Baltimore Officer Who Pulled Gun on Dog at Park Will Not be Disciplined
The City police officer did not violate any internal departmental or park policies when he pointed his weapon at a dog.
Photos
The off-duty Baltimore City police officer who pointed his gun at a dog and allegedly threatened to kill it at Annie’s Playground on March 12 will not be disciplined, said a spokesman for the Baltimore City Police Department.
“The [internal] command investigation was based on the information provided by the Harford County Sheriff's Office,” city police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi wrote in an email. “It was found that the officer did not violate departmental policy and acted lawfully, as indicated in the [Harford County Sheriff’s Office] report.”
The report stated that the officer, whose name has been withheld, “acted within the law to protect himself and family by drawing his weapon. No one was bitten or hurt in this incident.”
Patch has submitted a Public Information Act request for the officer’s identity. He is listed as the victim on the sheriff’s office report. Lisa Vecchioni, the woman listed as the suspect in the police report, said her dog was on a leash but that it got away to play with the officer’s dog, which was on a leash.
“He pulled the gun out immediately, didn’t even give a chance to see if the dog was friendly or not,” Vecchioni said.
The sheriff’s office report describes the dog as a “pitbull mix” weighing “approximately 80 pounds.”
But Vecchioni said her dog is a mutt, does not look like a pitbull and weighs 40 to 45 pounds. In an email to Patch she added she has “no way of finding out the breed of Rocky” because her son got him from a friend of a friend. But Rocky’s veterinarian believes the dog is a Labrador mix, she said.
[Click “View Gallery” on above picture for photos of the dog.]
“He had never identified himself as a police officer until I asked him what he was doing with a gun,” Vecchioni said.
Guglielmi said officers are not required to identify themselves before pulling a gun.
“I can’t give you a blanket answer and say every single time an officer draws his gun he has to say, ‘Police,’” Guglielmi said. “Nine-and-a-half times out of 10 they do, but there are situations that it’s not appropriate given the speed of those situations.”
The officer appears to have been within his right to carry a gun in a public park.
The Harford County Code prohibits the possession of firearms in county parks, except for “persons authorized by law to carry firearms in the discharge of their official duties,” as stated in Chapter 185-17.
"If [someone is] authorized by law to carry firearms in the discharge of their official duties then they can have a gun," County Attorney Robert McCord said. "Whether or not that’s appropriate for him to pull the gun out is not really covered by this section of the code."
The code, in Chapter 185-6 C, also states that, “No person shall: Cause or permit any dog, cat or other domesticated animal to run at large or to create a nuisance."
“Harford County law states any dog, as soon as it crosses over the line where it’s off of its property it either needs to be on a leash or under command with its owner,” said Valerie Surkin, a clerk at Harford County Animal Control. “The dog has to be obedient to the owner’s command immediately. … As long as it is under command it does not have to be on a leash.”
Surkin said she recommends using pepper spray on a charging dog, as opposed to a gun.
“We don’t advise [using a gun],” she said. “Especially in different areas where you’re not allowed to discharge one.”
Harford County Recreation Specialist Mike Getz said the rules about dogs are clear.
“Basically all of our parks have signs that say dogs must be on a leash or under control of an owner,” Getz said. “When you get to the parking lot [at Annie’s] and walk down to the playground there’s a sign.”
Baltimore City police officers are not required to carry their gun while off-duty, but it is not prohibited either, according to regulations.
“Sworn members when off-duty, outside the jurisdiction of the City of Baltimore and within the State of Maryland, are authorized to carry an issued or approved firearm. There is no requirement to be armed when off-duty outside the City of Baltimore,” the firearm regulations state.
The regulations also state that officers must, “Comply with all Baltimore Police Department Rules and Regulations pertaining to firearms, as well as all appropriate Federal, State and local laws relating to firearms.”
Guglielmi wrote in an email that city police are issued .40-caliber Glocks, which matches the description of the officer’s gun given by a witness of the incident at Annie’s Playground.
“I saw a Glock. I think it was a .40 caliber. I don’t know for a fact,” said Jack Megert, 12, of Perry Hall. “It was silver and black. The rectangle on the side was silver and then the rest of the gun was black.”
A duty officer at Maryland State Police headquarters said a Baltimore City police officer’s option to carry a firearm outside of his jurisdiction overrides any local law pertaining to parks.
“[It’s] because he’s still technically a police officer in this state,” Cpl. Darryl Clark said.
One local attorney said the law governing guns in parks could be interpreted to say that police officers can carry their guns while on duty.
“It does seem that the ordinance would prohibit him from carrying it in a place on parks and rec [property]," said Augustus Brown, of Brown, Brown & Young.
But, Brown added, "There's no clear cut answer on it." The officer, he said, has a "good argument" that it is part of his official duty to be available at all times.
The Harford County Sheriff’s Office report states that the officer was with his wife, child, mother-in-law and his mother-in-law’s dog. The officer told police that the dog began to “charge his family.” It also states that Vecchioni said the gun was never pointed at her, but Vecchioni said that is not true.
“My dog did not even approach toward them. He was going over the other side where this other dog was,” she said. “If he really felt that his [child was] in any kind of [danger] I would think that he would grab his child first before he pulled a gun out.”
Vecchioni added that the woman with the officer’s dog was swinging it in circles a “couple inches” off the ground.
“My dog’s trying to chase it,” Vecchnioni said. “He had a gun pointed at my dog, I had to cross between my dog and him with the gun pointed at my dog. … It was definitely pointed at me.”
Vecchioni said she then called the police while the officer went to the parking lot.
“He had a few words to say to me,” she said. “He was just being very arrogant about who he was and why he pulled his gun out.”
Gina Kazimir
7:38 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
WHEN did pulling a gun on a dog in a park become anything like acceptable? That is a child's playground! What kind of message does it send to our children when a grown man pulls a GUN on a family pet in front of them? Unless the dog was snarling, snapping and leaping up, AND unless a normal attempt to grab the leash or knock the dog down (Does the officer have knees? They work just fine on most dogs!) failed and someone was in IMMINENT danger of being mauled I can think of no sane reason to react like this. Is this really the behavior we want modeled for our children, especially by the police?
june donovan
8:00 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
The only thing worse than having that gun on him, on his own time, in a park - is the attitude that came with it. He may find
himself in a very bad situation on day when he pulls a prank like that - and fails to identify himself.
RW Willy
8:09 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
When did it become acceptable to defend somebody who can't keep thier dog on a leash?
I do not want a dog at a chlds playground running loose. How long does it take for a dog to go from running around to biting someone? I two dog fights, they are fast and very vicious. No time to second guess.
In the owners mind the dog is friendly. The cop didn't know that. Nor should he believe it.
Control your pet.
Neversure
9:29 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
I'm shocked, shocked!!!
Donald
10:25 pm on Friday, March 25, 2011
Baltimore City needs to get their officer under control. Raping Girls, pulled gun at parks, And making illegal money from unproved Auto shops. They are the Worst Police Department in the Country. Baltimre Country just suspended the head of the FOP for pulling a guyn on a cab driver and he was off duty. Baltimore city needs to take notes.
Brooke
12:40 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
My name is Brooke. Rocky is mine and my boyfriend Dominick’s dog. Lisa is Dominick’s mom. I am writing a statement about what happened at the park on May 12th, not only because it involved my dog but because I feel it is important to speak out about how officers can do basically whatever they want and get away with it. I want to say first off I have no problem with an officer carrying a gun on them, off duty. I do however have a problem with an officer abusing their weapon. The Police Dept. said they did not want this story to be blown out of proportion, but I feel it is absolutely necessary for people to know about what happened and to have an opinion about it. The Dept. also stated that this officer "acted within the law" but what they should have said was this officer is above the law. Most officers have become drunk with power, knowing they can get away with nearly anything, because they have “The Brotherhood” to back them up. And when you live by the concept, it’s us against them, and the law is on your side, why wouldn’t you act as if you are untouchable.
Remi
1:21 pm on Thursday, April 7, 2011
You're absolutely right. I was involved in an altercation with an off duty police officer who was harassing me in a grocery store. He was following me and everything for no reason. When my brother told him to back off he pulled put his firearm without announcing himself righ there in the store. I filed a complaint against him he was exonerated and when I filed an appela he was only 'spoken to'. I am not trying to sue him for PTSD.
Brooke
12:44 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Secondly in my opinion I don’t agree an officer should be punished only after a dog has been killed. I believe an example should have been made of that officer and his actions, before it is too late for the next family. I wasn’t at the park the day this happened. But I know my dog, and he was not charging at the officers family snarling and showing his teeth, he was simply running over because he was excited to meet another dog. You don’t have to be a trained officer to see the difference. If this officer had shot my dog, all he would have accomplished would be killing a completely harmless, gentle, and very much loved family member. The fact that my dog was almost killed because of an over reacting, trigger happy cop is unacceptable to me. Needless to say I am very disappointed with the H.C. sheriffs Dept. for not taking any action against this officer. Although it doesnt surprise me. I want everyone who reads this to ask yourself if an officer is able to get away with something as simple as this what ells are they capable of getting away with. If any one can tell me how i can go about geting this story to the Media let me know, i would be happy to tell my story.
mcgillicuddy
1:06 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Brooke, as the dog's owner I think you should be apologizing to the police officer for what he perceived to be an attack on his family by your dog. He had no way of knowing the dog's intentions and I know from personal experience that one doesn't know if a dog bites until after it has bitten them. The statements from the various police departments cleared the officer of any wrong doing. You won't accomplish anything by continuing to complain about it except maybe to give the officer's attorney more ammunition.
Chris Megert
2:37 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
'Officer’s attorney more ammunition ‘What in the heck are you talking about? The police Dept. does not want his name released because every court case he was involved in would be questioned. This Policeman flat out lied. Originally, he said the gun never left his holster. It was not until Brad from the Patch got calls asking about the incident that the truth came out. This officer needs to apologize to the families he endangered with his “John Wayne” bravado. Sure if it was Joe average, Joe would have needed bail money and would be facing a few charges. Nevertheless, because this person does put his life on the line every day we are all supposed to let his (hopefully) temporary lapse in judgment slide. I’m good with that. Mr. unnamed officer how about you think about the fact that a 12-year old was able to describe your 40 cal Glock and knows you tried to lie about not brandishing it at the park. You have kids would you want them to learn it is OK to lie if you do not get caught? I don’t think you do. Just man up anonymously and let the folks on the Patch know you’re sorry it went down the way it did and you will never lie again
Chris Megert
2:38 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
I want my son to learn a valuable lesson from this and the lesson is…. it is never ok to lie. He has seen Presidents lie, athletes lie, salespeople lie, and now he witnessed firsthand that a police officer even lied. Thank you for your service but come on don’t think for a minute that you’re being vilified for your actions that day for pulling your gun. It is the fact you tried to lie about it and you really scared a few families that day by not announcing, “Police restrain your dog or I will have to restrain it for you”. Did you forget how your brother got the shaft for trying to teach a 14 year old hoodlum some manners a few years ago. Salvatore Rivieri lost his job his pension all because he was just trying to keep the punk kid from spending sometime in juvie and his punk friend slapped it up on you-tube. I do appreciate the job the police, soldiers, teachers, and firefighters do. I hope you get to retire soon so you can enjoy civilian life like the rest of the sheeple of this great Nation of ours.
Tom G
3:01 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
@Mack Britt.....Get a clue. The report has shown the 2 police depts are both liars. They claimed he never pulled his weapon and he did. They claimed the owner of the dog said the gun was not pointed at her but in her account on these pages she said it was pointed at her and the dog as she put the leash back on. They claimed it was a pitbull and anyone with a quarter of a brain can see it is not. They also claim the dog weighs 80 pounds, again not even close. Police are not supposed to engage in high speed pursuit on crowded roads but they can be off duty in a public park with over 100 people and pull a weapon and wave it at a excited 40 pound dog acting in a non aggressive manner? I am glad i got out of Md last year and moved to Pa.
foresthill77
8:43 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Wow Mack Britt-Brooke has every right to express how she feels about this incident and what she knows about her dog....why would you even try to censor and berate her for doing that? You expressed your opinions so allow others to express theirs too.
Brooke
8:04 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
thank you foresthill77. @ Mack Britt i absolutly do not owe that officer an apology...as i stated b4 i was not @ the park the day this happen so why am i to blame? he may have percieved my dog was going to attack him but did my dog attack? NO! and im being persecuted b/c im upset my dog was almost killed b/c he slipped through his collar.
The only argument anyone can come up with against mine is....well the officer is justified b/c he didnt kno if the dog was nice or not. but tell me why i would alow my boyfriends mother to take my dog to a CHILDS PLAYGROUND if he was so dangerous and vicious? i highly doubt anyone in their right frame of mind would take a dog like that to a park full of children.
RW Willy
7:32 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Your dog runs around loose and now you attack somebody who responded with the only thing they had. That family had no idea what your dog was going to do. They hadn't seen the video of it playing with another dog.
Take some responsibility for your actions, you started this mess. Not the family.
Get off the internet and get to Pet Smart and buy a choker for that dog and go to the park. Be thankful he didn't have a baseball bat with him. He may have used it.
Dee Megert
9:23 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
the dog owner didn't start this mess. The man with the gun at a park who didn't identify himself started this mess. He was the only perceived threat there that day. I was there, 4 generations of my family were there, along with about 50 families with their young children who saw a man with a gun and I don't think a single one of us thought "oh, he must be a cop". If my nephew, who is in the military (and vowed to put his life on the line to protect this countyr) had tried to tackle him, or my husband or anyone else with a carry permit had pulled their weapon because they saw this man as a threat we'd be having a much different conversation.
Steve J.
12:27 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
If that's all he had, he's a idiot. Suppose he had a bazooka or a stick of dynamite? If that's the kind of thinking we have in our law enforcement officers we're all in trouble. I'm a Baltimore City resident and I will be contacting the Police Department and my city councilperson about this incident.
Dee Megert
9:32 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
I am saddened by this outcome. If the police department is so adept at lying why didn't they just lie and tell us that the officer has been suspended without pay for a week? Instead they are going to band together and pile the crap a little higher. I hope, for all our sakes, they remember the children, that witnessed this incident and saw it for what it truly was, are the future adults that will be in charge one day. Hopefully the actions of the Good Police will over shadow the actions of the ones that have no business being in law enforcement so our children do not completely lose respect for them.
I get it, no laws were broken, but COMMON SENSE was trampled all to hell!!!!
Dee Megert
9:42 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
I think by making a statement that Police don't need to identify themselves when they pull their weapon has basically just declared "Open Season" on the ones that don't. How's that going to hold up in court when someone is being charged with shooting a cop? This whole perceived threat and protecting his family, BS. I guess its all subjective as to what scares you and I think having a gun pointed at you would be enough for most. I hope the "good guys" read this and don't forget to identify, identify, identify! I am really, really, just completely digusted. Unfortunately, not surprised, just disgusted.
Neversure
10:01 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
The city officer lied and the Harford County officers swore to it. "Nothing to see here, folks, move along."
Dee Megert
10:58 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
From this point on, I will no longer support the F.O.P. financially, they obviously can take care of themselves. If the good men and women of Law enforcement don't start taking out the trash they will all suffer in the end. The following statements made by Edmund Burke in the 1700s, although a wee bit dramatic, seem to fit this situation;
All that’s necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
Neither the few nor the many have a right to act merely by their will, in any matter connected with duty, trust, engagement, or obligation.
Maryland Dog Federation
11:45 am on Saturday, March 26, 2011
This is becoming frighteningly old news. DC, Virginia, Maryland...in all these places and many others, police are ALLOWED to consider dogs, especially dogs they consider "certain" dogs, as target practice. Most cops don't think TWICE about pulling a gun on a dog. And don't think THRICE about shooting them.
Until their bosses quit allowing this behavior and provide training for cops that they SHOULD be getting plenty of...training to understand canine body language to know the difference between a threat and a non-threat (which is very easy to discern with a little training because dogs, unlike humans, don't lie about that sort of thing), this will continue.
A good friend on the PGPD tells me he used to hear "dog" calls over the radio and RACE to the scene in hopes of getting there before many of his fellow officers did...in order to prevent the dog from getting shot. If anyone is interested in sending in a public information request to their local police department, ask them for the number of gun discharges and the number of dogs shot. They answer might be insightful.
RW Willy
1:38 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Good idea on the information request. You get it and post it.
Cops don't need dog training. They have their hands full of killers of humans, assault and rape etc. Along with dogs not lying about their body language, they are also unpredictable, and excitable. The LEO doesn't have the time to figure out if the dog was mistreated as a pup.
I hope your "friend" didn't endanger any citizens while racing to save a dog. That would be careless.
I would hate to hear of a family pet getting shot for no reason. But if it happened, I would blame the owner.
Maryland Dog Federation
2:23 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Thanks. I have gotten the information request for my own jurisdiction, which is why I can draw the conclusion that dogs often serve as unspoken target practice. As the Maryland DOG Federation, that is hard enough to stomach. But when shots ring out with children around, and when guns are drawn in children's PLAYGROUNDS, as a person concerned with PEOPLE I sure am concerned about it, yesireebob.
There are approximately 70 MILLION dogs in the United States. The PG police officer that you are concerned about "endangering citizens" while intervening to save a dog was also potentially saving human lives as well from reckless actions. And guess what? That officer did not endanger any citizens driving to a call because that officer HAD TRAINING on how to safely drive a car. Training a police officer how to properly act in stressful situations is how we are ALL safer. Training a police officer to understand and utilize non-lethal methods of control simply makes for a better officer and a safer world. To think that cops do not need training regarding something so prevalent in their environment as dogs is very shortsighted. Dangerously shortsighted.
The cop doesn't need to figure out if the dog was mistreated; that's crazy. I'm glad you agree that dogs don't lie about their body language. But dogs are NOT unpredictable; as a matter of fact that are very predictable...especially when someone understands canine body language...when someone is TRAINED.
Donald
2:37 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
So the next time an off duty cops pulls his gun without Indentiftying himself. I can pull my gun and shoot him because i fear for my family.
Michael
9:45 am on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Your still dumb, stop posting. Switching treads did not make you any smarter. Still trying to figure out what "training" you received.
TheGardener61
5:06 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
Those of us that have police (they generally dislike the word 'cop') as friends know a little something. My police friends confide in me their 'entitlement' to the perks of being a Law Enforcement person. It goes way beyond free coffee at the mini-marts. Their word was mostly unquestioned. A 'charging' dog, definitely a cause for concern. But remember that guy in the Senators shooting in Arizona. The citizen that was armed, but never drew his weapon. Because before he reacted, he assessed the situation. If this happened in Pa. it would have been interesting, seems like everyone carries up there. I'd like to know how he identified himself to the citizens at the park. Verbally? or did he present Id. Just because this guys a policeman doesn't mean he's not an a-hole.
Chris Megert
9:50 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
and just because this guys a policeman doesn't mean he is not...... Can't wait to see what our fine men and woman of law enforcement do on the next episode. I can't believe the Judges believe a word that comes out of the mouth of some of these officers. Of course the kettle shouldn't call the pot black. Does anyone else have the theme song to COPS running through their head? Or JERRY JERRY JERRY
foresthill77
8:38 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
I am shocked by this also...of course I wasn't there but if the situation as the dog owner presented it is true I can't believe this officer is not being disciplined for at the very least being negligent in the manner in which he handled the situation. It seems very excessive to me if the dog was not an immediate threat to the officer or his family. And what a way for the officer to model conflict resolution to his child...draw a gun as a first line of communication.
Donald
9:54 pm on Saturday, March 26, 2011
That is why I love dealing with Judge Russel from the court house in essex. He tells the police to shut their mouths he wents to hear the subjects story before the police put their lies out. He him self say the police are the biggest liars out there. We need more judges and police officers like russel. We would have put this officer out of work for what he did.
Michael
9:53 am on Sunday, March 27, 2011
you are still dumb and now maybe the judge too now. The judge, except in MAYBE traffic court, always hears the officers story first. That is the way court works. The defense (the person who was arrested) always gets the chance to counter what the officer/state brings against them.
Can you please tell me this "training" you received that taught you to keep your weapon in your holster when your scared. I have been waiting for almost a week now. I mean really, is it that hard to search google for a weapons training course?
Maryland Dog Federation
9:58 am on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Also, in the counties in Maryland that I checked, the definition of a dog "running at large" does not include a dog whose owner is in "hot pursuit". In other words, if your dog slips the leash and you are chasing it and calling it and you have it in sight in an attempt to get it back, then the dog is not running at large. Perhaps there are some counties where that is open to interpretation, perhaps there are other counties in which that interpretation doesn't apply. And perhaps, it all depends on the mood of the ACO or the LEO and the situation in which they find themselves.
Donald
10:55 am on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Does anyone know how to change the passward to sign on in here. Somebody is hacking my account. I just got house after two months on the road and found this stupid post. Can any body help me
Brad Gerick
12:03 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Donald, send me an email (Brad AT Patch.com) and I'll see what I can find out. There are a 13 users named "Donald" in our system, so it could have been someone else under a different account. The only way I can distinguish is by knowing the email address with which you signed up.
BG
mcgillicuddy
1:18 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
After looking at the photos and seeing that the dog's head is as big as the heads of the human(s) in the photos, I must reiterate that I would be tempted to take the same action as the police officer did if that big head was running towards me and/or my family.
Brooke
7:22 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
lmao well you must have only seen what you wanted to see. Why dont u watch the video of rocky playing with our chihuahua and tell me how scary and vicious he really is....
TheGardener61
2:13 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Hey Michael. You keep your gun in your holster until such a threat presents itself that use of deadly force is necessary. You don't 'pull' a weapon because you are "scared", or to scare, or to fire a warning shot. A weapon should only be pulled when a life (yours or someone elses) is in immediate grave danger. And when that weapon is removed you are now past the point of verbal warnings. That should have been done during the situation assessment. Stop watching Cagney and Lacey. When you see officers with drawn weapons, the situation has already escallated to the point that the NEXT progressive step is firing. They are allowing the subject the final (although sometimes drawn out) right to back down. His/her next moves is the 'firing' determinent. If you are incapable of intelligent debate in an open forum, why don't you switch threads, we'll all be happy for it.
Michael
8:50 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
1. My comments to Donald are a cont. from an old thread.
2. An officer can go up or down in his use of force, and is also not required to hit each "step" in that use of force. This means that if he pulls his weapon, and decides he moved “up” to quickly he can go “down” just as easily.
3 I don't even know what Cagney and Lacey is, so nice try
4. I think "scared" would also fall under threatened. I know I don't pull my gun out because I am bored. Do you/ would you?
5. If pulling your weapon is not to scare someone then why is "presentation of deadly force" even a step in a use of force policy? Would you not just go right to deadly force?
6. Don't think because you read a single post, that by the way goes against what you believe, you understand the intelligence of the poster. I can argue this issue at a far high intellectual capacity and with more personal knowledge than you.
7. Just to show a thing called critical thinking, I am going to agree with you. A warning shot should not and is not allowed by any police agency I have ever had any contact with.
Chris Megert
2:46 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
I hope while we are "discussing" the article we remember a key component to this is the FACT the Officer lied about brandishing his weapon. Not to "beat a dead horse" that is the part of this story I see people losing site of. Forget the fact that personally it made for an interesting conversation with our son about the obvious double standard that exists in our Country.
mcgillicuddy
3:02 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
I think the key component was the dog being off his leash and running towards strangers. Without this there would be no "discussion".
Chris Megert
3:17 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Mack I said one key component. If you think the dog off lease is the only component I say with respect you are mistaken.
mcgillicuddy
4:41 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
I read and thoroughly understood your comment to say 'a key component' which leaves open the possibility there are more 'key components'.
It was my intention for my comment to mean the 'THE MAIN REASON FOR THE SITUATION WAS A DOG BEING OFF IT'S LEASH AND RUNNING TOWARD STRANGERS WHO APPARENTLY WERE SCARED THE DOG WOULD INJURE THEM OR THEIR PET AND WERE PROMPTED TO TAKE REMEDIAL ACTION.'
It has to be acknowledged that if the dog had not slipped his leash there would have been no story. Additionally, if the off-leash dog had not been taken to the park there would have been no story. The owner of the off-leashed dog, if anyone, is the one who must take blame for the situation.
The police officer, regardless of where he was from, has been found innocent of any wrongdoing by his superiors. He nor any members of his family nor his dog threatened anyone until he felt threatened by a strange big dog running toward them at which time he exerted his rights as a citizen to protect his family and pet.
I can understand most everyone being frightened by the sight of a gun in the park, but apparently the 12-year old son is pretty familiar with them since he was able to identify it from a distance.
Dee Megert
8:36 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
@ Mack Britt - "Additionally, if the off-leash dog had not been taken to the park there would have been no story. The owner of the off-leashed dog, if anyone, is the one who must take blame for the situation." ... and if gunpowder were never invented we wouldn't have a story either, but it was, and it did, then he did, and he LIED. The End. Our 12 year old son needs to be familiar with guns because he will one day be out and about by himself in the "mean streets" and needs to have some common sense about him and it wasn't that large of a distance that he needed to identify from. It was WAY TOO CLOSE.
Brooke
7:39 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Mack Britt you are so very confused. You really think the main reason ppl are talking about this story is b/c my dog got off his leash. dogs get off leashes all the time, and they arent threatend to be shot. accidents happen....its not like my boyfriends mom intentionally took him off the leash. If you think my dog slipping through his collar is justified by almost being killed there is something wrong with you.
John Citzen
3:06 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
The pat the "brother officer" on the back situation is clear here. Of course the Harford paperwork matched up like it should. What is this officer Annie Oakley and going to hit the dog on one shot. Look at most police shooting 10+ shots per officer suspect wounded, fellow officer have been shot with friendly fire, innocent victims etc... So a 9mm at a moving animal when the bullet passes thru this dog and into a running child oh its okay my brother officer got my back he will fill the paperwork out right (wink). Absoulte power corrupts absolutely. A liscensed to carrier citzen or other officer sees a gun pulled by a "unidentified person" and ventilates his head which is the correct action equal force and fearing for ones life. Which 'brother officer" will be defended. Did this officer try to protect his family or children or cast them aside to play OK corral. Remember today you let an officer get away with this what is next he feels scared cause 2 ethnic people talked funny language near him and suddenly the Har Co paperwork makes it out to be legal. Surrender you rights America WELCOME TO THE POLICE STATE>
Krista Brzezinski
3:21 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
This is complete BS. You can tell by looking at a dog's body language what that dog's intentions are. Sounds like someone wanted to play hero, because his panicked mother in law was freaking out and turning her poor dog into a yoyo.
TheGardener61
3:53 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
Two wrongs don't make a right. There maybe two sides to this issue. But they appear to me to both be wrong, but at differing levels. I only know what i've read in the Patch, article and comments. At one level, the dog owner was clearly wrong. It's my experience most dog owners are oblivious to the prospect that not everyone is a 'dog-person'. CONTROL YOUR DOG. Unless you actively train and work with your dogs obiedience, you can not control your dog in a setting with such unaccustomed activity. Your genuinely friendly puppy dog may very well be someones nightmare. As a former delivery person, I have had countless times that people said '..don't worry he wont bite' only to be nipped. You can never be certain that your dog is not reacting to a scent on another person. Maybe a pet left at home. An odor from work, whatever. I'm a dog person. I've kicked my share of charging dogs. I feel I can tell the difference between a happy dog coming to me, verses a not so well intentioned dog charging me. But I've had dogs my entire life. I prefer the company of most dogs to most people. But I don't value a dog over a human (most). The officer, what can I say? I wasn't there. I'm a gun owner. You don't unholster a gun when a good swift kick would do. Maybe he just got off work and was still wound up. I personally think too many police have that entitlement attitude. But I justify small doses of entitlement are a fair trade off for what police do.
Michael
9:01 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
With all of the “argumentative” comments going back and forth, many by myself, I think we are missing something. The actions of this single officer, whether you agree with them or not, are not a reflection of every officer in Baltimore City or even the state. Many idiots find their way into every job, and law enforcement is no different. YES, the county and city seem to be having a few issues as of late. The only thing I can think of is the warm weather brought the retard out in them. I hope the next officer you meet you don’t assume that he is going to shoot your dog/kiss a 17 year old on the mouth and neck/ punch a sedan driver and pull his gun. Just remember that guy/girl at your work that always seems to do things the wrong way. How would you feel if you put on the same level as that person because you had the same job title?
TheGardener61
9:53 pm on Sunday, March 27, 2011
My sincere apologies Michael. I only have what you write to consider when I respond to you. And your earlier posts to Donald implied that you don't keep your gun holstered when scared. Glad Google is working for you in your searches for gun training and carry policies. Here's another one for you,Threat assessment. Cagney & Lacey is an old psychological test, it tells me you're under 30, probably, mid 20's. It concerns me that someone so easily offened, so quickly raised to angst by ananymous dialogue, carries a gun. Please forgive me for forcing you to use a dictionary.
Michael
4:01 am on Monday, March 28, 2011
I find it interesting that you can’t figure out how to reply under the same post so we can keep our little spat organized. Anyways, I did not use Google for a single part of my post. I can throw out basic departmental SOPs all day. Would you like to hear what most departments policies are for vehicle pursuits? You are also wrong on my age. Nice try, but again you fall short of intelligent.
As far as getting “raised to angst”, that only appears to happen to me when idiots think they know what they are talking about. Oh wait, that seems to fit you…….sorry.
P.S. Don't hurt yourself trying to figure out what SOPs are, I will help you out. Standard Operating Procedures. There, that should save you about 20 min.
Brooke
7:14 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
wow if ur attitude an low blow coments arent a perfect example of a modern day cop, i dont kno wat is. i would have mistaken u for a 20yr old too.
Hollee Sifford
7:38 am on Monday, March 28, 2011
WELL I HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE.....IF IT HAS TEETH IT BITES!!!!!!IF IT CONTAINS BULLETS..... IT SHOOTS!!!! I n both senerios the dog or gun the owner controls it either by leash or holster.Just a thought
RW Willy
6:09 pm on Monday, March 28, 2011
The dog was not under the control of its owner!
Just saying.
Maryland Dog Federation
7:25 am on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Just because "it has teeth" does NOT mean it will bite". There are many hundred thousand dogs in this area, yet only a few hundred incidents in Baltimore statistics. And the vast majority of those incidents are very minor bites and scratches.
So, yes, the vast majority of dogs have teeth, but very very few bite. I vote for keeping things in perspective. Then perhaps we'll have less occasion to write about police officers drawing their weapons indescriminately, or fearfully, or even angrily.
Dee Megert
11:30 am on Monday, March 28, 2011
Do we really need to attack each other's intelligence, "training", or spelling/grammar skills? This story is not about US or how we would handle the same circumstances. It is about something that happened in the past. Who is at fault? The dog owner shouldn't have allowed the dog to slip the leash, The "man" shouldn't have pulled a gun when another defense would have also worked, The "man" should have made it known that he was not a lunatic with a gun on a playground but a Police Officer (off duty or otherwise), The Harford Co Police shouldn't have tried to sweep it under the rug until they realized there were witnesses that saw the man pull a gun, and the City Police Department should at the very least reprimand him for rash and unnecessary force in a playgound full of children (who probably would have had some ill effects had the Police actually killed the dog at the playground). I am at fault also for not trusting my 12 year old son's knowledge of weapons and stopped him from giving a more detailed description of the weapon because I didn't know if he was right in his assessment (if my child was able to determine all these details in this short amount of time, I would think that a TRAINED PROFESSIONAL could have evaluated the situation a little more clearly himself).
W.C.H.
12:15 pm on Monday, March 28, 2011
So let me get this straight... The officer basically commits perjury in the course of his duty and his superiors feel no need to discipline him? Disgusting.
Michael
4:30 pm on Monday, March 28, 2011
Perjury is only in court.
Steve J.
9:22 pm on Monday, March 28, 2011
Not necessarily. If he had to affirm a written statement to the Harford County officers he would be potentially liable to perjury charges.
Dee Megert
9:20 am on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Sorry everyone, I need to retract my potentially libelous statement of "He Lied". I do not know for a fact that HE lied. He may have told the story exactly as it happened. It may have been the Harford Co Police that said "c'mon guys, it's what?, 12:30, if I go back and write up this report I'm not gonna make it home by 3. Let's just stand here for a while and wait 'til some of these people clear out and then we'll get out of here. And the State Trooper could have scratched his head and said, "Ok, now what's the story?". I just don't know. When I was leaving the park the City, County and State Police were in a circle talking, as far as I could see there were no civilians included in the group. What I DO know is what Lisa stated that later that day when she tried to get the incident report number there wasn't one, by Momday when Brad started asking questions a report became available. So now while you have your Perjury / False statement charges straightened out, I'm going to have to yank that rug out from under your feet. Sorry. Somebody (or bodies) lied or covered.
k. morris
3:33 pm on Monday, March 28, 2011
I urge everyone who has commented on the inppropriateness of this officer's action to send an email to the Baltimore City Police Commissioner. There appear to people posting on here who think what this officer was warranted and no one is going to change their minds. Time and effort spent emailing or calling the commissioner would have more impact!
Here is a link to the Baltimore City Police we bsite http://www.baltimorepolice.org/contact-us/send-us-an-email
Michael
1:17 am on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Sorry Steve J, I am on my phone and can't post directly under ur post. Although very similar it is not the same charge. If he did lie in his statement to the deputy then the charge is "Making false statements". Perjury occurs in court or court procedures. Kind of a play on words, but perjury is not the right offense committed.
Steve J.
7:35 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
9-101. Perjury.
(a) Prohibited.- A person may not willfully and falsely make an oath or affirmation as to a material fact:
(1) if the false swearing is perjury at common law;
(2) in an affidavit required by any state, federal, or local law;
(3) in an affidavit made to induce a court or officer to pass an account or claim;
(4) in an affidavit required by any state, federal, or local government or governmental official with legal authority to require the issuance of an affidavit; or
(5) in an affidavit or affirmation made under the Maryland Rules.
(b) Penalty.- A person who violates this section is guilty of the misdemeanor of perjury and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 10 years.
(c) Contradictory statements.-
(1) If a person makes an oath or affirmation to two contradictory statements, each of which, if false, is prohibited by subsection (a) of this section, it is sufficient to allege, and for conviction to prove, that one of the statements is willfully false without specifying which one.
(2) If the two contradictory statements made in violation of paragraph (1) of this subsection are made in different counties, the violation may be prosecuted in either county.
(d) Statute of limitations and in banc review.- A person who violates this section is subject to § 5-106(b) of the Courts Article.
[An. Code 1957, art. 27, §§ 435, 437, 439; 2002, ch. 26, § 2; 2004, ch. 105.]
Steve J.
7:39 pm on Tuesday, March 29, 2011
From the Criminal Law Article
ManHatingWhiteGuy
4:24 am on Saturday, April 23, 2011
Had a pit bull run up to my 4 year old son and I when he and I were chasing each other at a public elementary school play ground today. I wanted to pull my .45 when the dog ran up but the owner was close by and stopped the dog and apologized. I would have shot the dog and not thought twice had the dog not stopped or worse attacked. I am not a cop just a pit bull hating white guy should I have been found guilty of anything had I murdered the dog? Sane people welcome to reply.
Steve J.
11:22 am on Saturday, April 23, 2011
Quite possibly. Depends on the more circumstances than you have supplied so far.