Puppycide

Buffalo Police Shot 92 Dogs Since 2011; More Than a Quarter By One Cop Alone

|

Cindy
family photo

Police in Buffalo have shot 92 dogs since January 1, 2011, 72 fatally, according to WGRZ, which requested use of force reports for its report on police puppycides in Buffalo. WGRZ begins with an incident from June of last year, when police shot an Iraq war veteran's six-month-old pitbull Cindy—an incident still being investigated internally.

It gets worse:

During the time period analyzed by WGRZ-TV, one individual officer shot 26 dogs, killing nearly all of them. In the years 2011 and 2012 alone, this officer killed as many dogs in the line of duty as the entire NYPD.

The Buffalo Police Department does not train specifically for canine encounters, according to Richards, even though dozens of other police departments across the United States have recently implemented new training procedures to deal with dogs. Unlike other departments, officers in Buffalo do not use Tasers, spray or other tools to contain animals in a non-lethal manner.

"It has not come to that point in Buffalo," Richards said, "that we've implemented any of those other techniques."

Police, and WGRZ, attribute many of these shootings to "high-intensity raids and search warrant executions, which often involve split-second decisions and fast-paced pursuits of armed and dangerous subjects." The police department says it's executed 357 search warrants this year, and claims to respond to 1,000 calls a day.

WGRZ compared Buffalo's dog shooting total, which comes out to 23 per year from 2011 to 2014, to other cities. Cincinnati, of similar size, saw 7 dog shootings per year in the same time period. WGRZ also found 36 dog shootings by the NYPD in 2011 and 2012, with only 21 fatalities in that period, at least 90 per year in Chicago between 2008 and 2013, at least 50 police shootings of dogs in Milwaukee between 2000 and 2008, and at least 37 per year from 2009 to 2012 in Southwest Florida.

Some police departments train their officers how to interact with dogs using live animals, but Buffalo's police chief rejected that idea, saying he's never heard of it. He should WGRZ's whole report, and so should you, here.

h/t sarcasmic

Advertisement

NEXT: The Scope of Obama's Immigration Action Does Not Make It Illegal

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m kind of surprised the number for NYC is so “low”, the city being 32 times bigger than Buffalo.

    1. I’m sure that a lot of the killings are never tallied by the NYPD.

    2. Look, the NYPD can shoot tourists with impunity, why would they bother with dogs?

    3. On the other hand, Buffalo has much higher crime rates than NYC. Something like 1/2 the territory is basically a no-go zone and I bet most of those dogs had not-so-nice owners.

    4. I wonder what the dogs-per-capita comparison looks like.

  2. one individual officer shot 26 dogs, killing nearly all of them. In the years 2011 and 2012 alone, this officer killed as many dogs in the line of duty as the entire NYPD.

    Billboard(s), with the officer’s name, photo, and a statement:

    WARNING: This man has shot ___ number of dogs [whatever his current score is]. USE EXTREME CAUTION if approached by him, especially if you own any pets.

    1. And put the number on an electronic display that can be remotely updated as needed. That would be a nice touch, even if it’s not used.

  3. When you’re stopping and frisking all the minorities all the time it doesn’t leave much time for pet hunting.

    1. Stop ‘n’ frisk is supposed to be way down, actually. I read The Post bitching about it all the time.

      1. Thank heaven that’s reduced street crime so much!

        Oh, wait…sorry ’bout that…

        1. ? Crime continues to drop in NYC and it’s like 80% reduced from the bad old days. Not sure what is your point.

          1. Uhm, you didn’t see the part where the big drop you refer to was coincident with the introduction and use of stop and frisk?

            And where are you getting ‘continues to drop’? (Nice if you’re right, though)

            1. Uhm, you didn’t see the part where the big drop you refer to was coincident with the introduction and use of stop and frisk?)

              Stop ‘n’ frisk is not generally credited for the huge drop in crime, which after all started long before stop ‘n’ frisk became an “issue”. Hell, even Bloomberg – frisking’s biggest cheerleader – did not make any such claims.

              And where are you getting ‘continues to drop’? (Nice if you’re right, though)

              The morning news. It’s not a huge drop, and in fact there was a small gain last year. But the dire predictions of DOOOOM that are splashed across the front pages of The Post are simply not coming true.

            2. I suppose if you randomly arrest enough people, you’re bound to get some actually criminals by pure dumb luck.

              1. And even if stop and frisk did contribute to lowering crime rates it’s still not OK to detain for no specific reason.

  4. but Buffalo’s police chief rejected that idea, saying he’s never heard of it.

    Sounds like a shitty police chief to me. Hasn’t heard of training officers for specific types of encounters, specifically those in which an officer might feel inclined to use his service weapon? If I lived in Buffalo, I’d be all for showing him the door.

    I guess that’s why I live in Montana instead.

  5. h/t sarcasmic

    Hooray!

    1. It’s your special day, sarc. Congratulations!

      Too bad they couldn’t throw you a “beloved commenter” or something…:(

      1. Beloved might be a bit much.

        How about “endearingly tolerated”?

        1. “aptly monikered”

      2. Yeah right. I’m about as beloved as a boil on someone’s ass.

        1. Hey, I call mine ‘Sarky’ – but that’s just a coincidence (as far as you can prove).

          1. I’m sorry you have a boil on your ass. Those things hurt. Yet I’m strangely honored that you named it after me. It must be Friday.

            1. I’m just kidding – my real problem is the Warty, Bo, and Tony on my johnson.

              Guys – ‘No’ means ‘No’!

              1. You call yours Johnson? I call mine Harry. Hairy Harry, actually. Well, that was before my wife made me trim. Now I need a new name. Did I just overshare? Must be Friday.

                1. Sounds like you need a new wife.

                  *ba-da-BA!*

                2. Oversharing is when you tell us about the stylist’s warm hands, and how gentle he was.

                  NTTAWWT.

                  1. The only thing I miss about trimming down there is the ticklish sensation of my farts wafting through the hair.

                  2. Come to think of it, I was pretty gentle.

        2. You may not be beloved, but I’d rather be with you than with the finest people in the world.

          1. +1 Fred Willard.

        3. Jesus, try to throw a guy a compliment…

          Oh, wait – I’m on Reason.com. Never mind! Haha!

    2. Damnit ED, now you are encouraging him. Next thing you know, EVERYBODY will be getting recognized (even Nicole, the horror of it)…ribbons for participating…when SF gets to put the Warty Chronicles in the 24/7 feed I am out of here.

      1. 24/7 is kaput, so you need not worry.

        1. for a name like sarcasmic…you have trouble…nevermind.

  6. one individual officer shot 26 dogs, killing nearly all of them.

    A success rate that nearly rivals PETA.

  7. Kind of on topic.

    I just heard on the radio that “shots were fired accidentally” from a cop’s gun in East NY (the hood, for those who don’t know), killing someone. If the races of the players are right, this could make for an interesting night if the Ferguson grand jury makes a decision.

    1. “shots were fired accidentally”

      This sort of “reporting” has gotten disgusting very quickly.

      Today a man was in the path of several accidentally discharged bullets which struck him. He later died from blood loss and an inability to breathe.

      I wanted to post the above passive anti-accountability snark and sign it “Officer Safety” like I sometimes do but I’m too irritated.

      Oh, and I agree with the billboard idea regarding the serial shooter of canines.

  8. During the time period analyzed by WGRZ-TV, one individual officer shot 26 dogs, killing nearly all of them. In the years 2011 and 2012 alone, this officer killed as many dogs in the line of duty as the entire NYPD.

    Imagine, for a moment, being the police chief. And imagine that you see one, two, three, then four, five, six, seven, ten, fifteen, twenty, twenty six reports come across your desk from Officer Bob, which contain the words “discharged firearm and eliminated canine threat”.

    DON’T YOU THINK SOMEONE WOULD BEGIN TO ASK SOME FUCKING QUESTIONS?

    1. Yeah, even if you generally assume that dog shootings are legit, that one guy is responsible for so many should be a big red flag.

    2. He wasn’t suspended without pay after the first puppy murder, so he did it again. And again.

  9. Is Officer Bob planning to retire into the Korean restaurant business?

  10. my co-worker’s step-sister makes $69 hourly on the internet . She has been out of work for nine months but last month her pay check was $13181 just working on the internet for a few hours. Go Here this site….

    ????? http://www.netjob70.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.