Louisiana Woman Says Cop Shot Family Dog, Complained About Cost of Bullet

The cop says he needed to shoot the dog after it charged at him three times. The woman says it was ankle height and weighed 12 pounds.


family photo via KATC

A sheriff's deputy in Evangeline Parish, Louisiana, killed a family's dog last month. The clop claims the dog charged at him aggressively three times before he felt the need to shoot it. The family denies this—and says the officer killed the dog in front of the children.

The deputy was responding to a harassment call next door. The dog's owner, Kelli Sullivan, told KATC that the dog was "ankle height" and weighed 12 pounds.

"My daughter was running around trying to catch her," she said to the station. "I thought we were going to go back in the house. I walked back to the house opened the door, turned around, boom, he shot her. It was a horrific event. He shot the dog up close and blew her skull apart in front of my children. Like her eyeballs were out of her head."

According to Sullivan, the deputy told her that if the dog had bit him he'd have sued them, and that shooting the dog was better than that. He then allegedly said it was a "shame" he "had to waste that bullet because it's a really expensive bullet."

The sheriff's office did not respond to KATC's request for comment.

Puppycide has been a persistent problem for police around the U.S. (even though mail carriers, who interact with America's millions of dogs on a daily basis, don't have a similar problem). Last year Reason's C.J. Ciaramella investigated how widespread unchecked police violence against dogs is in Detroit.

Unnecessary violence against animals can be a useful indicator to identify problem cops before they kill human beings. Unfortunately, state laws and contract-guaranteed job rules often make it difficult to enforce the zero tolerance policy for police misbehavior that could remove violence-prone cops from their positions.

NEXT: GOP Tax Plan Released, Utah Nurse Gets $500,000 for Blood Draw Arrest, Comey Trolls Trump with Book Title: P.M. Links

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. She should have shot him in the head twice and told him to keep the change. Would have been super cool. Totally worth getting shanked to death in a holding cell.

    1. You gotta be a little more euphemistic about that sort of thing if you don’t wanna get banned. Try: “She should have sent the cop hunting with Dick Cheney…”

      1. Look, the only movie I own is a VHS copy of Death Wish 3. Everything I do is based upon that fact.

        1. “The Court finds BestUsedCarSales Not Guilty By Reason Of 80s-Action-Movie Induced Toxic Masculinity.”

          1. I remember that, it was the same trial where I was found to be “Totally rad”

            1. *Totally a cisheteropatriarchal neocolonialist late-capitalist shitlord. Fortunately, they realized that, because you had been exposed to a Russian-funded VHS tape of DW3, you couldn’t be held responsible for your own actions at that time.

              1. Yes, I mistakenly took Totally Rad as a compliment rather than Totally Radical. But 15 years in Gitmo cleared up that mistake and now I’m here.

                1. In all fairness, it was a pretty decent plea deal, compared to the life sentence as Rep. Pelosi’s home video projector operator the prosecutor wanted.

      2. “You gotta be a little more euphemistic about that sort of thing…” or provide convincing concern for cop safety. Try: ” I fear that neighbors will start placing a bead on cops upon arriving at a scene out of an understandable fear that unreasonable police violence will be perpetrated and an immediate response will be required to protect life, property and a good defense.

        At the end of the day, people just want to make it safely from their front yard to the inside of their home. A Neighborhood Watch Program aimed at stopping violence.

        1. Oh, I’m not going for persuasion. There’s never been any hope of that. Plausible deniability will do just fine.

  2. According to Sullivan, the deputy told her that if the dog had bit him he’d have sued them, and that shooting the dog was better than that. He then allegedly said it was a “shame” he “had to waste that bullet because it’s a really expensive bullet.”

    The clop seems to have ambiguous agency.

  3. In fairness, it is customary to charge the family of the dissident for the cost of the cartridge in this kind of regime.

  4. “The clop claims the dog charged at him aggressively three times before he felt the need to shoot it.”

    The clop. I like it. Don’t change it, please.

    1. With the movie finally out, Ed finally feels comfortable admitting to being a Brony.

  5. and says the officer killed the dog in front of the children.

    Prediction: the officer or the department won’t dispute this particular fact.

  6. I think I would rather be sued for my dog biting a cop than to have my dog be dead.

    1. It would be awesome to listen to a cop whine about an owie.

    2. If your dog succeeds in biting a cop, i’m pretty sure you’ll get both.

  7. Someone needs to fund a Superbowl ASPCA style “save the dogs” ad showing all the dead family dogs, then revealing at the end that they were killed by cops unnecessarily.

    1. It’s not working for people, not sure if it’ll work for dogs.

      1. “”It’s not working for people, not sure if it’ll work for dogs.”‘


      2. I don’t know, I’d be more outraged at the killing of a Saint Bernard than some other gentle giants.

    2. While I think that would be awesome, I think much of the Superbowl fans are pro America, pro law enforcement types. It would likely be viewed as anti cop, not pro family pet.

      1. Get the Russians to target Facebook and Twitter ads. Touchy-feely leftists get ‘cops shoot dogs’ ads. Economic, bottom-line conservatives get ‘cops steal cars and cash’ ads.

      2. No pro-america, pro-law enforcement type will be watching the super bowl, unless the NFL grows a pair.

        1. The remaining NFL fans are season-ticket holders, degenerate gamblers and/or communists

          1. Is the Federalist not allowing you to post your pro-‘Merica, cop-fellating drivel anymore, STD?

  8. Can’t they just give the cops ankle guards or jackboots or whatever protects them from being bitten in the ankle by small dogs?

    1. The cops always complain about the jackboots though. It makes it harder to really feel the puppies skull cracking under their heel.

        1. PLEASE walk all over me with those!!!!

          1. Well, those boots *are* made for walking.

        2. If those are the boots on my neck, please just sit quietly in the corner and watch.

  9. Is an overwhelming fear of a dogs a requirement to become a police officer, or is it something they teach them at the Academy?

    1. You mean an overwhelming fear of everything?

      Isn’t fear the go to response after almost every shooting?

    2. If you’re not willing to murder somebody else’s innocent pet just because you know you can do so without repercussions, you probably aren’t gonna be interested in police work in the first place.

    3. I have been told, but can not confirm, that it’s generally a police policy to shoot dogs under basically any fucking circumstances because they could somehow harm or injure the officer. Ironically, if you shoot a police dog it’s treated as if you shot a human.

      Yeah, that figures. Why not?

      1. Yeah, that figures. Why not?

        My favorite is when they, bodily, move into the path of a vehicle and then open fire in self-defense.

        1. Although when you consider that they are ordered to do those things it is self defense in the sense that they are protecting their jobs over protecting the public, which I think is just about par for the course. Any doubts I might have had at one point that the military or cops wouldn’t shoot their fellow citizens over political orders have been tempered by the fact they already do it for less reason.

          1. Cops aren’t under orders to shoot into moving vehicles of fleeing suspects (some who have no idea they are “suspects” or are involved in a law enforcement encounter). They are trained to claim they were in fear for their lives when they do it though.

        2. Saw that just the other day. LA sheriff’s department had a cruiser get stolen and a high speed pursuit happened. They sort of box him in and a cop gets out in front of the stolen cruiser and when the thief inevitably drove forward again, pumped a couple rounds into the car.

      2. Because The State is big, and you’re small, The State is smart and you are dumb, The State has prosecutors & lots of guns and you have Reason, FB, & Twitter. HT: Matilda

      3. And forget shooting the cop in self-defense.

      4. I guess it’s just assumed that in order to be a cop, you also have to be a tremendous pussy?

    4. “….or is it something they teach them at the Academy?”

      All cops are taught that the first order of business is establish dominance and control with all encounters regardless of species. Will escalate as needed until the desired result is achieved.

      The training is so powerful that it will extend into off-duty hours. So be on high alert for you personal safety.
      https://www.dallasnews.com/news/tarrant- county/2017/10/31/ duty-police-officer-fatally-shoots- familys-great-dane-mansfield

      Perhaps cops could do some training at the postal academy to learn how to handle dog encounters but under no circumstances should the clops remain for any “Going Postal” training as all violence instruction must be directed for use on the public.

  10. She should do four things:
    1. File a complaint against the Sheriff’s department and the Sheriff for the destruction of her property (not dog). This forces the local Prosecutor to take action. Undoubtedly won’t see any favorable results with this tactic.
    2. Sue the Sheriff’s department for destruction of her property (not dog).

    Using common law procedure:
    3. Sue the man who acts as Sheriff for trespass – the unwarranted destruction of her property
    4. Sue the man who was acting as the Sheriff’s deputy for trespass – the destruction of her property.
    FYI, one cannot sue the Sheriff or Sheriff’s Deputy when acting in common law since the Sheriff and Sheriff’s Deputy are paper entities. The suit must be against a man/woman.

    Absolutely no lawyers needed since lawyers cannot operate in common law. Of course, she’ll have to learn a little, not too much, about using common law and staying out of the legal system.

    1. Hi crazy. I’ve been trying to find a SovCit coffee mug, because I figure what better way to wake up than being reminded the government can only seize my person when acting under admiralty law.


    2. Should have included that in the photo alt-text

  11. This cop should be flogged.

  12. I’m assuming that these cops are actually trained to do this, right? It happens way to consistently in far too many places to be just a bunch of dog hating assholes. I’m pretty sure they’re taught to do this, and it is absurd.

    1. That and lots of people become cops specifically so that they can shoot living things and get away with it.

    2. Cops ignore department policy all the time though. It’s nonetheless telling when one chooses to follow it to the letter and beyond with the beagle yapping at his feet.

  13. This is why the feds do not allow us to own land mines that can be controlled from inside the house.

    How about child abuse? Can she sue him for child abuse?

  14. Cops are like a box of chocolates

    They’ll kill your dog

    I will make this joke on every puppycide article until it catches on

      1. Hey Y’all!!! I have the perfect fix for all of this, listen up!! Ya know how the “softies” among the cops crowds keep soft teddy bears and stuffed bunny waaaabbbitts in their trunk to soothe small children in “domestic dispute” situations, and so forth? Well, conversely, the hard-asses among the cops crowds needs to do SOMETHING to intimidate those arrogant citizens who DARE to defy their SACRED, Government-Almighty Blessed Devine Wills, I can understand that? Can’t YOU, you heartless smellvillian, you?!?!… And so? I propose a win-win-win solution for us all! Y’all know how all the do-gooders want “no-kill” un-wanted pet shelters? I have worked (volunteered) in such places, I have seen way-hostile cats and dogs (some of them sick and ugly to boot) that are never, in a zillion years, going to get adopted?

        1. Yet? “No kill” even while they have no more room for adoptable strays. So? When policeman is getting ready to have a happy ol’ time shootin’ up the family mutt, he says to family, “Here, pay me $50 dollars, and I will allow you to move your pot smoke or your domestic dispute to the local no-kill shelter, and I will kill some of their un-wanted mutts instead”. OK? Family wins, no-kill shelter wins, in that they now have more room for adoptable pets. Cop wins, he gets $50, and some target practice. Done deal!!! (Alternate scenario, Fearless Cops keep un-wanted mutts-to-be-shot in their trunk, instead of the cute teddy bears, but you get the idea, I trust). ? This LOVERLY idea brought to you for FREE by the Church of Scienfoology. To learn more about Scienfoology, please see http://www.churchofSQRLS.com ?



    1. I just read the description of what happened to the dog and holy fuck that’s graphic

      It needs to be common knowledge among people that the government does not care about your dog (just as they don’t much care for property or life in general, but we can get to that later) and that if a cop is at your home, it is always a life-or-death situation for your dog (and probably you). Reason is the only publication I see covering this on a consistent basis. Not even the rabidly anti-cop Marxists I know are aware that cops murder dogs

      1. Reason is very good on certain beats. (Not science or economic policy.)

        1. By all means, please elaborate on your intricate knowledge of sound economic policy and science.

          Is that the economic policy you advocate where you say we need a healthy mix of socialism and capitalism? That’s my favorite.

          Or is it that THE science is settled?
          I think you should stick to the skinny jeans and trump outrage policy.

        2. You don’t need to remind us of your zealous moronism on every thread, Tony.

  15. 2 off duty Rensselaer, NY police officers kill a woodchuck at their annual golf tournament. Weapon of choice – golf cart.


    1. Was one of them Bill Murray?

      Cue music: “I’m alright, don’t got to worry ’bout…”

  16. Sure! Reason’s true colors come out! Here was a fiscally conservative cop that didn’t want to commit government waste, but that wasn’t good enough for the cocktail-swilling, Reason staff!

    1. VERY good! You’ve found the true measure of more than a couple of commenters.

  17. So what would the clop have done if one of the children ran towards him and bit him?

    1. He’d have emptied the whole clip and then reloaded?

      1. Mag, not clip. Gun Vocabulary 101.

    2. You misspelled Republican Hero.

  18. Unnecessary violence against animals can be a useful indicator to identify problem cops before they kill human beings.

    You know what a psychologist will tell you cruelty to animals is a marker for?

    1. Wetting the bed? Impotence?

      1. Imminently resurgent flava bean and chianti sales.

  19. And this is why when pigs die I do not weep, I cheer.

  20. The cowardice of American copping knows no bounds.

  21. It’s been a while since we had a cop dog shooting thread. Makin me feel nostalgic.

  22. Remember Sammy Weaver. Sic semper tyrannis.

  23. In all fairness to the cop, the bullet was probably on the shy side of a 1/2″ tall and significantly lighter than 12 pounds…

  24. Sounds like it used to be when the Khazar Jews ran Russia. The Communists were notorious for executing people and making the families pay for the ammo.

  25. God’s Own Prohibitionist’ 2016 party platform dedication: “We dedicate this platform with admiration and gratitude to … The men and women of our military, of our law enforcement, and the first responders of every community in our land.” Democrats and Republicans by definition welcome the initiation of force. May they continue to kill the pets of the idiots that voted for their murderous, anti-life platforms, and may the sewers of Rangoon back up in their breakfast cereal.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.