Officer shoots carjacker dead in Harris county

[surprise_i'm_armed]

Yes, PETA does not like the term "pet". They prefer "companion animal".

PETA....Meat eaters believe the term stands for "People Eating Tasty Animals."

03Lightningrocks - Yes, the thread has drifted, as one's conversation may do when talking with friends. :-)

SIA

[philip964]

I visited a dog dentist one time, besides regular dog teeth cleaning he did tooth replacement on k -9 officers. Quite often they will lose teeth apprehending a suspect.

He replaced the lost teeth with stainless steel teeth.

Some times as a preventive measure he would laminate stainless steel to the teeth on a new K-9 Officer to prevent the broken tooth problem in the from ever happening.

Note to self, surrender to any Officer accompanied by K-9 Officer immediately with a yes sir right away sir.

One Officer I met who has a K9 Officer with him has a button on him that automatically releases and unlatches the door to his patrol car where his k9 Officer is waiting and wanting very much to help his Officer out as much as he possibly can.

Dog is family. The law may not say it, but they are.

[narcissist]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.

Your right but I'm sure most our pets mean about the same as our children, of course I'm not talking for everyone here but I'm pretty sure most would agree,

[03Lightningrocks]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.

Your right but I'm sure most our pets mean about the same as our children, of course I'm not talking for everyone here but I'm pretty sure most would agree,

I know I would defend my dog to the end.

[srothstein]

If the BG had survived the attack on the K9 he would have been charged with assault on a Peace Officer! By Texas Law a Police dog or horse is considered a Police Officer and the charges are the same! I think the BG should have been shot!

This is interesting, especially since officers can and do shoot dogs with little or no justification.

Charles has a point and the consideration of police animals as officers is simply not true. To be a peace officer, one must be employed in a position listed under Article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. While there are more than 35 different types of peace officers in Texas, all of them are people.

If a person hits a police dog or horse, they are charged with interference with police service animals, section 38.151 of the Penal Code. If you just hit the police animal, it is a class C misdemeanor. If you injure or kill it, it ranges from a state jail felony to a second degree felony, depending on the amount of injuries.

Police departments tend to treat animals as officers, especially when they get injured or killed. But in truth, the law still recognizes that animals are just animals.

[flechero]

I recall on the local news several times, hearing about k-9's being injured in drug bust or arrests and the perps being charged with attacking a police k-9.

It seems that some pets are more equal than others,..


Now back to topic- the carjacker already shot someone and was on the run, fighting his way towards escape... I'd expect to be shot if I ever did the same.

[mcscanner]

Comment was directed to a post I did not quote at the end of page 1. Seems a little out of place now.

...and the dog in question was a K-9 officer.

[The Annoyed Man]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.

Your right but I'm sure most our pets mean about the same as our children, of course I'm not talking for everyone here but I'm pretty sure most would agree,

I know I would defend my dog to the end.

But I would also put down a suffering dog well before it actually dies due to the cause of its suffering. I could never put down a child of mine. Why? Because in the end, no matter how much I love the dog, it’s still just livestock. OTH, I will give my child every opportunity to extend his life, and will authorize pulling the plug on him ONLY when he’s already brain dead and unable to continue without life support. I’d euthanize a dog that was in the end stages of cancer. I wouldn’t do that if my child was in the end stages of cancer.

Why that difference? It’s because of the difference of the value of a dog's life compared to the value of a human life.....and I love my dogs as much as anybody else loves theirs. I just know that they’re not the same.

It is good that we take care of and love on our dogs. They are dependent on us, and they require good stewardship from us. That includes protecting them, just as they would protect us. And they reward our love for them with unconditional love in return. They’re amazing animals. But they’re not on the same level as my son or grandkids.

[03Lightningrocks]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.

Your right but I'm sure most our pets mean about the same as our children, of course I'm not talking for everyone here but I'm pretty sure most would agree,

I know I would defend my dog to the end.

But I would also put down a suffering dog well before it actually dies due to the cause of its suffering. I could never put down a child of mine. Why? Because in the end, no matter how much I love the dog, it’s still just livestock. OTH, I will give my child every opportunity to extend his life, and will authorize pulling the plug on him ONLY when he’s already brain dead and unable to continue without life support. I’d euthanize a dog that was in the end stages of cancer. I wouldn’t do that if my child was in the end stages of cancer.

Why that difference? It’s because of the difference of the value of a dog's life compared to the value of a human life.....and I love my dogs as much as anybody else loves theirs. I just know that they’re not the same.

It is good that we take care of and love on our dogs. They are dependent on us, and they require good stewardship from us. That includes protecting them, just as they would protect us. And they reward our love for them with unconditional love in return. They’re amazing animals. But they’re not on the same level as my son or grandkids.

[oljames3]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.

Your right but I'm sure most our pets mean about the same as our children, of course I'm not talking for everyone here but I'm pretty sure most would agree,

I know I would defend my dog to the end.

But I would also put down a suffering dog well before it actually dies due to the cause of its suffering. I could never put down a child of mine. Why? Because in the end, no matter how much I love the dog, it’s still just livestock. OTH, I will give my child every opportunity to extend his life, and will authorize pulling the plug on him ONLY when he’s already brain dead and unable to continue without life support. I’d euthanize a dog that was in the end stages of cancer. I wouldn’t do that if my child was in the end stages of cancer.

Why that difference? It’s because of the difference of the value of a dog's life compared to the value of a human life.....and I love my dogs as much as anybody else loves theirs. I just know that they’re not the same.

It is good that we take care of and love on our dogs. They are dependent on us, and they require good stewardship from us. That includes protecting them, just as they would protect us. And they reward our love for them with unconditional love in return. They’re amazing animals. But they’re not on the same level as my son or grandkids.

[striker55]

One less bad guy on the street.