[lil fu fu girl]

Originally Posted by Robin Lodal

Ok... so this is the first time I have heard of this and any of you who are not a police officer (or part of a police family) would not understand. I do not know exactly what happened in the kitchen (with the dogs) but I do know that when my husband is in the field and he even feels slightly threatened (aggressive dog, growling, nipping, lunging forward, etc) and their well being is at stake they will eliminate the dog. My husband is an animal lover and he has not had to do this but I know several officers that have. Its not ok nor typical for them to just shoot the suspect's animals. And you may think the Corgi could not have "done a number" on someone but think again. I know some officers who get bitten by small dogs (chihuahuas, yorkies, etc) all the time. Not that they will do the same damage as a large dog, but there can still be damage. If there is an aggressive dog they ask the owner to restrain them before they are even an issue but in this instance (with the search warrant) - that was not an option...

Now... for the comment on the kid being present. The parents should have thought about dealing drugs and breaking the law if they did not want their kids to see Mommy/Daddy going to jail. My hubby does drug raids (he is a K9 officer) all the time and there are kids present. It makes me angry and sad that the kids have to see it and that the parents care more about dealing drugs than to be a good example. Police officers are trained to handle these kinds of situations and they are taught not to use gun fire unless absolutely necessary. I don't know, I think its absurd to try to only do a bust w/o a child being present because that is where they live and you need to make sure you can catch the suspect home. I guess where I LIVE "in this world" and my hubby is doing raids more often now.... its unrealistic to not have kids home. Very sad but true. This is sad consequence of Mommy and Daddy breaking the law. Whenever my hubby goes on a raid, I always ask if children are involved (in the home at the time) and more often than not, they are. This is one of the reasons we are now foster parents (although we do not take any local children).

I will go on to add that I will be the first one to tell you or anyone else that if at ANY TIME my hubby feels as though his life is in danger, he comes first. PERIOD. His job is to protect and serve and he is the most service oriented person I know.

Again, I don't know anything about this incident but I can only speak from personal experience.

*stepping off soap box now*

While I can empathize with you for being part of the "police" family, I do not think that is the issue that concerns most Americans.
What concerns me in particular are the amount of raids on homes where nothing was ever found, or was there in the first place; and then the horrible consequences that have happened.
I guess my query is, "Where is the line drawn where a police mans rights come before those, that he has supposedly sworn to "Serve and Protect"?
Is his right to protection any more important than those that pay his salary?
Do not take this wrong, I am all for police protection and
I do believe in the police concept; in that they should be protecting the population from those who intend to harm us, however drug enforcement is a concept gone wrong.

In Arizona a swat team broke into a 73 year old Alzheimers patients house and burned it to the ground with one of their grenades.

The New York police broke into a disabled nurses house and proceeded to jail both her and her husband because a plumber had informed the police that he smelled drugs in the house.

In Annapolis they broke into a house, launched a concussion grenade, kicked the homeowner in the groin, all before realizing they had the wrong house. ( These are only a fraction of recent violations on an unsuspecting public)

Is spending BILLIONS of our tax dollars supporting the DEA really worth it.....or a more logical question...Is it really keeping the drugs off the streets? I think if we ask the families who live on the Texas /Mexican border, or any of the families in the above situations they would answer a resounding No. Why keep pumping money into a situation that is not working? Especially when that money could be used for educational purposes. Our schools are ranked below almost all of the other industrialized nations, and yet we continue to fund these organizations that are not producing positive results.

So, while I respect your husbands career choice as admirable and profoundly honorable, as well as his dedication to protecting and serving others; I strongly question the logic and intentions of the others who enact and enforce laws that contradict the basic rights of the people that they have sworn to serve and protect.