Texas LEO shoots family dog at wrong address

[JSThane]

Um... wow, this thread exploded. I'm just going to respond to VM177's response to me, and then I'm gonna finish the rest of the thread.

It doesn't change the fact that his unreasonable fear or incompetence resulted in a dog being killed.

Unreasonable fear or incompetence? I'm not so sure it was unreasonable. The worse chewing I got from a dog was at the teeth of a rottweiler that had been taught to play that way by an incompetent owner. If you don't know the dog, you don't know the dog. Did he go overboard? I want to agree, but having been in similar situations, having been chewed on by aggressive dogs -and- playful dogs with no self-control, I can't deny him the benefit of the doubt. I still have scars from the rottweiler incident, and I know I might not respond well in a similar situation. Then again, I might.

He was serving a traffic warrant, not busting a drug house.

I wasn't clear on this one. If this was a traffic warrant, it does change things. All these serve is revenue generation, and I want them to go away. If it was a traffic warrant, no cops had any business being on the property. If you must have them, just wait until the next time he gets pulled over, and hook him up then. If someone's going to scofflaw a traffic ticket, they'll usually drive in such a fashion as to get pulled over again. Finding him is NOT going to be difficult.

[quote='VM177"]The notion that a cop should be able to come onto my property to serve a traffic warrant and kill my dog without any consequences is absurd. No one else who comes on my property gets to do this. [/quote]

And neither should the cops. Don't get me wrong, I was not and am not arguing for no consequences. I was arguing that the consequences devolve from the initial mistake - that of the wrong address - and not the subsequent actions. Because of the initial mistake, the rest of it, however justified it -would- have been (or not), becomes the department's liability. Whether or not the officer made the initial mistake will probably determine what, if any, disciplinary action he faces; however, his department holds the liability for any veterinarian costs, property damage, lawsuits, etc. (The mistake could have been from the officer swearing the warrant, the judge issuing it, OR the officer serving it)

All he had to do was call the people inside BEFORE he entered their property and ask them to secure any animals. Neither I, nor the Constitution that is supposed to guarantee my inalienable rights, exists to make life easier for law enforcement.

While we're quibbling on exactly -what- the problem was, we're on the same wavelength here. Officer incompetence, judicial inattention, or what, regardless of where we draw the line of error, this family's property rights -WERE- violated, and they are due recompense.

[VMI77]

Um... wow, this thread exploded. I'm just going to respond to VM177's response to me, and then I'm gonna finish the rest of the thread.

It doesn't change the fact that his unreasonable fear or incompetence resulted in a dog being killed.

Unreasonable fear or incompetence? I'm not so sure it was unreasonable. The worse chewing I got from a dog was at the teeth of a rottweiler that had been taught to play that way by an incompetent owner. If you don't know the dog, you don't know the dog. Did he go overboard? I want to agree, but having been in similar situations, having been chewed on by aggressive dogs -and- playful dogs with no self-control, I can't deny him the benefit of the doubt. I still have scars from the rottweiler incident, and I know I might not respond well in a similar situation. Then again, I might.

He was serving a traffic warrant, not busting a drug house.

I wasn't clear on this one. If this was a traffic warrant, it does change things. All these serve is revenue generation, and I want them to go away. If it was a traffic warrant, no cops had any business being on the property. If you must have them, just wait until the next time he gets pulled over, and hook him up then. If someone's going to scofflaw a traffic ticket, they'll usually drive in such a fashion as to get pulled over again. Finding him is NOT going to be difficult.[/quote]

[quote='VM177"]The notion that a cop should be able to come onto my property to serve a traffic warrant and kill my dog without any consequences is absurd. No one else who comes on my property gets to do this. [/quote]

And neither should the cops. Don't get me wrong, I was not and am not arguing for no consequences. I was arguing that the consequences devolve from the initial mistake - that of the wrong address - and not the subsequent actions. Because of the initial mistake, the rest of it, however justified it -would- have been (or not), becomes the department's liability. Whether or not the officer made the initial mistake will probably determine what, if any, disciplinary action he faces; however, his department holds the liability for any veterinarian costs, property damage, lawsuits, etc. (The mistake could have been from the officer swearing the warrant, the judge issuing it, OR the officer serving it)[/quote]

All he had to do was call the people inside BEFORE he entered their property and ask them to secure any animals. Neither I, nor the Constitution that is supposed to guarantee my inalienable rights, exists to make life easier for law enforcement.

While we're quibbling on exactly -what- the problem was, we're on the same wavelength here. Officer incompetence, judicial inattention, or what, regardless of where we draw the line of error, this family's property rights -WERE- violated, and they are due recompense.[/quote][/quote]

I think we're pretty much in agreement. Maybe I could have used a better term than unreasonable fear. What I meant is that everyone else, not in LE, that has to deal with dogs in similar situations, is legally required to accept whatever risk such contact entails, and for the most part, are allowed no recourse to deadly force. Hence, how reasonable is it for the fear of dogs by LE to be so much greater than the fear that must simply be accepted by everyone else doing their jobs in similar situations and without a resort to the use of deadly force? Not the best wording, but I hope you get what I'm trying to say.

I couldn't get the nesting right and gave up.

[VoiceofReason]

I just don't see how we can accept the double standard like we do whether it be "department policy" or not. Especially considering the cop was at the wrong location.

Inconsistency in the application of the law, double standards and certain people getting a pass on things that would get a mere citizen thrown in jail is what leads to a lot of the "us against them" attitudes so many complain about.

Apparently mere "policy" cleanses away all morality, responsibility, judgement, and law breaking, from a small town police department all the way up to TSA, DHS, CIA, NSA, DEA, DOJ all the other alphabet agencies, and the FBI --heck, all the way up to the Prez. Yeah, we spied on reporters, but it was policy. Yeah, we monitored millions of innocent Americans, but it was policy. Yeah, we were selling weapons to Al Qaeda and let an ambassador and a few other Americans die, but it was in accordance with administration policy. Yeah, we sold some guns to Mexican drug cartels, but hey, it was policy. Yeah, we got the wrong address, busted down the door of the wrong house, shot the occupants and their dogs, but we did it in accordance with policy, so it's AOK.

There is and always will be a double standard.

Street cops go in harm’s way, sometimes numerous times per day and occasionally even when they are “off duty”. We have pretty much beat this horse to death and people will still have different opinions.

We don’t know what experience the officer has had with dogs. Maybe he has been bitten possibly more than once. I do not know anyone that can size up a strange dog running at them and know if it will bite or not. This officer had a few seconds to act and two dogs running at him. The officer had no way of knowing the history of the dogs and what they might have experienced at the hands of (let’s say) someone in uniform.

I’m an old man and have seen a lot. I have seen a dog stand and wag it’s tail while a person pet the dog, then the dog bit that person.

The officer does not have the luxury of deciding what warrants are served and which ones he doesn’t have to. The subject may have only gone a “few” miles per hour over the speed limit or he/she might have 57 tickets and not shown up in court for any of them. It would not have looked good for the officer if he had not served the warrant and the subject had been sitting in the back yard the whole time, sipping a cold one with some steaks on the grill.

I would say this situation is what it is. No door was “busted down”, the “occupants and their dogs” were not shot and hopefully the dog recovers.

I agree that some officers should be put in jail for some of the things they do and some are but then again I believe LEO’s should be among the highest paid people in the country.

[VMI77]

I just don't see how we can accept the double standard like we do whether it be "department policy" or not. Especially considering the cop was at the wrong location.

Inconsistency in the application of the law, double standards and certain people getting a pass on things that would get a mere citizen thrown in jail is what leads to a lot of the "us against them" attitudes so many complain about.

Apparently mere "policy" cleanses away all morality, responsibility, judgement, and law breaking, from a small town police department all the way up to TSA, DHS, CIA, NSA, DEA, DOJ all the other alphabet agencies, and the FBI --heck, all the way up to the Prez. Yeah, we spied on reporters, but it was policy. Yeah, we monitored millions of innocent Americans, but it was policy. Yeah, we were selling weapons to Al Qaeda and let an ambassador and a few other Americans die, but it was in accordance with administration policy. Yeah, we sold some guns to Mexican drug cartels, but hey, it was policy. Yeah, we got the wrong address, busted down the door of the wrong house, shot the occupants and their dogs, but we did it in accordance with policy, so it's AOK.

There is and always will be a double standard.

Street cops go in harm’s way, sometimes numerous times per day and occasionally even when they are “off duty”. We have pretty much beat this horse to death and people will still have different opinions.

We don’t know what experience the officer has had with dogs. Maybe he has been bitten possibly more than once. I do not know anyone that can size up a strange dog running at them and know if it will bite or not. This officer had a few seconds to act and two dogs running at him. The officer had no way of knowing the history of the dogs and what they might have experienced at the hands of (let’s say) someone in uniform.

I’m an old man and have seen a lot. I have seen a dog stand and wag it’s tail while a person pet the dog, then the dog bit that person.

The officer does not have the luxury of deciding what warrants are served and which ones he doesn’t have to. The subject may have only gone a “few” miles per hour over the speed limit or he/she might have 57 tickets and not shown up in court for any of them. It would not have looked good for the officer if he had not served the warrant and the subject had been sitting in the back yard the whole time, sipping a cold one with some steaks on the grill.

I would say this situation is what it is. No door was “busted down”, the “occupants and their dogs” were not shot and hopefully the dog recovers.

I agree that some officers should be put in jail for some of the things they do and some are but then again I believe LEO’s should be among the highest paid people in the country.

Due to the nature of their duties, there certainly are circumstances where LE is and should be treated differently than how a citizen is treated. By the same token, it is not my fault that someone else earned a warrant, or that the police got the address wrong, so those exceptions related to duty should not extend to the privilege of wrongly entering my property and killing my dog without facing any consequences for their error. A badge shouldn't be a blank check. Not having to face consequences facilitates and engenders errors. Texasjoker says he knows that warrant addresses are often wrong, and he apparently considers that as an excuse for less diligence rather than more. Serving the public isn't quite as convenient as ruling over it, but LE is supposed to protect and serve. To me that suggests some extra effort is required under circumstances KNOWN to be fraught with error, and that in such circumstances business as usual amounts to negligence.

[VoiceofReason]

Um... wow, this thread exploded. I'm just going to respond to VM177's response to me, and then I'm gonna finish the rest of the thread.

It doesn't change the fact that his unreasonable fear or incompetence resulted in a dog being killed.

Unreasonable fear or incompetence? I'm not so sure it was unreasonable. The worse chewing I got from a dog was at the teeth of a rottweiler that had been taught to play that way by an incompetent owner. If you don't know the dog, you don't know the dog. Did he go overboard? I want to agree, but having been in similar situations, having been chewed on by aggressive dogs -and- playful dogs with no self-control, I can't deny him the benefit of the doubt. I still have scars from the rottweiler incident, and I know I might not respond well in a similar situation. Then again, I might.

He was serving a traffic warrant, not busting a drug house.

I wasn't clear on this one. If this was a traffic warrant, it does change things. All these serve is revenue generation, and I want them to go away. If it was a traffic warrant, no cops had any business being on the property. If you must have them, just wait until the next time he gets pulled over, and hook him up then. If someone's going to scofflaw a traffic ticket, they'll usually drive in such a fashion as to get pulled over again. Finding him is NOT going to be difficult.

[quote='VM177"]The notion that a cop should be able to come onto my property to serve a traffic warrant and kill my dog without any consequences is absurd. No one else who comes on my property gets to do this. [/quote]

And neither should the cops. Don't get me wrong, I was not and am not arguing for no consequences. I was arguing that the consequences devolve from the initial mistake - that of the wrong address - and not the subsequent actions. Because of the initial mistake, the rest of it, however justified it -would- have been (or not), becomes the department's liability. Whether or not the officer made the initial mistake will probably determine what, if any, disciplinary action he faces; however, his department holds the liability for any veterinarian costs, property damage, lawsuits, etc. (The mistake could have been from the officer swearing the warrant, the judge issuing it, OR the officer serving it)[/quote]

All he had to do was call the people inside BEFORE he entered their property and ask them to secure any animals. Neither I, nor the Constitution that is supposed to guarantee my inalienable rights, exists to make life easier for law enforcement.

While we're quibbling on exactly -what- the problem was, we're on the same wavelength here. Officer incompetence, judicial inattention, or what, regardless of where we draw the line of error, this family's property rights -WERE- violated, and they are due recompense.[/quote][/quote]

I think we're pretty much in agreement. Maybe I could have used a better term than unreasonable fear. What I meant is that everyone else, not in LE, that has to deal with dogs in similar situations, is legally required to accept whatever risk such contact entails, and for the most part, are allowed no recourse to deadly force. Hence, how reasonable is it for the fear of dogs by LE to be so much greater than the fear that must simply be accepted by everyone else doing their jobs in similar situations and without a resort to the use of deadly force? Not the best wording, but I hope you get what I'm trying to say.

I couldn't get the nesting right and gave up.[/quote]

everyone else, not in LE, that has to deal with dogs in similar situations, is legally required to accept whatever risk such contact entails, and for the most part, are allowed no recourse to deadly force.

Please site your source.

By entering your property, a utility worker or anyone else for that matter does not forfeit his/her right to self defence up to and including deadly force. If your dog attacks someone coming to your front door, that person can kill your dog if necessary to protect themselves, then sue you.

[VMI77]

everyone else, not in LE, that has to deal with dogs in similar situations, is legally required to accept whatever risk such contact entails, and for the most part, are allowed no recourse to deadly force.

Please site your source.

By entering your property, a utility worker or anyone else for that matter does not forfeit his/her right to self defence up to and including deadly force. If your dog attacks someone coming to your front door, that person can kill your dog if necessary to protect themselves, then sue you.

I've never heard of a utility worker, letter carrier, or most other such people likely to show up on my property, that is allowed to carry a deadly weapon. The postal service most definitely prohibits letter carriers from possessing deadly weapons on duty. If a utility worker enters my fenced, gated (and locked) property and I have not contracted with that utility for any service, he is trespassing. I happen to work in the electric utility industry, for a VERY gun friendly company, and I can assure you that any meter reader who entered a customer's property armed would be fired (assuming the company found out). If he killed a customer's dog he would be fired. Some utility easements expressly forbid entering property with a gun in possession. And anyway, the company would expect that employee to contact the homeowner or person receiving service and ask them to secure their dog. That is because for those of us not in LE, there are consequences for killing our customer's pets.

If my dog is running loose in a front yard, especially in a place where there is a leash law, and someone is attacked by my dog, he can sue, and I would not desire to see him punished for defending himself. If I found my dog attacking someone I would shoot it myself (at least if they weren't trespassing). That's not the situation here, where the officer was in the wrong location, and entered a fenced yard through a closed gate. Where I live, with my gate shut, they'd either have to call me or break the lock, and breaking the lock would be criminal trespass. There is either a contract or implied contract allowing entry for utility workers and deliverymen. Someone who enters my property without consent, unsolicited, or without such implied consent, is going to get charged with trespassing. I see them with a gun in their hand something more serious is likely to happen.

[lrpettit]

To me, the scary part is trying to figure out what I would do if I knew my young son or grandson was in the backyard and I heard/saw someone (in uniform or not) shoot my dog and was heading toward the youngster. Hopefully the uniform would cause me to hesitate (which would probably just get me shot).

Admittedly I don't know what the answer is but situations like this can't be allowed to happen! Additional fail-safes need to be put in place to stop an officer from going into the backyard of a wrong address and opening fire unless there is a VERY compelling reason. Just saying this is an unfortunate mistake with no consequences is not good enough.

I could see this turning far more tragic than a dead dog and I sure wouldn't want to have to explain to a young child why a police officer shot their dog or have my wife have to explain why the police officer shot me! Me explaining why I shot anybody (much less a policeman) is CERTAINLY not something I want to ever have to do!

[talltex]

I feel that what those with an LE background see this as a reasonable, and understandable situation because we have been there and done it. Through no fault of our own, and in the routine execution of our duties, we have been sent to wrong houses.

As VMI77 previously stated: "Therein lies the problem." I'm really NOT trying to pick on you or Joker, but take a minute and look thru all the posts on this incident and you can CLEARLY see that there is a GREAT DISPARITY in the perceptions of the LEO's and the CITIZENS. The vast majority of the non LEOs most definitely DO NOT view this type of thing as a "reasonable and understandable situation". Your justification for your viewpoint is that "WE have been there and done it...through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN, and in the routine execution of our duties, we have been sent to the wrong address". It's that concept that we just don't accept...the attitude that as long as someone told you to go there and do it, you are somehow absolved of ALL blame. As officers, given power and authority over others, along with the legal sanction to use FORCE to accomplish this, you HAVE to make the effort to BE SURE it is done correctly. This IS NOT an isolated incident...just a few weeks ago a 72 year old Ft. Worth man was shot and killed in his own garage because two officers didn't take the time to make sure they were at the right address. Earlier in spring, "no knock" drug raid...wrong address...man opens door at 3:00 am holding his gun and immediately shot and killed. Last fall on another "no knock" raid, officers knocked down the door and killed the wrong man because the intended target parked his motorcycle in front of someone else's apartment, and they didn't take the time to look at the apartment number. In Los Angeles, officers opened fire on two women in a truck because they THOUGHT if was Dorner, even though the truck didn't match the description. Maybe it IS the increasing "militarization" of the police depts. everywhere that promotes the "I was only following orders" defense...it certainly seems to be increasingly pervasive in law enforcement. In this case, look at how Officer Blasé lists his qualifications and duties, and remember that this is Leander...not south central LA. : Current position: Senior Officer & Special Deputy U.S. Marshal...assigned to: Fugitive Warrants Section & Lone Star Fugitive Task Force... SWAT Operator, SWAT Team Leader, Firearms Instructor, Patrol Rifle Instr., Chemical Munitions Instr., Flash Bang Instr., M16/M4/AR15 Armorer, Glock Armorer, SOTG Shooter Qualification. WHY is he even being paid to go out and serve traffic warrants given the time wasted and costs to do it? The person will have to come in and register the vehicle at some point and you can collect it then or he'll get stopped for something else. In another display of good judgment, two weeks ago Officer Blasé wrote a ticket to a 10 year old boy for "improper use of seatbelt" because he had the upper seatbelt behind his back, and told him "sorry, but it's click it or ticket". It was dismissed when it was found out it's not legal to do that to someone under 15 years of age. Hard to picture him in that Norman Rockwell painting.

[talltex]

Please site your source.

By entering your property, a utility worker or anyone else for that matter does not forfeit his/her right to self defence up to and including deadly force. If your dog attacks someone coming to your front door, that person can kill your dog if necessary to protect themselves, then sue you.

If they kill someone's pet, they might win the legal battle against criminal charges but they will lose their job and likely lose their money in a civil suit. Most juries will take the viewpoint that if you entered a closed gate without asking, you intruded on the dog's property uninvited and they will assess at least a portion of the damages to you. I can't speak to every company's policies, but my brother just retired as an engineer with First Choice Power and they allow their employees to carry only pepper spray. If they are caught carrying anything else on the job, they will be fired. Have a friend that works for ATMOS energy, and he said up until about 20 years ago, they could carry a small cattle prod which will keep a dog off without injuring them, but they had to stop after someone saw them zap their dog and sued them for damages...they now carry pepper spray also.

[texanjoker]

I just don't see how we can accept the double standard like we do whether it be "department policy" or not. Especially considering the cop was at the wrong location.

Inconsistency in the application of the law, double standards and certain people getting a pass on things that would get a mere citizen thrown in jail is what leads to a lot of the "us against them" attitudes so many complain about.

Apparently mere "policy" cleanses away all morality, responsibility, judgement, and law breaking, from a small town police department all the way up to TSA, DHS, CIA, NSA, DEA, DOJ all the other alphabet agencies, and the FBI --heck, all the way up to the Prez. Yeah, we spied on reporters, but it was policy. Yeah, we monitored millions of innocent Americans, but it was policy. Yeah, we were selling weapons to Al Qaeda and let an ambassador and a few other Americans die, but it was in accordance with administration policy. Yeah, we sold some guns to Mexican drug cartels, but hey, it was policy. Yeah, we got the wrong address, busted down the door of the wrong house, shot the occupants and their dogs, but we did it in accordance with policy, so it's AOK.

There is and always will be a double standard.

Street cops go in harm’s way, sometimes numerous times per day and occasionally even when they are “off duty”. We have pretty much beat this horse to death and people will still have different opinions.

We don’t know what experience the officer has had with dogs. Maybe he has been bitten possibly more than once. I do not know anyone that can size up a strange dog running at them and know if it will bite or not. This officer had a few seconds to act and two dogs running at him. The officer had no way of knowing the history of the dogs and what they might have experienced at the hands of (let’s say) someone in uniform.

I’m an old man and have seen a lot. I have seen a dog stand and wag it’s tail while a person pet the dog, then the dog bit that person.

The officer does not have the luxury of deciding what warrants are served and which ones he doesn’t have to. The subject may have only gone a “few” miles per hour over the speed limit or he/she might have 57 tickets and not shown up in court for any of them. It would not have looked good for the officer if he had not served the warrant and the subject had been sitting in the back yard the whole time, sipping a cold one with some steaks on the grill.

I would say this situation is what it is. No door was “busted down”, the “occupants and their dogs” were not shot and hopefully the dog recovers.

I agree that some officers should be put in jail for some of the things they do and some are but then again I believe LEO’s should be among the highest paid people in the country.

Due to the nature of their duties, there certainly are circumstances where LE is and should be treated differently than how a citizen is treated. By the same token, it is not my fault that someone else earned a warrant, or that the police got the address wrong, so those exceptions related to duty should not extend to the privilege of wrongly entering my property and killing my dog without facing any consequences for their error. A badge shouldn't be a blank check. Not having to face consequences facilitates and engenders errors. Texasjoker says he knows that warrant addresses are often wrong, and he apparently considers that as an excuse for less diligence rather than more. Serving the public isn't quite as convenient as ruling over it, but LE is supposed to protect and serve. To me that suggests some extra effort is required under circumstances KNOWN to be fraught with error, and that in such circumstances business as usual amounts to negligence.

Wow, there you go again putting words on my post . I have never made an excuse for less diligence rather then more as you are now stating. You sure like to assume a lot. That must be the difference between us because I prefer to go by facts. If I was trying to make excuses, I wouldn't inform you how we find people and that addresses can be wrong as I know some of you will blow that out of proportion. I merely stated how people are found and that sometimes addresses are wrong. You don't know that until you knock on the door. That doesn't make any excuse for or against an action and is just stating a fact. Having worked these kind of details and the k9 unit which went yard to yard searching for people on a daily basis, I ALWAYS made sure I didn't have to make a bad decision about somebody's dog when I was a guest in their yard.

[mamabearCali]

Please site your source.

By entering your property, a utility worker or anyone else for that matter does not forfeit his/her right to self defence up to and including deadly force. If your dog attacks someone coming to your front door, that person can kill your dog if necessary to protect themselves, then sue you.

If they kill someone's pet, they might win the legal battle against criminal charges but they will lose their job and likely lose their money in a civil suit. Most juries will take the viewpoint that if you entered a closed gate without asking, you intruded on the dog's property uninvited and they will assess at least a portion of the damages to you. I can't speak to every company's policies, but my brother just retired as an engineer with First Choice Power and they allow their employees to carry only pepper spray. If they are caught carrying anything else on the job, they will be fired. Have a friend that works for ATMOS energy, and he said up until about 20 years ago, they could carry a small cattle prod which will keep a dog off without injuring them, but they had to stop after someone saw them zap their dog and sued them for damages...they now carry pepper spray also.

Same at my husbands utility company. They are permitted to carry pepper spray and a metal clipboard. They are trained to if they must enter a fenced area to stop, look for signs of a dog, then whether or not they see signs to call for a dog. If dog friendly comes around to talk with the dog and to enter once they have gained the dogs favor to enter carefully. If dog unfriendly comes around they call the owner and request that they restrain their dog. Now they carry pepper spray and the metal clip board in case those measures don't work.

Look I am a reasonable person. I have many LEO friends. If the LEO is serving a warrant on a dangerous person (murder, drug kingpin, etc) or if he is trying save persons life and he cannot take the time to be patient and careful then I can understand sorrowfully having to kill a pet because one is trying to save human life. But this was not an emergency. No one was dying. This was a traffic violation. No one was dying...no one was committing heinous acts against another person. There were other actions that could have been taken.

I plead with those of you charged with the enforcement of laws. Please, use at least as much sense as the 7.50/hr meter reader. Please don't be in such a hurry to dispense "enforcement of the law" that you forget to use your heads and get yourself in a position where you have to kill someones pet over a petty traffic violation.

[EEllis]

Please site your source.

By entering your property, a utility worker or anyone else for that matter does not forfeit his/her right to self defence up to and including deadly force. If your dog attacks someone coming to your front door, that person can kill your dog if necessary to protect themselves, then sue you.

I've never heard of a utility worker, letter carrier, or most other such people likely to show up on my property, that is allowed to carry a deadly weapon. The postal service most definitely prohibits letter carriers from possessing deadly weapons on duty. If a utility worker enters my fenced, gated (and locked) property and I have not contracted with that utility for any service, he is trespassing. I happen to work in the electric utility industry, for a VERY gun friendly company, and I can assure you that any meter reader who entered a customer's property armed would be fired (assuming the company found out). If he killed a customer's dog he would be fired. Some utility easements expressly forbid entering property with a gun in possession. And anyway, the company would expect that employee to contact the homeowner or person receiving service and ask them to secure their dog. That is because for those of us not in LE, there are consequences for killing our customer's pets.

Employer policies and legal liability are two separate issues and the fact that many employers prohibit their employees from effectively being able to defend themselves is hardly worth mentioning when discussing the law. Truth is since it is not trespassing to enter the yard when it's unlocked and unposted there is every reason to believe that one could shoot a dog and successfully claim self defence. Now I assume the shooter would be doing so because they feared serious injury, and I hope they were correct and have evidence of such. Really though isn't this why we carry? What if you were walking you daughter as she sold GS cookies, or school candy, or whatever. We have already established that the law, and most people, don't consider an unposted, unlocked gate to mean "STAY OUT!" So if you were walking you kid and around the corner comes 2 barking shepherds do you really think you couldn't "get away" with shooting? Please.

If my dog is running loose in a front yard, especially in a place where there is a leash law, and someone is attacked by my dog, he can sue, and I would not desire to see him punished for defending himself. If I found my dog attacking someone I would shoot it myself (at least if they weren't trespassing). That's not the situation here, where the officer was in the wrong location, and entered a fenced yard through a closed gate. Where I live, with my gate shut, they'd either have to call me or break the lock, and breaking the lock would be criminal trespass. There is either a contract or implied contract allowing entry for utility workers and deliverymen. Someone who enters my property without consent, unsolicited, or without such implied consent, is going to get charged with trespassing. I see them with a gun in their hand something more serious is likely to happen.

You're trying to equate your situation with a locked and secure gate to what the officer was faced with. It is not the same. Anyone can open an unlocked unposted gate because the contract you mention includes contacting the residents, which is what the officer was trying to do. Leave you gate unlocked and try it your way but TDC has really poor internet access so you probably won't be able to tell us to much about it.

[chuck j]

I have ben quiet , it does seem to me that law enforcement does have a problem with pets . Could be many reasons but I'v heard of , read many stories of shooting pets by LEO's . I am a stanch supporter of all local LEOs , I realize how hard their job is and thank them for the good they do .
This happened in Wichita Falls not long ago , weird .

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/201 ... elty-case/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ameer]

When they go to the the wrong house and shoot a politician's dog, there might be some consequences.

[RX8er]

A buddy of mine called me to come help him move a porch swing. I called him a few minutes before my arrival and he said he was out back getting it ready to move. When I showed up, I walked to the side of his house and though his gate. As I rounded the corner and his dog started to come at me barking with teeth showing. It was an aggressive dog and I feared for my life so I stopped the threat. As it turns out, I was at the wrong house. See he just moved in to his house and he is at 3632 Any Street but got confused on his address and told me he was at 3623 Any Street. I shot and killed someones treasured pet.

Now, all sarcasm aside, this didn't happen as I'm sure you could guess.

Other than a badge how is this any different? As a LEO, I'm pretty sure you would take me to jail for this. Now, I got to go lock my front door and gates because I just learned that if I don't put up a sign and have unlocked doors, anyone can just come walking in to my house or yard.