Show of HandsShow of Hands

RoDe October 22nd, 2014 2:32am

Based on the camera fitted to the officer, it would appear a Texas police officer needlessly and wantonly killed a dog. If a tape of a civilian shooting a dog was brought to police's attention do you believe it's more likely an arrest would occur?

7 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Zod Above Pugetropolis
10/21/14 9:44 pm

Yes in most places, but probably not in the places where the cops go around shooting dogs themselves.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/21/14 8:49 pm

Okay not clicking. Killing dogs hits me hard in the feels. Fuck people who kill dogs. Cops who should be fucking PROTECTING the innocent more than most. Ugh ugh fuck them fuck fuck assholes fuck.

Ima pet my dog now :'-(

Reply
Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/21/14 7:49 pm

An officer can't take the law into his own hands - that's wrong. But I wish pit bulls were banned. My guess is that officer has seen some pretty viscous pit bulls and figured he was doing the community a favor. My friend who is a cop had to put three

Reply
Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/21/14 7:50 pm

Pit bulls down a month or so ago, but he called in animal control and they were all euthanized.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/21/14 8:51 pm

It isn't pit bulls' fault that assholes breed them and raise them specifically to be attack dogs. Habitual offenders should have to pay massive fines, but pit bulls' very *existence* doesn't deserve to be outlawed.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 5:55 am

I know Aurora Colorado outlawed pit bulls. I would vote for similar ban here. I do live in an area that doesn't tend to attract the kind of people that own or raise pit bulls, which is one of the reasons that makes this area very attractive.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 9:00 am

That you think there's a "kind of people" who raise pit bulls tells me you don't actually know many pit bull owners. I know plenty - and every last one of them is kind and loving, just like their sweet pitties.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 9:07 am

It always shocks me when people tell me they have a Pit bull. I have to inform them that because they have a pitbull, they no longer qualify for preferred homeowners insurance. Instead we have to write them through a non-admitted carrier.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 9:09 am

Non-admitted carriers are the only carriers that can successfully exclude things like animal bite liability. Unfortunately for the insured, non-admitted carriers are not regulated by the state, so there's no built-in consumer protections; and the

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 9:10 am

Coverages are significantly less at a much higher cost.

I'll tell the pitbull owner that the average dogbite liability claims $28,000, and that the numbers are higher for the average pitbull claim. But of course, they won't give up their dogs.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 9:11 am

I just have to let them know that if their pitbull does attack someone, they'll get sued & they may have a judgment placed against their house & their future income. It's shocking to me that someone would choose a dog that could cost them everything.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 9:13 am

There are so many wonderful large dogs without aggressive tendencies. I don't know why people like pit bulls and Rottweilers.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:14 pm

That depends on the state and the insurance company. A couple of states prohibit breed discrimination in insurance policies. And insurers who blacklist pit bulls blacklist other breeds as well. Similar issue with landlords - we've lived some places

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:18 pm

that won't allow dogs from a whole random list of breeds. It's pure fearmongering, but dog owners are well aware it exists.

Our renter's insurance never asked what breed of dog we have. We don't know anyway as they're both rescue mutts.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:29 pm

I wouldn't call it a random list. It's a list of what they consider "vicious dog breeds". Generally includes pit bulls, Rottweilers, wolves, German Shepherds, Akitas, Chows, Siberian Huskies, & presa canario (Italian pitbull).

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:30 pm

Insurance companies are all about data. If the data tells them that those are the dogs the cause the most problems, then those of the dogs they don't want to insure. As a landlord, I won't let my tenants have any of those types of dogs either.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:31 pm

If my tenant has a vicious dog that attacks someone, then I can be held liable as the landlord. That's why have to carry over $1 million of insurance to protect myself, and that's why don't allow them to own vicious dogs.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:31 pm

Oh, and I forgot, Dobermans are also on that list.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:47 pm

You're conflating "vicious dogs" with breeds. Not all vicious dogs belong to a specific subset of breeds, and not all dogs within those breeds are vicious. If a tenant's dog bites someone, the landlord is only liable if s/he had reason to know that

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:48 pm

the tenant had a dangerous dog. Pit bulls are generally not considered inherently dangerous under most state laws. A handful of shitty laws for lazy people probably exist adjusting those presumptions. So liability would depend on whether you live in

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:48 pm

a shitty jurisdiction.

Of course, you have the right to be draconian about what kinds of dogs you let tenants have. I always find it sad when powerful people like landlords throw their weight around by making arbitrary and underinformed decisions

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 12:49 pm

like that, but yeah, it's your legal right.

I always keep a file when I rent from landlords like that. Keep notes when they fuck up and whatnot. Two can play at the arbitrary rules game.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:52 pm

Bethany, it's not arbitrary, if I allow my tenant to have a pitbull or another dog on the vicious breed dog list, my insurance will cancel me. And regardless of whether or not I am held liable, as the landlord, I would be sued and the legal defense

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:52 pm

costs alone can amount to tens of thousands of dollars.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 12:53 pm

It's not done to "throw my weight around as a landlord." If I don't follow the requirements of my insurance company, then I'll have no coverage, and could possibly lose everything. It just doesn't make sense to have one of those vicious dogs.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 1:04 pm

Okay. Then it's your insurer who's throwing their weight around. It's still arbitrary. Maybe Texas law is such that you can't find a better insurer, in which case, I suppose that's just another reason to be glad I live where I do.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 1:10 pm

It is the insurance company's call, but in my opinion, they are making the right call. California insurance definitely is different. It shocks me that your state minimum on auto insurance is only $15/$30/$5. Your auto insurance prices are simply so

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 1:11 pm

outrages, I don't know how people afford to drive out there. We get a lot of people moving from California to Texas and they always carry state minimum liability, and these are people with good incomes and high educations. Such a different culture

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 1:12 pm

out there. We always have to educate them a little bit on auto insurance when they move to Texas so they'll have the right coverage in case they get in an accident.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 1:12 pm

We get a lot of Californians moving here too, Texas has more people from other states moving here every day than any other state. 750 people a day move to Texas from other states, most of them from California & New York.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 1:14 pm

That's hilarious. I think this has got to be the first time a conservative has ever complained to me that my state doesn't regulate something ENOUGH. Lol.

My car insurance isn't very expensive. Maybe you just get the worst drivers coming there.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 1:15 pm

And while you're free to think your umbrella insurance is right to exclude certain breeds, that doesn't make it rational. You're still ignoring a lot of factual evidence.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:04 pm

I'm sure the actuaries hard by the insurance companies would argue their data is far more extensive and for more conclusive than yours on the dogs. If there's one thing insurance companies are good at, it's proving correlation of risk. As far as

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:05 pm

Californians him move here, they've all had clean driving records & good credit, the high rates they're paying is most likely due to the ZIP Code they're coming from. If it's an area with a lot of uninsured motorists, then the rates will be very high

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:06 pm

The insurance industry benefits from regulations because it's standardizes policies and makes it easier for the consumers understand.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:06 pm

And laws that require higher limits of auto insurance liability benefit everyone.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 2:12 pm

Insurance companies are just as subject to flawed perceptions as anyone else. In terms of actuarial statistics, when you're talking about liability coverage, jury verdicts matter just as much as actual danger/costs.

I guess I just have to take your

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 2:12 pm

word about whatever subset of drivers you're seeing. Honestly not clear what your point is regardless.

bethanyq Ess Eff
10/22/14 2:15 pm

As I understand Texas law, civil damages for dog bites can be harsher there than in other states (kind of funny given that Texas is otherwise seen as a haven for tort defendants). That might explain the unique insurance rules you're describing.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:21 pm

Its not just Texas. Every single insurance carrier I represent that is a preferred carrier will not insure your home if you own a dog on the vicious dog list, regardless of which state you live in, unless that state has a law requiring them to do so.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:31 pm

I did find on the web that you can actually purchase pet liability insurance as a separate policy. The estimated premium is $450-$2500 a year, depending on the breed. That might be a good alternative for people who own dogs on the vicious breed list

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/22/14 2:33 pm

That's actually a pretty fair price considering that one third of all liability claims are dog bites, and that the average claim is $28,000, and that there is generally around half a billion dollars in dog bite claims each year.

FemmeAdamWest in the Tardis library
10/21/14 7:41 pm

Absolutely. Civilians get charged and cops get paid vacation.

Reply