yet when the dog tries to protect its family or home, it's ok to kill it because that's "personal protection". The fact that they were on city property had nothing to do with it. The dog attacked the officer for a reason, not just because he was a random guy on city property.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast