Category: Animal House
Sad story.
Houston Cop Forces Family to Leave Blind Chihuahua at Roadside to Die in Traffic Stop
I hope the cop dies a long, slow, painful, agonizing death.
I totally agree with the above poster.
Hey, let's get our priorities straight:
1. It was a dog.
2. It was 14 years old.
3. It was almost blind.
I agree this cop was probably a jerk (most are these days). But what would you have done in his/her shoes?
And to respond as Imprecator did, "I hope the cop dies a long, slow, painful, agonizing death."
Is, at most, an over reaction, at least I hope so.
Bob
What would I have done? I would have called animal control to get the dog. Not that friggin hard and virtually expending no extra effort.
Cop's too busy saving the world to stay and wait for animal control? Tie the dog to a pole or somewhere at least safe?
I can't even believe your thoughts behind points 1-3, seriously? Well you know back in the day people with disabilities were locked up because they were seen as worthless wastes of space, but you know it's OK to do that to an animal cause it's just a dog right? I'm sure they thought "it's just a blind person".
Just WOW!
I get what Bob is saying, and I agree with him, to some extent.
how could anyone who has never been in a situation of this nature possibly know they would've handled things differently than the cop? we can't.
am I advocating the killing of animals? no, of course not. the dog was 14 years old, though, so he could've died anyway, whether animal control got to him, or not. and, again, how can we claim to know what the outcome might have been?
Ok, so the dog was old, and may not have had long left. But would you leave an elderly person with age related disabilities on the side of the road, unlikely. Most people, especially cops, would recognise that the person wasn't able to be left in a situation like that.
And also meow makes a good point, tie it somewhere safe. That really isn't so difficult. Also, it was a huge city, there will be loads of animal shelters and rescue places around.
You've also got to remember that the dog wasn't just wandering around and a cop saw it...the owners specifically asked the cops if they could call someone. It really wouldn't have been that difficult for him to say yes, they could call someone to come and get the dog.
Oh, and I'm sure all the people saying it was ok would feel very different if it was their retired guide dog that was left. Just think about that for a second. Oh well, it's old, doesn't work anymore, who cares if it dies. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have that attitude then...but it's ok because it's someone else so who cares.
Is is standard procedure to search a car when someone fails to use a turn signal? It seems to me that we might be missing a chunk of the story that occurred between the time they were stopped and the search and discovery of the drugs.
The problem that those like chelsea and bob seem to miss is that this was not
the cop's dog. This was the family's dog. Thus, even if it was old and blind, its
still their decision whether or not to put it down. Would you like it if I had the
power to decide whether you were useful or not, and if I decided you weren't I
could just put a bullet in your temple? I mean, you're useless, why not do it? I
mean Chelsea doesn't plan on adding to the gene pool, so what purpose does
she serve humanity? She's basically an old maid, why not leave her on the side
of the road? Its only right.
Yeah, I sound like I'm insane now, don't I. Well, you sound like you're
heartless and unsympathetic people. There's really not a lot of difference.
I think Cody can come across as a dick sometimes, but here I honestly think he has a valid point. It was the families dog, and they asked to call someone. Giving them that time wouldn't have required anything, the cops didn't have to go out of their way, they just had to show some respect.
Just because the dog was old doesn't mean it deserved to die.
If you had a family member that for example struggled to remember even very basic things would you just leave them on the side of the road because they were probably going to die soon anyway? I doubt you would.
A pet is family. This is no different. And just because it's an animal, not a human, does that give us the right to decide it should die in a horrible way, no, it doesn't.
SilverLightning, I hope you don't actually believe that the only way to make any contribution to this world is through reproduction. What I think you're saying is that it's hypocrisy for people to become so outraged when a cop leaves a blind dog to die, but if the family decided to put it down those same people would find it acceptable. Am I correct?
That being said, I would much rather be given an injection which makes me go to sleep and then die than be struck by a car and possibly experience a prolonged and very painful death. I doubt any dog could understand that he was useless, his family didn't want him anymore, and therefore he was being sent to die. He would be incapable of experiencing that kind of emotional pain, but quite capable of feeling the physical agony of his bones being broken and skin being ripped off. There is a difference.
No, you're completely wrong about what I meant I'm afraid. I meant that
saying that its ok what happened because the dog was useless is an absurd and
narrow-minded response.
I think cody's point was it was the families dog, and they asked to be able to call someone to ensure it was safe. And yet someone else decided it's life had no value.
And the people supporting the cops decision wouldn't like it if we decided their life had no value. But it's ok for him to leave an innocent animal to be hit by a car because it was old.
People are sick.
Voyager, to your first comment...that has NOTHING to do with the cop's decision to leave the dog on the side of the road, like nothing, like what a waste of the 10 seconds it took me to read through that.
And if you think all cops act by the book at all times well then I'd like to live in your ignorant bubble. I've experienced/witnessed/read about ratial profiling, abuse of power, etc. etc. from cops. but again that has NOTHING to do with the point here.
the comment about me not planning to have kids was unfounded, both cause it's untrue, and doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.
as I said in my earlier post, though, neither Bob or I are saying that killing animals is right.
however, aside from the fact there's probably more to the story than we know, I don't think people are within their right to say the cop was an asshole, in handling things the way he did.
maybe he had extreme circumstances in his own life to tend to, that kept him from reacting differently, or maybe he reacted based on how he would've wanted things to happen, rather than stopping to consider the fact that this family might have had a different approach altogether.
we can't possibly know, is all I'm saying.
No, I'm not overreacting. I don't take animal cruelty lightly. And this, is cruelty.
Totally agreed with Imp on this. There is no excuse. Not One. Cop's wife is dying, fine put the dog in the fucking cop car and have animal control pick him up at the hospital he's rushing to for his family emergency or again just tie him up to a freakin pole what like all of 2 minutes time? NO EXCUSE!!!!
From the article…
“The officer took both men into custody. And when the tow truck arrived, the dog was placed on the side of the road.”
The title of the article and the first line imply that the officer himself put the dog there but after reading the above sentence it’s not very clear if this indeed took place.
In some instances, “taken into custody” can simply mean that a suspect has been arrested and put in the patrol car. But if not, as the sentence somewhat implies, and the vehicle was actually towed after the suspects were driven away and taken to the station, it seems very possible the tow-truck driver had no idea the dog was blind. After all, its visual acuity was not specified in the article which could mean the animal’s blindness went unnoticed.
the order in which the events unfolded is unknown.
We can speculate that the owner explained his pet’s condition to the police officer but the tow-truck driver was never informed and simply let the dog out of the vehicle reassured it would find its way back home like most dogs.
Lack of communication between police officer and driver was probably the cause of the dog’s death and not animal cruelty.
I am not sure what kind of procedures or contractual agreements the Houston Police Department follows when having a car impounded but it’s possible they simply make their arrests and let the towing company take care of the vehicle.
I admit I read the article but haven’t looked deeper into the story. There is probably a more complete report that hasn't been brought to our attention. Many factors, such as the suspects’ demeanor, the dog being protective, or animosity from past run-ins with the husband, could have led to the officer’s behavior.
But what we have here is likely a case of pig misconduct. It would surprise me very little...
And I do agree that the police officer could have shown a little more consideration for the dog's welfare. The article simply states he said the dog would be okay but we cannot assume naivety prompted him to respond in this fashion.
The police are trained to assume the worst about people they arrest so it's also possible the officer viewed the dog owner's story incredulously.
That theory might hold weight if police used private tow trucks. They don't
just leave cars on the side of the road to be towed all willy nilly. Its called
impounding, and they do it themselves. Its so that they can A. use the evidence
in the car, and B. give the car back after the incident is over. The cop would
have stayed there the entire time waiting for the tow truck to arrive. There is a
lot of paperwork to be filed, and some of it requires a signature from those who
are in custody.
But, lets assume that you're right, you're not, but lets assume it any way.
That would require that either A, the cop left the dog in a car on the side of a
highway in Texas, where it was nearly or over 100 degrees, or B, left the dog on
the side of the highway while he drove off and let the tow truck handle it. Both
of these scenarios is animal cruelty, and it still makes the cop a jackass. So
even if you were right, you'd still be wrong.
Chelsea, I really don't give two rat shits about whether or not you're planning
on having children. The point still stands, and nitpicking one little detail
suggests that you know that, and are too cowardly to admit that you were
wrong.
The problem I have with Bobby's kinds of views is that, I believe animals are just as important on this earth as humans. I understand that a lot of people think very differently to me there. This is a disgrace.
as a person with a service dog. man, i would freak out if i were to be arrested and the cop left my dog at the side of the road!!! they would have to beat me down! no animal should be treated in such unhumane fashion. i dont care if the person being arrested is
"acting" crazy or whatever his demeanor. the cop should have called the humane society, the pound, someone to pick up the pup. old, young, blind,retarted , no matter. this goes to show howthe police force has lost empathay, disconnected, the police who are suppose to protect us and make us feel safe have become. i dont care if we are missing some of the story. the fact remains. this asshole of a hateful cop left the dog there. to do what? to die! fucking asshole! yes, one day. one day. again, one day. we all die! its the circle of life! but, no one can realy state at what time, on what day of th week, or what year the pup was going to die! no! one! so, check your humanity. forget your mental and smart ass skills. it is a memeber of the family! left to die! on the side of the road! fucking hateful!
thank you, raskolnakov, for demonstrating that there could, indeed, be much more to the story than we'll know.
That still fails to eliminate the possibility that the officer never communicated the dog’s health to the tow-truck driver. Perhaps the suspects were sitting in the patrol car by the time the car was being impounded and the dog owner’s words never entered the driver’s ears.
All that’s being argued here is that the article seems to place all the blame on the cop. Upon closer inspection of the story, though, it becomes possible that the tow-truck driver could also have inadvertently taken part in the animal’s demise. As some say, the one who holds the cow’s leg is just as guilty as the one who slits its throat.
Leaving an animal in a car with the windows rolled down is dangerous but I doubt most people, including pet owners, know this amounts to animal cruelty. The temperature inside can climb higher than the temperature outside. Most people think of neglect, violent abuse, dog fighting, and so on, as animal cruelty, but cases that are not as extreme may seem like a responsible solution, such as leaving a pet inside the car.
Perhaps the cop has never owned a dog and lacked the sense to know any better, and from the looks of it, he didn’t seem to worry about violating anything within policy when ignoring Mr. Garcia’s concerns. He probably operates by the book and believes he shouldn’t go beyond what is expected of him. I still believe the outcome was unfortunate but to say it was willful animal cruelty is a serious accusation when not all the details are known.
Again this is mere speculation and as I have said, I do believe the cop showed little consideration for Mr. Garcia’s pet, which in my estimation makes him a rotten pig.
Also, some people assume a dog can find its way back home unscathed from any area of the city. The hazards that a dog may encounter along the way never crosses their mind. Maybe they see all the strays surviving out in the streets and believe a family pet will do just as fine.
Because neither the motives of the officer nor those of the driver are known, it is safe to argue that the animal died as a result of irresponsibility and ignorance as well as a lack of common sense. Is this still animal cruelty? I am certain it is cruel but as for motive and intent, I’m sure there is room to argue both ways there.
It has been suggested that the dog in this case could have been tied to a pole. But had this solution been used, others, including pet owners, who have a different understanding of dogs, would have considered that solution just as heartless and cruel.
Since this is mere speculation and not all the details are known, I will say no more on this topic. Feel free to disagree.
Rascolnikov, at least, shows some analytical skills.
I'm not defending the cop or even the tow car driver. I'm just saying there's a hell of a lot about this story we don't know.
And, like it or not, dogs are not people. So, to wish the cop a horrible death, despite the fact we don't know what he did or did not do, is simply stupid.
As far as Silver lightning's assertion that Chelsea is knit picking, all I can do is quote his original post and let you decide:
" I mean Chelsea doesn't plan on adding to the gene pool, so what purpose does she serve humanity? She's basically an old maid, why not leave her on the side
of the road? Its only right.
Yeah, I sound like I'm insane now, don't I. Well, you sound like you're
heartless and unsympathetic people. There's really not a lot of difference."
If you don't know the difference between insanity and indifference, then you are insane.
Bob
All right, I'm not defending the cop's actions. But a little perspective.
The Wife was in a terrible situation almost a year ago, where She had to assist someone having a stroke on the sidewalk. She got the paramedics there to help him.
You want to know what a bunch of punk-ass passers-by social justice warriors did? Started yelling at Her for not looking after the dog. I'm afraid had I been there I'd probably be in jail for rearranging somebody's face.
It's not like they said, "Oh, here, I'll take that dog." They started giving Her shit for not having looked after the dog. The situation itself was triggering her own personal anxiety.
So this is how it is now, people feeling all important, often over the Internet, over the dog.
To the original poster, I get your sentiments. I'm not claiming this is the same situation at all. But look at some of the specialton responses. If he tied the dog to a pole, he would have been criticized for tying the dog up. An animal that is tied is seen as vulnerable to predation by other animals.
Anyway, I don't want you to think like I do. I just want you to think.
But Leo, this is a cop. A person with a little gismo on their shoulder we usually
call a radio. Its a wonderful little gadget that allows them to make calls out over
the entire city. One of the places that call can be heard in is the ASPCA. Wanna
know how I know that? The houston ASPCA has its own television show. I
assume that your wife did not have a radio that could call the ASPCA on her
shoulder. I assume she also did not have a job that not only requires her to be
prepared to react to stressful situations, but gives her free training on how to
handle those stressful situations. So I'm afraid your comparison really doesn't
hold up.
Bob, you're still nitpicking the details and completely missing the point of the
post. As for your last sentence, the difference between indifference and
sociopathy is degree and medication. Not really a big difference in the long run.
Learn to think better and more creatively and one day you'll be able to see that.
As for rascal, I think the only thing his post proved is that he doesn't know
what the word inadvertent means. He's also much too forgiving of ignorance.
But, that is a trait many people suffer.
But, whether you want to blame the cop alone, or the cop and a tow truck
driver, its still the responsibility of a city employee. Its still cruel. You guys
aren't even making an attempt at proving it isn't cruel. You're trying to argue
responsibility, when we're arguing about the nature of the crime. Its like we've
seen a murder and one person says, "Well that was nasty" and the other person
retorts, "Well maybe their wife was cheating on them". They are completely
nonsequiitor.
Perhaps my words were not clear enough. Of course the word inadvertently was used to show that the driver could not have known that his actions would lead to the dog’s death, not that he had no idea he was putting the dog outside of the car or on the roadside. But this is all hypothetical. Moreover it may be argued that leaving a dog on the side of a busy street not only can cause great injury to the dog but also a traffic accident or something worse. But proving that it was done with the intention of causing such a tragedy is better left for a judge and jury to decide. For instance, the cop’s history with animals could be investigated to determine the degree of cruelty..
Also I did argue that the dog’s death could have been a result of ignorance. This does not mean that the cop or driver are not responsible and should go unpunished. It does mean that they were either poorly trained or simply were too focused on getting their job done and believed they were doing the right thing. I am sure the case is under investigation and once all has been brought to light, they will find the appropriate penalty.
Does what happened amount to a crime? I believe it does, but since it may have come about as the result of a huge mistake, the response and punishment must be fair.
Determining motive is always instrumental in how people are tried. Perhaps that is unacceptable for some people as motive can be feigned or exploited but you cannot separate motive when judging the nature of a crime. It in no way removes responsibility from the accused but it does determine how the judgement will be rendered.
I don't care if dogs are not people. People are animals too, like it or not.
You sure you want to use that logic, Imprecator? Remember, I live in the PETA capital of the world. OK second to capital: Frisco is the Capital, but still.
So, here we go:
You say we are animals too, which is, of course, scientifically correct.
So by that logic, are you prepared to charge a bear with neglect for abandoning its young? Are you prepared to charge a dog for negligent homicide for fleeing the scene of a water-based disaster, where the human died of hypothermia?
I could go on. I'm not saying the animal's welfare is unimportant, though some special snowflakes will no doubt claim that I am. What I'm saying is, don't use the 'we're all animals' argument, unless you're willing to explain why we are responsible and they aren't.
Face it, we are all animals, and all animals do more or less care for their own species. But we are in fact special due to our evolutionary emergent properties. If you wanna argue with that, then you either make the cop not responsible, or you make every other animal responsible for abandonment, which happens in nature all the time for various reasons.
I agree, that argument isn't very sound. But if you want to get all naturalistic,
think of it this way. This was a chihuahua, if I remember correctly. This is not a
natural animal. This is a manmade animal. So, since we made them, we're
responsible for them. We took them out of their natural habitat, flipped off some
genetic switches, flipped on a couple others, and we had a cute little ankle-biter.
Now, we as a species have the responsibility of taking care of them. Those with
the ability to do something, have the responsibility to do that something if it is a
positive something.
But lets look at this ignorance idea. So, the cop and the tow truck driver both
think that its perfectly fine to leave a dog on the side of the road. Or, they both
think that leaving it in a car on the side of the road is perfectly acceptable. Ok, I
read the stuff that fox news puts out, and I still don't think anyone is that
stupid. If you don't realize that cars get hot when you leave them sitting, you're
either an alien from another planet, an immigrant from a country where they
have no cars or heat, or you're too stupid to be a cop. So either this guy/guys
are cruel, or they're too stupid to have a job that involves the public. Certainly
the cop is too stupid to be trusted with a gun.
Oh boy, too stupid to be a cop? Reminds me of what might be an urban legend, but out here in the early 90s, there was rumor afoot that people were denied entrance into Police Academy for scoring too high on the test.
All right, Cody I can see that. So, if they didn't violate regulations, people in that area need to lobby the police department for regulations for two things: - when reporting in, you have to report in the dog, not just the humans. And second, just like the humans, the dog has to be accounted for.
I can rationally explain to you why during a water rescue not all dogs get rescued, and it's not a heartless bastard situation. But this is not a water situation, where number of bodies / weight on board the craft can present a risk. You're right about it being a Chihuahua. Those things are so small, I mistook one for a lost pound puppy, when it was a neighborhood pet that got loose. No reason he couldn't have put it on the seat or the floor of the car when driving to the station.
Exactly. He had several possible courses of action. He chose the crule one.
That makes it cruel. Whether he intended to kill the dog or not is irrelevant to
the fact that the action taken was a cruel one. Plain and simple.
Agree with Cody and Leo here. There are situations where you have to make decisions, particularly if they involve water or fire. But by waiting a few minutes to make a phone call, or bringing the dog along, nobody's life would have been endangered.
So in this case the cop made a cruel choice, and an unfair choice. We've chosen to domesticate animals and keep them as our pets, therefore we are responsible for caring for them. If we live in a society where we have pets we can't expect not to be held to account when something like this happens.
Fair enough. I still have no sympathy for the cop though.