Police Officer Forced To Shoot Dog

A police officer in Elizabeth City was forced to shoot a dog while serving a search warrant Tuesday morning.

It happened on Hunter Street in Elizabeth City early Tuesday morning. Police say the officer and a police K-9 were going to issue a search warrant when a dog from a few houses down rushed the officer and his dog. The officer shot the dog. The rottweiler/lab mix is in the animal hospital in Edenton.

Police ended up arresting the man whose home they came to search. No word yet on whether the owner of the dog that was shot will face charges for not having the dog on a leash.


You must be logged in to post comments.

Username:
Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by JW on Nov 25, 2009 at 10:21 PM
    I was just wondering why this is considered news? This stuff happens all of the time. I have had to shoot a dog that attacked me as I was chasing a fleeing suspect...it didn't make the news. Why? Bc it's not important...
  • by The Pirate Lady Location: Grimesland on Nov 25, 2009 at 03:08 PM
    The officer did the right thing, and perhaps it was his intention to wound rather than kill. Either way, the dog was stopped, and the owner's got a lot of 'splaining to do.
  • by ThinBlueLineWife Location: Raleigh on Nov 25, 2009 at 11:29 AM
    Although, this is tragic, you have think of the officer's view, his K9 is his PARTNER, he does what is in the best interest of that dog, and if meant shooting an aggressive attacking dog, then so be it. Not only was he protecting himself but his partner as well, these guys live, breath and train with these dogs, they aren't just strictly work they become part of the family. The owner of the aggressive dog, should face penalties for allowing the dog to roam, run and attack. Have they ever heard of Leash Laws?!
  • by Russ Location: Henderson on Nov 25, 2009 at 11:23 AM
    Audra, like you said a dog is rushing at you, just what do you see? Head neck and chest any of which if hit by the caliber bullet most officers carry is going to kill that dog. And while I'm not passing judgement on him I know from daily personal experince, most cops can't shoot worth a crap because it takes practice and most don't. And yes if you've seen a real shooter shoot it is an art. And all of this just because I stated he needs little more range time.
  • by debra Location: kinston on Nov 25, 2009 at 10:50 AM
    Poor dog...just doing what came natural to him probably. Can't blame the cop though, he did what he had to I'm sure.
  • by enc on Nov 25, 2009 at 10:41 AM
    hey "g" why do you "hate" to side with the police , seems like thats who you should side with. imho
  • by Dave on Nov 25, 2009 at 10:20 AM
    Russ, what I'm saying, is that he was aiming at the dog to stop it, not to ensure death. He hit the dog, so his hsooting was not that pathetic. How often to you practice moving target shots with a handgun? I'm sure he wasn't aiming specificly at the hind quarters to prevent killing the dog either. But in an immediate reaction situation he's not taking the taime to aim for the heart. Also, aside from the head, there is an are of a dog that produces a clean kill lessed than that of a deer. About a 6"x9" oval. Anywhere else is not always leathal. I don't disagree that they need more range time, but his shot accomplished what he needed it to. What is pathetic other than your attitude, and lack of understanding the difference between vital organs and organs? He did his job effectively and efficiantly.
  • by Audra Location: SoCal on Nov 25, 2009 at 09:55 AM
    Rott, not Rock, but yes it can be a very dangerous animal and the officer acted correctly. I won't even debate that because there is no gray area on this one. Russ, you need an anatomy lesson. The term "vital organs" refers to organs vital to the survival of the animal - heart, liver, kidneys, lungs, and brain, for example. If the dog only consisted of solely those attached to a hind end & legs, I wouldn't want to see that ugly beast. You're also passing judgement on an individual officer without any knowledge of his personal habits when it comes to range time. If he had killed it there would be a whole slew of posts screaming about why didn't he just injure it, so give me a break already. No amount of range time compares to real experience in these situations either. There is no art involved in firing off a round for protecting yourself when surprised by something rushing you with sharp teeth - paper targets don't do that.
  • by Dog gone Location: eastern nc on Nov 25, 2009 at 08:02 AM
    Why do people think that when a police officer has to take his weapon out that they are going to kill someone or something they are protecting them self and the public and most of the time they try to wound and not kill. If the dog had been after you would have done the same thing you react and save your self.
  • by Russ Location: Henderson on Nov 25, 2009 at 07:55 AM
    Well Dave, what a pathetic response. The only part of a dog that isn't vital organs is it's hind end and legs. My concern is to stop it by killing it and preferably with the first shot. And for your information, MOST officers go to the range once a year and shoot a couple of hundred rounds. Hardly enough to be proficient in the art.
  • Page:
WITN

275 E. Arlington Blvd. Greenville, NC 27858 252-439-7777
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 73380802 - witn.com/a?a=73380802
Gray Television, Inc.