FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Police use car to kill agressive dog

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety....

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Shame they dont do it with the 2 legged dogs on the street

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *olgateMan
over a year ago

on the road to nowhere in particular

If it was genuinely dangerous yes.

The police tend to overreact in situations like this

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm not sure, on one hand it was on a major road that could have caused an accident. On the other hand the poor thing was probably scared.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!! "

Its the muppets fault not the dogs.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!! "

I think it was a spaniel of some kind

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It was a foxhound

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Shame they dont do it with the 2 legged dogs on the street"
ooooooh

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!!

Its the muppets fault not the dogs. "

Agreed ....but an out of control dog is still a potential killing machine

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What do you think?

Swear I've never seen someone sit on fence so much- always hedging.

Be brave - have an opinion

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oodmessMan
over a year ago

yumsville

they stop motorways if swans are on them ... just arehole management.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!!

Its the muppets fault not the dogs.

Agreed ....but an out of control dog is still a potential killing machine "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If they had knowingly left it and the HGV or car that narrowly avoided it had actually crashed, would that not have been worse?

Not an easy decision I'm sure but they had to make a decision pretty quickly, the press statement was keen to state they were both dog owners (police officers in the car) too.

I think best decision to potentially save lives, and also curious who owned the dog, nobody is coming forward anyway.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No. They could have tasered it and then got it in a van. It was probably just scared and that's why it was acting aggressive. I adore the police but to do that us inhumane. Lost respect now.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *izzy.Woman
over a year ago

Stoke area

I think the road would be pretty quiet at 3 am! !!! Call a countryside vet to have it shot would have been more humane. Get a dog warden. Close the road. Park a police car with hazards on to warn people.

Run it down with a police car at speed ......... sounds more like joy riders than the actions of a professional police force to me.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... "
don't they have tranquiliser guns for this sort of things ,if the dog was dangerous to humans it should be subdued and assessed by a vet ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... don't they have tranquiliser guns for this sort of things ,if the dog was dangerous to humans it should be subdued and assessed by a vet ? "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It wasn't dangerous to people per say, it was running around panicked, and all attempts to catch it had been fruitless.

Vehicles were swerving and braking and an accident was inevitable. They don't carry dart guns and it's not practical to taser the thing. Sadly this was necessary to prevent a serious or potentially lethal accident.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unfortunately a difficult decision had to be made , fairly quickly by the looks of it .....

What if it had caused an accident or a major pile up

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This was at 3am in the morning! Why not close the road and call someone who knew what they were doing? The dog bit an officer but was almost certainly terrified and any dog will bite in that situation, this doesn't mean the dog was a danger to the public. Given that they purposely ran the dog over, I hate to think what their initial approach to catching the dog was. Very sad and unnecessary.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If it was a cow or a horse or even a d*unk human running around the dual carriageway I think they would have handled it a little differently.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

With any luck they'll extend this policy to running over criminals as well .....save us taxpayers a bit of money !!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned."

I would never have said that.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned.

I would never have said that."

Ok then. "Some" people.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it."
yes but let's face it who wouldn't like to bite an officer !!!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned."

Agreed, can you imagine the outrage if a family was injured or killed!

People would be up in arms asking why they didn't kill the dog

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aneandpaulCouple
over a year ago

cleveleys

If the dog was a danger what,s the problem

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Big dog and animal lover here but human life is more important than animal life,a sense of perspective is paramount in certain situations.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned.

Agreed, can you imagine the outrage if a family was injured or killed!

People would be up in arms asking why they didn't kill the dog "

My point is there must have been alternatives to killing the dog which still would have prevented loss of human life.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" It wasn't dangerous to people per say, it was running around panicked, and all attempts to catch it had been fruitless.

Vehicles were swerving and braking and an accident was inevitable. They don't carry dart guns and it's not practical to taser the thing. Sadly this was necessary to prevent a serious or potentially lethal accident. "
why wasn't it practical to taser it yet it was practical to kill it!!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned.

Agreed, can you imagine the outrage if a family was injured or killed!

People would be up in arms asking why they didn't kill the dog

My point is there must have been alternatives to killing the dog which still would have prevented loss of human life."

Who knows. None of us were faced with the situation and in the position of having make an on the spot decision. I agree that the police should be made accountable for their actions at all times and was just pointing out a possible alternative view of the situation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" It wasn't dangerous to people per say, it was running around panicked, and all attempts to catch it had been fruitless.

Vehicles were swerving and braking and an accident was inevitable. They don't carry dart guns and it's not practical to taser the thing. Sadly this was necessary to prevent a serious or potentially lethal accident. "

Suggestions of tasers and tranquilisers are a bit naive, they don't have that stuff on them at all times, what should they have done, wait for a specialist dog unit, in the middle of the night?

It's a sad case, but in my book risk to human life always supersedes risk to animal life.

Incidentally, the dog's owner has contacted the police to say they support the decision.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aneandpaulCouple
over a year ago

cleveleys

Will the owner come forward and say why is dog is running wild like a lot of dog owner,s just let there dogs out for a shit to lazy to pick it up

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" It wasn't dangerous to people per say, it was running around panicked, and all attempts to catch it had been fruitless.

Vehicles were swerving and braking and an accident was inevitable. They don't carry dart guns and it's not practical to taser the thing. Sadly this was necessary to prevent a serious or potentially lethal accident. why wasn't it practical to taser it yet it was practical to kill it!!!"

Because hitting a small moving target with a car is easier than hitting a small moving target with a taser, perhaps?! What do you think they're going to do, hang out of the car window while driving at speed and taser a dog that's frantically running around? Howay.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester

I believe it's a sad situation as a dog lover that the dog had to die but that said I also imagine that until you are the person in that situation making that decision then it's hard to judge, I have driven that stretch of road many a time late at night and it's so dimly lit, the dog was a foxhound suspected to be from a breeder and can be said to be unpredictable, also a car and a hgv had swerved to avoid the dog, to call out a vet or other to shoot the dog would have taken time and I imagine they need to make a quick decision, I also imagine to set up a road block on such a fast flowing, dimly lit stretch of road may have been a disaster in itself, so well yes it's terribly sad and somewhat Inhumane and they maybe didn't make the right decision in hindsight but in the moment of panic perhaps they did, just my opinion though Mrs cmy

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely. "
obviously they had been close enough to the dog if it bit one of them.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely. "

It was domesticated, dogs are a domesticated species. Just being picky But agreed that the poor dog would have been terrified. I've worked with rescue dogs my whole life and there are plenty of hands off ways to catch a frightened dog.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rnortholtMan
over a year ago

Waveney Valley

Now if it was Hampshire they would have got a marksman from the local zoo, called in the police helicopter, blown it over with the downdraft and then realised it was a stuffed toy lion - I kid you not!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely. obviously they had been close enough to the dog if it bit one of them."

So that tells us they probably tried a humane approach first and got bit for their efforts?

Do all Police officers carry Tazers? Nope.

Should

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The owner supports the decision I would imagine because foxhounds are routinely killed if not up to the job. They're not considered as pets. If this was someone's family pet I doubt they'd be so supportive.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they'd left the dog and a fatal accident had occured people would be saying "why didn't they just run it over?"

A bit of a no win situation for the officers concerned.

Agreed, can you imagine the outrage if a family was injured or killed!

People would be up in arms asking why they didn't kill the dog

My point is there must have been alternatives to killing the dog which still would have prevented loss of human life."

What alternatives could they have come up with for a dog running in and out of traffic on an unlit carriage way with vehicles travelling at 70mph

The Police had to act and act fast. As a massive dog lover, the dogs outcome was sad but I'd rather read about one dead dog than one human life!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If they got bitten they must have gone to grab the dog. So must have been close enough to use a catchpole. No risk of getting bitten.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely.

It was domesticated, dogs are a domesticated species. Just being picky But agreed that the poor dog would have been terrified. I've worked with rescue dogs my whole life and there are plenty of hands off ways to catch a frightened dog."

Hands off in a fast traffic situation without causing harm to other road users be interesting to know how you would go about it?

Remember the resourcing issues the police have on a remote stretch of road in Wales?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"Just chuckling at the thought of some poor traffic copper weaving through traffic trying to shoot a nimble dog with a Tazer and his colleague with a dart gun???!?!!

What's the effective range for a Tazer? Plus getting two prongs into a dog to make a circuit would be a little tricky. (They did Taze a sheep though)

It was an escaped foxhound terrified from being away from its pack. It's not domesticated so could hardly be caught safely and had bitten an office already.

Guessing the last resort was taken to allow people driving along the road to go home to their families safely.

It was domesticated, dogs are a domesticated species. Just being picky But agreed that the poor dog would have been terrified. I've worked with rescue dogs my whole life and there are plenty of hands off ways to catch a frightened dog."

My point is that there wasn't somebody like you there and they were in the position of having to make a decision there and then. It's one thing to say what we would have done at nine thirty on a Thursday morning from our armchairs quite another in the middle of the night on a dark motorway.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"If they got bitten they must have gone to grab the dog. So must have been close enough to use a catchpole. No risk of getting bitten."

But they aren't routinely carried in police cars

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *aneandpaulCouple
over a year ago

cleveleys

Just seen a police car drive past with a catch pole hung out the window in case a dog is running in and out the road as if

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just seen a police car drive past with a catch pole hung out the window in case a dog is running in and out the road as if "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!!

Its the muppets fault not the dogs.

Agreed ....but an out of control dog is still a potential killing machine "

agreed but i think the owner should now be prosecuted

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Like to see you try an run down a cow or horse lol

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they got bitten they must have gone to grab the dog. So must have been close enough to use a catchpole. No risk of getting bitten."

since when did police carry catch poles?

and by the time the RSPCA turned up half the estate would have been bitten

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... "

Before hysteria strikes, if it hasn't already, the thread title is wrong.

The dog WASN'T aggressive

It, like any livestock, was loose on a main dual carriageway, running towards a section of tunnels that cut through the coastal headlands.

After attempts were made to "corale" the foxhound, which priced futile, and assessment of shooting the dog, it was decided that the safest method was to kill it by hitting it with the police car.

It was not an easy decision to make.

If the dog had managed to evade capture any further and entered the tunnels then the consequences could have been tragic.

Indeed, the hunts master, of the pack that the dog had escaped from, said that this was the best cause of action.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !"

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/23/traffic-police-deliberately-run-down-and-kill-dog-loose-on-motorway

Google is good for finding things like this

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I wish you could post Meme's on these forums.

Would probably get a ban though with the one I have in mind

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

What is a meme?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"What is a meme?"

Googled....yeah probably best not to

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/23/traffic-police-deliberately-run-down-and-kill-dog-loose-on-motorway

Google is good for finding things like this "

after reading that no i dont think they did the right thing

is everybodys life so hectic they couldn't have just stopped the tradfic while the dog, who it seems was no danger to anybody was cought

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What is a meme?

Googled....yeah probably best not to "

(Some are very funny though)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *olgateMan
over a year ago

on the road to nowhere in particular

Dogs get ran over all the time, it was a foxhound, hardly a giant. The North Wales police have traditionally had some bizarre methods when dealing with traffic matters. Who remembers Richard Brunstrom who constantly targeted motorists and refused to investigate burglaries

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/23/traffic-police-deliberately-run-down-and-kill-dog-loose-on-motorway

Google is good for finding things like this

after reading that no i dont think they did the right thing

is everybodys life so hectic they couldn't have just stopped the tradfic while the dog, who it seems was no danger to anybody was cought "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/23/traffic-police-deliberately-run-down-and-kill-dog-loose-on-motorway

Google is good for finding things like this

after reading that no i dont think they did the right thing

is everybodys life so hectic they couldn't have just stopped the tradfic while the dog, who it seems was no danger to anybody was cought "
. Just stopped the traffic really because it's that easy, even the most qualified of traffic officers struggle to stop the traffic, this is a fast moving, dimly lit stretch, there are strict rules and guidelines about setting up rolling roadblocks and stopping traffic, public and personal safety is paramount, as I said earlier in my post maybe they did the right thing, maybe they didn't, but until your the one in that position making that decision then well then it's really harsh to judge

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No. Should have dispatched the owner instead

Where is the source on this please?

Just read two distressing stories on the Forums, one of the reasons I avoid faceache! !

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/23/traffic-police-deliberately-run-down-and-kill-dog-loose-on-motorway

Google is good for finding things like this

after reading that no i dont think they did the right thing

is everybodys life so hectic they couldn't have just stopped the tradfic while the dog, who it seems was no danger to anybody was cought . Just stopped the traffic really because it's that easy, even the most qualified of traffic officers struggle to stop the traffic, this is a fast moving, dimly lit stretch, there are strict rules and guidelines about setting up rolling roadblocks and stopping traffic, public and personal safety is paramount, as I said earlier in my post maybe they did the right thing, maybe they didn't, but until your the one in that position making that decision then well then it's really harsh to judge "

Also the policing level is reduced at night; the main police trafic base is at St Asaph, some twenty plus miles away ; and if it's the exact location I'm thinking of, there's a very large central reservation with scrub which would make it even more difficult to do the dog going from one carriageway to the next

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm a dog owner and lover.

Of course they were right, a dog is loose running around on a major dual carriageway, it's an accident waiting to happen, there'd already tried capturing it and one officer had apparently been bitten, they couldn't shoot it because of safety of the location at that point the only alternative was to run it over!.

At the end of the day

It's a dog that's causing a potential big problem

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh

Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *arkstaffsMan
over a year ago

Rugeley

Absolutely sickening.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *abphilMan
over a year ago

sheffield

Arn't you supposed to run over animals if they are potentially causing a threat to life?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

"

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand "
. Was it not remotely possible the police officers were scared too, they are after all human beings with emotion, not necessarily scared of the dog(although possibly) but scared of the situation and the decision making they had to do, being a police officer does not instantly make you all knowing all seeing, as with every job in every walk of life sometimes we have to make decisions in an instant, no real thinking time just instinct, clearly the instinct of the two officers dealing with the dreadful dilemma they were faced with is not to everyone's liking but it was the decision they felt they had to make, the people who judge seem to judge in a way that deem neither of the officers to have any feeling about what they did, unless you have spoken to them then surely that judgement can not be made and once again, a dimly lit, fast moving stretch of road not an easy nor necessarily safe job to set up a road block

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Blimey, I'm glad some of you lot aren't in the police.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And let's not forget that both officers are dog owners themselves.

I'm sure that they didn't take the decision lightly, or that they did it out of malice or for pleasure

I expect they're feeling pretty cut up about the situation

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand . Was it not remotely possible the police officers were scared too, they are after all human beings with emotion, not necessarily scared of the dog(although possibly) but scared of the situation and the decision making they had to do, being a police officer does not instantly make you all knowing all seeing, as with every job in every walk of life sometimes we have to make decisions in an instant, no real thinking time just instinct, clearly the instinct of the two officers dealing with the dreadful dilemma they were faced with is not to everyone's liking but it was the decision they felt they had to make, the people who judge seem to judge in a way that deem neither of the officers to have any feeling about what they did, unless you have spoken to them then surely that judgement can not be made and once again, a dimly lit, fast moving stretch of road not an easy nor necessarily safe job to set up a road block "

Don't want to argue but with a pc for a cousin and a sergeant for a uncle I know what some can be like when aranalin kicks in.

Just ment they didn't have to run it over they could of used other methods

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"And let's not forget that both officers are dog owners themselves.

I'm sure that they didn't take the decision lightly, or that they did it out of malice or for pleasure

I expect they're feeling pretty cut up about the situation "

I'm sure they didn't make the decision lightly but it seems that it was the quickest solution. How long would it have taken a dog handler to get there? I understand the outcry, if it had been my dog then I'd be devastated. It's easy to say that it was aggressive but what else did they expect?

If it had been a cow or a swan in the road they'd have stopped the traffic. I appreciate it may have been a dimly lit piece of road etc but they don't appear to be slow in stopping traffic if there's been an accident. Prevention is obviously the important part but it seems a bit extreme to run an animal over to reach a safe conclusion.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And let's not forget that both officers are dog owners themselves.

I'm sure that they didn't take the decision lightly, or that they did it out of malice or for pleasure

I expect they're feeling pretty cut up about the situation

I'm sure they didn't make the decision lightly but it seems that it was the quickest solution. How long would it have taken a dog handler to get there? I understand the outcry, if it had been my dog then I'd be devastated. It's easy to say that it was aggressive but what else did they expect?

If it had been a cow or a swan in the road they'd have stopped the traffic. I appreciate it may have been a dimly lit piece of road etc but they don't appear to be slow in stopping traffic if there's been an accident. Prevention is obviously the important part but it seems a bit extreme to run an animal over to reach a safe conclusion. "

As I said in an earlier post, the levels of traffic police are a lot lower at that time than during the day. Also the nearest traffic centre is some distance.

I'm not sure that even a dog handler would have been any use, and the possible introduction of another dog couldn't have done any good.

With the potential for a serious incident in a tunnel, the decision they took was probably the only reasonable one in the circumstances.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And let's not forget that both officers are dog owners themselves.

I'm sure that they didn't take the decision lightly, or that they did it out of malice or for pleasure

I expect they're feeling pretty cut up about the situation

I'm sure they didn't make the decision lightly but it seems that it was the quickest solution. How long would it have taken a dog handler to get there? I understand the outcry, if it had been my dog then I'd be devastated. It's easy to say that it was aggressive but what else did they expect?

If it had been a cow or a swan in the road they'd have stopped the traffic. I appreciate it may have been a dimly lit piece of road etc but they don't appear to be slow in stopping traffic if there's been an accident. Prevention is obviously the important part but it seems a bit extreme to run an animal over to reach a safe conclusion.

As I said in an earlier post, the levels of traffic police are a lot lower at that time than during the day. Also the nearest traffic centre is some distance.

I'm not sure that even a dog handler would have been any use, and the possible introduction of another dog couldn't have done any good.

With the potential for a serious incident in a tunnel, the decision they took was probably the only reasonable one in the circumstances.

"

Could you imagine the carnage if the dog ran into the traffic that's stopped for the road block? It would have to be moved out the way for them to deal and would have been keystone cops all over the place.

Dammed if they do dammed if they don't.

I feel for the dog I really do but people need to think out wider rather than concentrate on the emotional aspect.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand . Was it not remotely possible the police officers were scared too, they are after all human beings with emotion, not necessarily scared of the dog(although possibly) but scared of the situation and the decision making they had to do, being a police officer does not instantly make you all knowing all seeing, as with every job in every walk of life sometimes we have to make decisions in an instant, no real thinking time just instinct, clearly the instinct of the two officers dealing with the dreadful dilemma they were faced with is not to everyone's liking but it was the decision they felt they had to make, the people who judge seem to judge in a way that deem neither of the officers to have any feeling about what they did, unless you have spoken to them then surely that judgement can not be made and once again, a dimly lit, fast moving stretch of road not an easy nor necessarily safe job to set up a road block

Don't want to argue but with a pc for a cousin and a sergeant for a uncle I know what some can be like when aranalin kicks in.

Just ment they didn't have to run it over they could of used other methods "
. That's as maybe and adrenalin can cause people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do, I respect that you have experience with family members but bravado can be a wonderful thing, I am sure there is good and bad in all walks of life, I would be naive to believe everyone within any profession is as we want them to be bit again I stress without knowing the officers and being in the position they were in surely it's harsh to judge

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand . Was it not remotely possible the police officers were scared too, they are after all human beings with emotion, not necessarily scared of the dog(although possibly) but scared of the situation and the decision making they had to do, being a police officer does not instantly make you all knowing all seeing, as with every job in every walk of life sometimes we have to make decisions in an instant, no real thinking time just instinct, clearly the instinct of the two officers dealing with the dreadful dilemma they were faced with is not to everyone's liking but it was the decision they felt they had to make, the people who judge seem to judge in a way that deem neither of the officers to have any feeling about what they did, unless you have spoken to them then surely that judgement can not be made and once again, a dimly lit, fast moving stretch of road not an easy nor necessarily safe job to set up a road block

Don't want to argue but with a pc for a cousin and a sergeant for a uncle I know what some can be like when aranalin kicks in.

Just ment they didn't have to run it over they could of used other methods . That's as maybe and adrenalin can cause people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do, I respect that you have experience with family members but bravado can be a wonderful thing, I am sure there is good and bad in all walks of life, I would be naive to believe everyone within any profession is as we want them to be bit again I stress without knowing the officers and being in the position they were in surely it's harsh to judge "
. But not bit, also other methods there maybe but other methods available to them at that point in time who knows?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Stop the traffic, deal with the situation properly and carry on.

To run over a scared animal is beyond cowardly. It's only defence in that situation is to bark/bite and most likely in fear.

Some days I despair.

Wrong on many levels.

Totally agree were the police that thick they didn't twig the poor dog was scared. Before anyone argues I have family members in the police and know what complete ***** witnessed it first hand . Was it not remotely possible the police officers were scared too, they are after all human beings with emotion, not necessarily scared of the dog(although possibly) but scared of the situation and the decision making they had to do, being a police officer does not instantly make you all knowing all seeing, as with every job in every walk of life sometimes we have to make decisions in an instant, no real thinking time just instinct, clearly the instinct of the two officers dealing with the dreadful dilemma they were faced with is not to everyone's liking but it was the decision they felt they had to make, the people who judge seem to judge in a way that deem neither of the officers to have any feeling about what they did, unless you have spoken to them then surely that judgement can not be made and once again, a dimly lit, fast moving stretch of road not an easy nor necessarily safe job to set up a road block

Don't want to argue but with a pc for a cousin and a sergeant for a uncle I know what some can be like when aranalin kicks in.

Just ment they didn't have to run it over they could of used other methods . That's as maybe and adrenalin can cause people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do, I respect that you have experience with family members but bravado can be a wonderful thing, I am sure there is good and bad in all walks of life, I would be naive to believe everyone within any profession is as we want them to be bit again I stress without knowing the officers and being in the position they were in surely it's harsh to judge "

Fair enough can see your point but still think other methods could of been used .agree to disagree ??

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... "
no. The police i think are overtrained and over reacted. It was reported as a loose dog that could cause a traffic accident. This aggresive narrative is a face saving excercise.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... no. The police i think are overtrained and over reacted. It was reported as a loose dog that could cause a traffic accident. This aggresive narrative is a face saving excercise. "
. Aggressive or not, the fact that it could course loss of life is enough

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"As I said in an earlier post, the levels of traffic police are a lot lower at that time than during the day. Also the nearest traffic centre is some distance.

I'm not sure that even a dog handler would have been any use, and the possible introduction of another dog couldn't have done any good.

With the potential for a serious incident in a tunnel, the decision they took was probably the only reasonable one in the circumstances.

"

I didn't mean introducing another dog... I'm pretty sure that would have caused carnage but dog wardens and the like have these poles with a collar on them and tranqs surely?

I dunno... it just seems like running it over was a bit of a poor judgement call. They were likely thinking of the best way to deal with it at the time and it's easy for us sitting at home to make suggestions or pass judgement but equally I would hope not to make that call in the same situation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *litheroevoyeurMan
over a year ago

Clitheroe

03:00 on a dual carriageway in North Wales in February just how much traffic was around at that time? Hardly rush hour around the M60 is it? I can't help but think there was probably a better way to deal with this indeed the officers may well have endangered themselves and others by aiming their patrol car at the animal. I doubt it was standing still waiting for the impact.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... "

They could not catch it and it was running in and out of traffic on a busy road... So yes they were right...

Even the dogs owner agreed with them

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The original bbc report at the time said that an officer had tried grabbing the dog and had been bitten.

Yes we could call in helicopters and close roads and tranquilliser dart marksman... But it's a fucking dog, according to the story reported it's loose, it's running around on a busy dual carriageway, it's already bitten an officer!

Nobody wants to run it over deliberately, I'm pretty sure the two coppers didn't want to, if it had been a badger or a fox nobody would give a shit but for some reason because it's a dog were all getting het up over nothing

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No. They could have tasered it and then got it in a van. It was probably just scared and that's why it was acting aggressive. I adore the police but to do that us inhumane. Lost respect now. "
They say they will be taking lessons from the rspca, so a statement like that doesnt equate to am aggresive dog

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No. They could have tasered it and then got it in a van. It was probably just scared and that's why it was acting aggressive. I adore the police but to do that us inhumane. Lost respect now. "
They say they will be taking lessons from the rspca, so a statement like that doesnt equate to am aggresive dog

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Were they right to run down and kill a dog which was allegedly endangering public safety.... no. The police i think are overtrained and over reacted. It was reported as a loose dog that could cause a traffic accident. This aggresive narrative is a face saving excercise. . Aggressive or not, the fact that it could course loss of life is enough "
. Cause not course, God I am sick of this phone

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"03:00 on a dual carriageway in North Wales in February just how much traffic was around at that time? Hardly rush hour around the M60 is it? I can't help but think there was probably a better way to deal with this indeed the officers may well have endangered themselves and others by aiming their patrol car at the animal. I doubt it was standing still waiting for the impact."
. No it's not rush hour but it is a crappy stretch of road to drive at night, lots of hgv's and who knows maybe there were, are other options or methods but that's not to say they were available to those officers at that point in time, I think it's useful to point out that if we believe that the officers made that decision alone, without any input from senior officers or without any guidance then that would be very naive

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's the main road from Holyhead port to Liverpool and Manchester, it's always busy with hgvs and cars and they Bob on a bit

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *litheroevoyeurMan
over a year ago

Clitheroe


"It's the main road from Holyhead port to Liverpool and Manchester, it's always busy with hgvs and cars and they Bob on a bit"

Thanks for that, I do know the road and have driven it many times.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The original bbc report at the time said that an officer had tried grabbing the dog and had been bitten.

Yes we could call in helicopters and close roads and tranquilliser dart marksman... But it's a fucking dog, according to the story reported it's loose, it's running around on a busy dual carriageway, it's already bitten an officer!

Nobody wants to run it over deliberately, I'm pretty sure the two coppers didn't want to, if it had been a badger or a fox nobody would give a shit but for some reason because it's a dog were all getting het up over nothing"

I try to avoid cats, dogs,foxes, badgers ,hedgehogs and even try to avoid pigeons though not seagulls. ..hate them plus their scary.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *abeandhimCouple
over a year ago

Chester

To say the dog was agressive could be an under statement, dog was lost away from its own companions, scared from being chased, so reaction would be to react in some way, 3am in the morn road busy when its been closed before ie for a sheep..

What a horrible way for anything to die!!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"To say the dog was agressive could be an under statement, dog was lost away from its own companions, scared from being chased, so reaction would be to react in some way, 3am in the morn road busy when its been closed before ie for a sheep..

What a horrible way for anything to die!!!"
. But again it may have been closed for a sheep, but who knows the circumstances at that time, as no one other than the officers themselves know the circumstances this time, I doubt the officers would argue that the dog was scared and imagine it was a really horrible thing for them to have to do, but they made the decision they needed to make, the phrase, walk a mile in somebody's shoes, seems to spring to mind

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the dog owner should be prosecuted and billed for police time .

If they had been responsible owners ,none of this would of happened and I'm saying that as a dog owner .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Suppose we have to pay for the damage to police car to ,dog should have been sedated and monitored by a vet

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *abphilMan
over a year ago

sheffield


"Arn't you supposed to run over animals if they are potentially causing a threat to life?"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Suppose we have to pay for the damage to police car to ,dog should have been sedated and monitored by a vet "
. How?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Suppose we have to pay for the damage to police car to ,dog should have been sedated and monitored by a vet "

Make the dog owner pay

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In what part of the news did ot say the dog was aggressive???

There's lots of ways to get a dog off the roads,, and by running ot over and killing it is NOT one of them.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"In what part of the news did ot say the dog was aggressive???

There's lots of ways to get a dog off the roads,, and by running ot over and killing it is NOT one of them.

"
. I am sure the officers thought, right we need this dog off the road, now how can we do this, I know we won't think of any other ways lets just run it over . Again not at the scene, haven't spoken to the officers, have no idea of the true situation, a little harsh to judge

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Suppose we have to pay for the damage to police car to ,dog should have been sedated and monitored by a vet . How? "
. As in how would you have managed to sedate the dog?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Wonders how the 'officers' will react if I drove down their road, saw their dog and DELIBERATELY ran it over!

Sorry but this was NOT the best way to deal with the situation, it was 3AM and the road could have been closed, just like it would have been for a horse or a cow etc.... the dog was SCARED, it WASNT a dangerous animal, there are plenty of other ways they could have controlled the situation!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

I think there would be far more outcry if people found out that it cost X amount of public money to save the dog by bringing in a helicopter, vet, marksman, close the motorway etc etc, it was a tough decision to make and I can only assume that the police officers involved are traumatised about the event, you don't know what was being said in the police car as they were doing it.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

they were probably saying something along the lines of... 'our shift finishes soon, lets just run it over and be done with it' etc.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon


"they were probably saying something along the lines of... 'our shift finishes soon, lets just run it over and be done with it' etc.

"

I doubt it very much

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *tillup4funMan
over a year ago

Wakefield


"I think the road would be pretty quiet at 3 am! !!! Call a countryside vet to have it shot would have been more humane. Get a dog warden. Close the road. Park a police car with hazards on to warn people.

Run it down with a police car at speed ......... sounds more like joy riders than the actions of a professional police force to me."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

To deliberately run a dog over is a crime, and they are supposed to be showing the public how NOT to commit crimes!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *tillup4funMan
over a year ago

Wakefield


"Wonders how the 'officers' will react if I drove down their road, saw their dog and DELIBERATELY ran it over!

Sorry but this was NOT the best way to deal with the situation, it was 3AM and the road could have been closed, just like it would have been for a horse or a cow etc.... the dog was SCARED, it WASNT a dangerous animal, there are plenty of other ways they could have controlled the situation!

"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"Wonders how the 'officers' will react if I drove down their road, saw their dog and DELIBERATELY ran it over!

Sorry but this was NOT the best way to deal with the situation, it was 3AM and the road could have been closed, just like it would have been for a horse or a cow etc.... the dog was SCARED, it WASNT a dangerous animal, there are plenty of other ways they could have controlled the situation!

"
. I am sure if said officers dog was endangering life then they would have to accept it, as I have said before setting a road block is not something taken lightly as this can also endanger life, perhaps there were many ways to control the situation but as those officers were the only ones in that situation then they took the action at that time that they deemed necessary as obviously your many ways were not appropriate at that given time

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To deliberately run a dog over is a crime, and they are supposed to be showing the public how NOT to commit crimes!

"

Actually it's not a crime. Maybe if you looked at it objectively as opposed to allowing prejudices to cloud your judgement it may help.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To deliberately run a dog over is a crime, and they are supposed to be showing the public how NOT to commit crimes!

"

Lol look at it subjectively if you can.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I think the road would be pretty quiet at 3 am! !!! Call a countryside vet to have it shot would have been more humane. Get a dog warden. Close the road. Park a police car with hazards on to warn people.

Run it down with a police car at speed ......... sounds more like joy riders than the actions of a professional police force to me.

"
. It's actually not a quiet road it's a very fast moving road, a hgv and car had already swerved to avoid the dog, the area in which this all took place wouldn't have a quick soloution as in, dog warden, vet or other to pop along, this option would have taken time, to park a police car with hazards would have been totally ridiculous as this could have caused carnage, and as u have said many times to set a road block is not something that is easy to do

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I think the road would be pretty quiet at 3 am! !!! Call a countryside vet to have it shot would have been more humane. Get a dog warden. Close the road. Park a police car with hazards on to warn people.

Run it down with a police car at speed ......... sounds more like joy riders than the actions of a professional police force to me.

. It's actually not a quiet road it's a very fast moving road, a hgv and car had already swerved to avoid the dog, the area in which this all took place wouldn't have a quick soloution as in, dog warden, vet or other to pop along, this option would have taken time, to park a police car with hazards would have been totally ridiculous as this could have caused carnage, and as u have said many times to set a road block is not something that is easy to do "
. As I have said, sorry bloody phone

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

"

A rolling road for an animal that can move freely,jump the armourer barrier to the opposite carriageway or run behind the barrier? Not sure what experience you have of such matters but it's unlikely that would succeed.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ust RachelTV/TS
over a year ago

Horsham

It bit one of the police officers, hardly aggressive, more shits scared.

As for what they did, only they knew why they came to that decision they made, as they were there we were not.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please?? "

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oachman 9CoolMan
over a year ago

derby


"Will the owner come forward and say why is dog is running wild like a lot of dog owner,s just let there dogs out for a shit to lazy to pick it up"
The council have got tough with owners who don,t bother cleaning up After their dogs have fouled the area, Its like a lot of things thou you think Its gone away for a while which sometimes it does but rears its ugly head again somewhere down the line because in my opinion there as and always will be those who try and flout the law or community and have no respect for anybody and it can be anybody who does these things even when fines are Involved there are those who are happy to gamble on getting caught and when caught they should pay the maximum fine it is sad when the majority of people care and a small percentage don,t, I think you would be very lucky to have a area on the main land where its clean all the time round.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?"

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Forget about the police should they or shouldn't they .what about the owners??? As I said earlier they should be prosecuted ,billed for police time and any damage to car and named and shamed .if they had taken better care of the poor dog none of this would of happened .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

"
. You clearly have no clue as to what's involved in setting a rolling road and I could well imagine they would set one for a horse, and again different situation

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is"

In the interest of public safety it isn't against the law.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is"
.

I think the wording is a "pet" I belive from reports this dog was a trail dog, I don't think you could describe trail dogs as pets!.

However seen as the police have reported themselves for investigation, I'm sure we'll find out all the details later

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

. You clearly have no clue as to what's involved in setting a rolling road and I could well imagine they would set one for a horse, and again different situation "

i actually do know quite a bit about the setting up of a rolling road... but i wont bore you with all the minute details of how its done.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please?? "
. As I have said earlier it would be naive of me to believe there is all good in all professions, you have clearly your view of our experienced officers, should that then mean we should all tar them with your view, many have been truly supported and many have truly needed our officers at times of great fear, sadness and troubled times, I hope one day you will see they are not all bad, as the world is not all bad

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is"

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

. You clearly have no clue as to what's involved in setting a rolling road and I could well imagine they would set one for a horse, and again different situation

i actually do know quite a bit about the setting up of a rolling road... but i wont bore you with all the minute details of how its done.

"
. You wouldn't need too, but if you do have any clue then you would have quickly realised this was not a situation where one could have been actioned

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"A rolling road is all they had to do, nothing spectacular like close the road completely!

they can manage if for a horse, so why not a dog?

. You clearly have no clue as to what's involved in setting a rolling road and I could well imagine they would set one for a horse, and again different situation

i actually do know quite a bit about the setting up of a rolling road... but i wont bore you with all the minute details of how its done.

"

No please do...in what capacity?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

In the interest of public safety it isn't against the law. "

That is a rather grey area, surely? Who decides what is in the interest of public safety? The police? Dangerous to give so much power wantonly to another person, I'd suggest. Ultimately we have all probably had to drive carefully around wildlife at some time or another. Just the other day I had to swerve violently to avoid running over a rabbit that ran straight across my path. Hardly earth shattering but it could have led to an accident. How often do you experience cats shooting across a road in front of you? I've had that often. Never once did I consider running the animal over! What makes this case different?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So while calling in all these experts and stopping traffic and rolling roads is taking time. A poor traffic car on scene has to watch the dog weave in and out of traffic potentially causing a fatal in seconds. And then they would have got hung out to dry for doing nothing.

Split second real time decision in the real world. Not taken from behind a keyboard with a clouded judgement.

Rock on.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe. "

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They should have just nipped off to maccy ds got a bunch of hamburgers and left a big trail of bits off the road, leading the dog to perfect safety in open field... Where by the dog smelt a fox chased after it and ripped it to bits!.

Everybody loves a happy ending

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why"

You clearly have some beef against the police. Some Police are terrible just like people in everyday life. It seems you think all Police are the same.

There is an old adage that covers this.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why"

And to some the police can do no right, which is just as damaging and naive an attitude.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why"

Absolutely...some questions that need answering....just one point. In the interests of impartiality perhaps you could include all the good work? I don't believe you're capable of objectivity on this which is ironic given your claims of prejudice.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why

Absolutely...some questions that need answering....just one point. In the interests of impartiality perhaps you could include all the good work? I don't believe you're capable of objectivity on this which is ironic given your claims of prejudice."
. couldn't have said this better

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why

And to some the police can do no right, which is just as damaging and naive an attitude."
this exactly

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why"

Not all police are as you say racist etc..I have 2 family members in the force and at times I do call them muppets or worse ,but it's usually when their doing their jobs and following the law and I don't agree for whatever reason .

You can't just write off the whole profession just on behaviour of a few .

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why

Absolutely...some questions that need answering....just one point. In the interests of impartiality perhaps you could include all the good work? I don't believe you're capable of objectivity on this which is ironic given your claims of prejudice."

I am simply trying to highlight that the assumption - made by quite a few posters - that the coppers involved would not have acted recklessly are not learning from history. Ultimately I hope that they have to answer for their actions and that this is looked at fairly and impartially. History suggests that this will not be the case, however. I also hope that the dog's owner has a case to answer

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No they should have at least tried to sedate the dog

The poor animal must have been so scared

Doesnt anyone care anymore?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

In the interest of public safety it isn't against the law.

That is a rather grey area, surely? Who decides what is in the interest of public safety? The police? Dangerous to give so much power wantonly to another person, I'd suggest. Ultimately we have all probably had to drive carefully around wildlife at some time or another. Just the other day I had to swerve violently to avoid running over a rabbit that ran straight across my path. Hardly earth shattering but it could have led to an accident. How often do you experience cats shooting across a road in front of you? I've had that often. Never once did I consider running the animal over! What makes this case different? "
. What makes this case different REALLY, Mrs cmy feeling totally exasperated

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"No they should have at least tried to sedate the dog

The poor animal must have been so scared

Doesnt anyone care anymore?"
. As I have said on several posts red , it is sad, I don't believe the officers had any other choice, I believe they cared, I can't see how the dog could have been sedated

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

Anyway animal if not wild is property. It's criminal damage to kill it unlawfully.

A rational and justified and proportionate action exempts them in their actions as does section 3 criminal Law act.

The two individuals in the car are the ones who have to justify it. Making sweeping statements that all officers are thugs or reckless as some have done,without factual evidence against the 100000 officers in the UK; suggests you have an opinion as opposed to a fact to back your debate. There's a difference I believe.

Haven't "officers" (surely a misnomer?) been shown repeatedly - eg the Lawrence inquiry - to be racist, sexist homophobes? Or did I imagine that? I don't believe they should be assumed to be working in the public's interest when so many cases have shown them not to be. Remember Rodney King? Amazingly a jury acquitted the "officers" involved. To some the police can do no wrong. I can't understand why

Absolutely...some questions that need answering....just one point. In the interests of impartiality perhaps you could include all the good work? I don't believe you're capable of objectivity on this which is ironic given your claims of prejudice.

I am simply trying to highlight that the assumption - made by quite a few posters - that the coppers involved would not have acted recklessly are not learning from history. Ultimately I hope that they have to answer for their actions and that this is looked at fairly and impartially. History suggests that this will not be the case, however. I also hope that the dog's owner has a case to answer"
history suggests no such thing, many cases have been successfully investigated by the ipcc, as with any other walk of life, things go wrong, miscarriages of justice do happen, the police force will like any other professional organisation have good and bad and this is what history will suggest

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've seen and experienced coppers behaving like dangerous animals.

Can I please start running them over now then? Please??

Ahhh the proofs in the pudding. ..this isn't about the choice made,but the fact you're anti police?

From personal experience I would suggest the police might have enjoyed doing what they did.

They are arseholes who appear to be above the law.

I also suggest that you are wrong to suggest that deliberately killing an animal is not against the law: I'm pretty confident it is

In the interest of public safety it isn't against the law.

That is a rather grey area, surely? Who decides what is in the interest of public safety? The police? Dangerous to give so much power wantonly to another person, I'd suggest. Ultimately we have all probably had to drive carefully around wildlife at some time or another. Just the other day I had to swerve violently to avoid running over a rabbit that ran straight across my path. Hardly earth shattering but it could have led to an accident. How often do you experience cats shooting across a road in front of you? I've had that often. Never once did I consider running the animal over! What makes this case different? . What makes this case different REALLY, Mrs cmy feeling totally exasperated "

You and me both!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it."

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death.

"

You never elaborated what you do for a living?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I suppose without being there its very easy to pass judgement. It's a pity they couldn't have arranged for a vet to tranquilis the animal. On the other hand how would you feel if the police knocked on your door to say your wife, sister or son etc had died in a car accident trying to avoid a dog.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I haven't read all the posts , so apologies if I'm repeating something someone else has said.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing - they made a decision on the spot. Perhaps it wasn't the right one and it will be investigated I'm sure.

My thought process though is - if the police were made aware there is a dog that is causing a dangerous situation - they couldn't catch the dog. The dog then causes a driver to swerve and go into another oncoming car , hits a tree, goes into a ditch etc etc. Who would the public blame? The dog. the dog owner or the police ?

Sarah

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death."

The level of hyperbole here is ludicrous. Yes people care about animals and yes it may have been a beloved pet, but it's a dog, FFS.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Every day people in certain professions make decisions with consequences that face scrutiny. Doctors,teachers,Police officer's etc.

It's a sad indictment that a section of the public just love to hate anyone with authority to exercise some power.

I'm sorry a dog died and everyone agrees a better outcome would be ideal,but there's some hateful vitriolic sorts making comments above...I like to think I support all our service's not allow my clouded personal judgement to fuel negativity and hatred.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death."
.If it's the section before the tunnel coming from England?

Mmmm no I don't think it is 50 I wouldn't swear to it but I'm pretty sure that section is 70 mph i think the tunnel might be 50 but nobody pays a blind bit of attention to it even if it is!.

I'm no expert on rolling road blocks but wouldn't you need quite a few cars to do that, I mean you'd need at least one going both ways and then one to track the dog with so that's at least three cars maybe four because if it runs on the other carriage way you'll need a car on that side to chase it with as well.

That's an awful lot of time expense and money for a trail dog that's 80 miles from home..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death."
. Oh for the love of the Lord, how many times, setting up a rolling road block is not that simple, it would have not have been actioned on that stretch of road, it is a 70mph zone, and although most of the A55 is not motorway it is never the less a very busy, very dimly lit stretch of road, these officers did not take the decision lightly I am sure, and again i stress that how fair is it to judge when never having been faced with the situation, and never having spoken to the officers in question

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have a brother who is a Fox hound, and have a pet police officer.

Still can't get particularly worked up about this story, either way.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act"

So avoiding animal cruelty now trumps all consideration of avoiding risk to human life?

They referred themselves to the IPCC, who hopefully will retain a sense of proportion.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


" Every day people in certain professions make decisions with consequences that face scrutiny. Doctors,teachers,Police officer's etc.

It's a sad indictment that a section of the public just love to hate anyone with authority to exercise some power.

I'm sorry a dog died and everyone agrees a better outcome would be ideal,but there's some hateful vitriolic sorts making comments above...I like to think I support all our service's not allow my clouded personal judgement to fuel negativity and hatred."
. Omg that is such a wonderful statement, I agree with every word, I only wish I could have found those words Mrs cmy

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"

A dog that was running loose on a motorway was deliberately run down and killed by traffic police, North Wales police have confirmed.

In a statement issued on their website the force said that the dog had been running loose on the A55 at various locations between the Llanfairfechan roundabout and the Conwy tunnel.

The roads policing unit tried to catch the dog but it ran in and out of traffic which was travelling at more than 70mph on an unlit carriageway. The dog also bit an officer who tried to take hold of it.

Just a couple of points...

The A55 is not a motorway, the hint is in the A before the number...

Second (and this is from memory so I may be wrong). That section of the A55 has a 50MPH speed limit.

Thirdly, if the police had wanted to they could have easily slowed the traffic by using a rolling roadblock.

Therefore I have to conclude that some moron decided that rather than being a servant of the law with a sworn duty to keep the peace that he (or maybe she) was some sort of Welsh Judge Dredd and the sentence was death.

The level of hyperbole here is ludicrous. Yes people care about animals and yes it may have been a beloved pet, but it's a dog, FFS. "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *cduck and Blue eyesCouple
over a year ago

nr chester


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act

So avoiding animal cruelty now trumps all consideration of avoiding risk to human life?

They referred themselves to the IPCC, who hopefully will retain a sense of proportion. "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act

So avoiding animal cruelty now trumps all consideration of avoiding risk to human life?

They referred themselves to the IPCC, who hopefully will retain a sense of proportion. "

The risk to human life could have been negated given some traffic control and a little patience.

Heaven forbid the Police shut the road and make busy motorists wait.

As a motorist I would have been more than happy to have waited behind a road closure for them to catch the dog

I was merely saying that it was an unnecessarily cruel way to resolve the situation

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act

So avoiding animal cruelty now trumps all consideration of avoiding risk to human life?

They referred themselves to the IPCC, who hopefully will retain a sense of proportion.

The risk to human life could have been negated given some traffic control and a little patience.

Heaven forbid the Police shut the road and make busy motorists wait.

As a motorist I would have been more than happy to have waited behind a road closure for them to catch the dog

I was merely saying that it was an unnecessarily cruel way to resolve the situation

"

I concur. It's also worth speculating how busy an A road in Wales at three in the morning could be! PETA and the Battersea Dogs Home have said similar to you, which seems sensible to me. News reports also state that, according to police, one HGV and one car had to swerve. Doesn't put me in mind of the mass pile up some have talked about, above. The same police force recently tasered a sheep over a similar incident too! What are they up to? It's interesting that the Chief Inspector of the force involved was at great pains to reassure everyone that the police involved were dog owners. Presumably to reassure the public that the action wasn't taken recklessly. All seems very OTT to me

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4150386.stm

For the people saying the police couldn't stop the traffic to save the dog, they managed to stop the traffic to rescue a soft toy for a child ( in another report it was a toy dog )

Funny old world isn't it

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"Oh for the love of the Lord, how many times, setting up a rolling road block is not that simple, it would have not have been actioned on that stretch of road, it is a 70mph zone, and although most of the A55 is not motorway it is never the less a very busy, very dimly lit stretch of road, these officers did not take the decision lightly I am sure, and again i stress that how fair is it to judge when never having been faced with the situation, and never having spoken to the officers in question "

OK I seem to be attracting some flack here so lets be a little more accurate in what I say.

Firstly I have driven the A55 100's nay 1000's of times. The stretch of road being talked about is about 10 miles long and has at least 1 roundabout between and 3 or 4 slip roads between Llanfair and Conwy. Further at the Llanfair roundabout that was mentioned a police controlled variable speed limit and contraflow system that runs all the way to the far side of Conwy starts. It is there so that if landslides block the old A55 headland road now used as the northbound lane trafic can be diverted though the south bound tunnels without it taking hours or days to put a contraflow system in place, and vise versa if a tunnel is blocked. So I for one do not accept that setting up a rolling roadblock on that streach of highway would be in any way complicated!

Secondly I do not believe that any police officer on the ground would be allowed to make the decision to deliberately run anything down. It is not how police work! That decision was made by the senior (probably Chief Superintendent or higher) duty commander and that is the man or woman who had the authority to SWITCH ON the variable speed limit signs or turn on the overhead gantry signs and light up the RED X's on all lanes and stop the traffic!

As I said some moron decided they were Judge Dredd and the Sentence was death!

Rather than tell me I need to get some perspective, I would suggest that everyone living, working or travelling through N Wales should take note and demand that whoever made this decision is removed from any post where they may get to make similar choices in the future. Next time they may be ordering the killing of a man for carrying a chair leg in a bag!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act"

It was run over and killed because they couldn't catch it!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Oh for the love of the Lord, how many times, setting up a rolling road block is not that simple, it would have not have been actioned on that stretch of road, it is a 70mph zone, and although most of the A55 is not motorway it is never the less a very busy, very dimly lit stretch of road, these officers did not take the decision lightly I am sure, and again i stress that how fair is it to judge when never having been faced with the situation, and never having spoken to the officers in question

OK I seem to be attracting some flack here so lets be a little more accurate in what I say.

Firstly I have driven the A55 100's nay 1000's of times. The stretch of road being talked about is about 10 miles long and has at least 1 roundabout between and 3 or 4 slip roads between Llanfair and Conwy. Further at the Llanfair roundabout that was mentioned a police controlled variable speed limit and contraflow system that runs all the way to the far side of Conwy starts. It is there so that if landslides block the old A55 headland road now used as the northbound lane trafic can be diverted though the south bound tunnels without it taking hours or days to put a contraflow system in place, and vise versa if a tunnel is blocked. So I for one do not accept that setting up a rolling roadblock on that streach of highway would be in any way complicated!

Secondly I do not believe that any police officer on the ground would be allowed to make the decision to deliberately run anything down. It is not how police work! That decision was made by the senior (probably Chief Superintendent or higher) duty commander and that is the man or woman who had the authority to SWITCH ON the variable speed limit signs or turn on the overhead gantry signs and light up the RED X's on all lanes and stop the traffic!

As I said some moron decided they were Judge Dredd and the Sentence was death!

Rather than tell me I need to get some perspective, I would suggest that everyone living, working or travelling through N Wales should take note and demand that whoever made this decision is removed from any post where they may get to make similar choices in the future. Next time they may be ordering the killing of a man for carrying a chair leg in a bag!"

An entirely ridiculous statement. ..especially given your previous occupation. And sadly entirely speculative.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Oh for the love of the Lord, how many times, setting up a rolling road block is not that simple, it would have not have been actioned on that stretch of road, it is a 70mph zone, and although most of the A55 is not motorway it is never the less a very busy, very dimly lit stretch of road, these officers did not take the decision lightly I am sure, and again i stress that how fair is it to judge when never having been faced with the situation, and never having spoken to the officers in question

OK I seem to be attracting some flack here so lets be a little more accurate in what I say.

Firstly I have driven the A55 100's nay 1000's of times. The stretch of road being talked about is about 10 miles long and has at least 1 roundabout between and 3 or 4 slip roads between Llanfair and Conwy. Further at the Llanfair roundabout that was mentioned a police controlled variable speed limit and contraflow system that runs all the way to the far side of Conwy starts. It is there so that if landslides block the old A55 headland road now used as the northbound lane trafic can be diverted though the south bound tunnels without it taking hours or days to put a contraflow system in place, and vise versa if a tunnel is blocked. So I for one do not accept that setting up a rolling roadblock on that streach of highway would be in any way complicated!

Secondly I do not believe that any police officer on the ground would be allowed to make the decision to deliberately run anything down. It is not how police work! That decision was made by the senior (probably Chief Superintendent or higher) duty commander and that is the man or woman who had the authority to SWITCH ON the variable speed limit signs or turn on the overhead gantry signs and light up the RED X's on all lanes and stop the traffic!

As I said some moron decided they were Judge Dredd and the Sentence was death!

Rather than tell me I need to get some perspective, I would suggest that everyone living, working or travelling through N Wales should take note and demand that whoever made this decision is removed from any post where they may get to make similar choices in the future. Next time they may be ordering the killing of a man for carrying a chair leg in a bag!"

Possibly even more hyperbolic than your previous post, bravo.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4150386.stm

For the people saying the police couldn't stop the traffic to save the dog, they managed to stop the traffic to rescue a soft toy for a child ( in another report it was a toy dog )

Funny old world isn't it"

Toy dogs don't run away or bite.

Funny old world indeed

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I'm confused....

Was it run over because it was a dangerous dog as in grrrrrrrrr (sorry)

Or was it run over because it was in danger of causing an accident

With the first option it could be argued that the response was warranted

With the second option, someone needs to be prosecuted for animal cruelty if it was a deliberate act

So avoiding animal cruelty now trumps all consideration of avoiding risk to human life?

They referred themselves to the IPCC, who hopefully will retain a sense of proportion.

The risk to human life could have been negated given some traffic control and a little patience.

Heaven forbid the Police shut the road and make busy motorists wait.

As a motorist I would have been more than happy to have waited behind a road closure for them to catch the dog

I was merely saying that it was an unnecessarily cruel way to resolve the situation

"

Put simply, if it was that easy then they probably would have done it.

I fail to believe there's two coppers driving around Wales together determined to inflict death on a poor defenceless little doggy just for the hell of it. In that situation, at that time, it obviously seemed to them like the best course of action to take. There's probably a reason for that (like - it was) but the decision will be reviewed by the IPCC anyway.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

I'm puzzled. I know that part of the A55 and the area around it is pretty rural.. surely if an officer could get close enough to be bitten, then they could have got hold of someone with a shotgun to dispatch it, assuming that is the part of the road with drystone wall along it, would have done as a backstop for shot (but not a bullet)...

But then, I wasn't there...

I just can't see trying to hit a dog with a car being very...er.. precise. The opportunity for complete fuck up seems quite large..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And that ends this discussion!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Absolutely some of these big powerfull status dogs which are own by fuckin muppetts are a lethal weapon !!!! "

It was a little fox hound not a big powerful status dog

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4150386.stm

For the people saying the police couldn't stop the traffic to save the dog, they managed to stop the traffic to rescue a soft toy for a child ( in another report it was a toy dog )

Funny old world isn't it

Toy dogs don't run away or bite.

Funny old world indeed "

Shows it can be done though

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The police should use whatever they can to deal with potential Trouble, from anything, or anyone. Until the blessed day that they are all armed. May it soon arrive....

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
back to top