North Wales Police deliberately mow down dog

McGray said:
Animals stray on to the carriageway daily, everything from sheep to escaped zoo animals.

Is Police procedure at removing these animals just to mow whatever it is down with the car, or is that just dangerous and reckless?
Click to expand...

Ah a bit of reductio ad absurdum... of course they don't mow everything down - but perhaps in this situation it was the easiest/fastest/safest conclusion to the problem? They were able to make a decision and get it done there and then quickly without closing down motorways etc...

Running over a dog in a car is less likely to kill you than hitting a cow or a horse.

I'm not suggesting it is a sensible long term tactic moving forward - but in this situation it may have been the only option? Does it really matter? The problem is solved, no one was injured, the motorway didn't need to be shutdown for a long time, and the cops were there at the right time to do something about it. Sure, it's brutal, and sad, but ultimately, it's a dog - and people get all emotionally bananas when it relates to such things.
 
ttaskmaster said:
Probably because there are any number of reasons why the dog ended up there, likely none of them its own fault. They are angry because a scared, innocent dog paid the ultimate price for the actions of humans.

If it came to it, the owner gets prosecuted and the dog goes to a more responsible home - That's the ideal, obviously, but these comments show there are plenty of people willing to be that responsible... Instead, they possibly see this as the Police giving up and taking an easy way out?
Click to expand...

nail + head. I dog had it's life cut short through no fault of it's own, so dave could get home on time (minor exaggeration).
 
If they were close enough to get bitten, maybe they should have just beat it to death with their truncheons?

I mean, you wouldn't want to close the road. Quite an inconvenience.
 
Dogs can run at speed. If this dog had disappeared only to re-appear a few hours later on the same stretch of road and cause a collision then everyone would be blaming the police for not ending it when they had the chance.

I'm a dog owner and I work in the veterinary industry. However I agree with the decision.
 
McGray said:
Is Police procedure at removing these animals just to mow whatever it is down with the car, or is that just dangerous and reckless?
Click to expand...
Freefaller said:
Ah a bit of reductio ad absurdum... of course they don't mow everything down - but perhaps in this situation it was the easiest/fastest/safest conclusion to the problem?
Click to expand...
Let's not get too ahead of things here, incidentally... I happen to have a family of ****** running around in the road near my house and I had to swerve to avoid hitting them.
The Police have been notified... :p
 
McGray said:
If they were close enough to get bitten, maybe they should have just beat it to death with their truncheons?

I mean, you wouldn't want to close the road. Quite an inconvenience.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Costs the country millions and is dangerous as people tend to not pay attention and plough into people.

People are stupid. Of course the owner is also to blame and the dog is innocent, but you know, life sucks sometimes and it might not have been the best resolution, but frankly, it does not need this amount of excessive exaggeration.
 
doofer said:
It's against the Law in the UK to cause unnecessary cruelty suffering to any animal, but it's the Police so they are above the laws they are supposed to uphold. There are far more humane ways of dealing with animals.
Click to expand...

The cops are not above the law, hence the IPCC referral.

Also, hitting the dog at speed with a ton of motor vehicle is about as humane as I can think of given the circumstances. It would have been instant death.

All options would have been considered I have no doubt. An AFO would have been considered but was one nearby ? Would the on duty control room inspector authorise it ? Is it the safest option to discharge a firearm at a moving target and on a main road ? I don't think it is.

Cops often have to make such decisions without the luxury of time or hindsight.
 
IPCC referral is only for procedure. Lets hope nothing stupid is done to the cops who were just doing their job and protecting the public!
 
Exactly, where do you draw the line in terms of amount of resources and other peoples times should be dedicated to saving a dog.

I don't even consider this story national news worthy.

At most you can be upset about the story or disappointed that it ended the way it did but i cant really understand the anger towards the police as if they are portraying a villain.

People are fine with disrupting travel, risking the safety of road users, wasting police time and a fair bit of money to have just a chance to capture a dog safely but go off their nut when they hear about a single parent needing a bit of a handout to supplement her income. Funny world

Von Smallhausen said:
All options would have been considered I have no doubt. An AFO would have been considered but was one nearby ? Would the on duty control room inspector authorise it ? Is it the safest option to discharge a firearm at a moving target and on a main road ? I don't think it is.
Click to expand...

A few people here must consider themselves pretty good gun slingers to think that firing a gun at this dog on an unlit road at night was a more humane and safer alternative.
 
Last edited:
The amount of paperwork that would have been produced upon damage to the vehicle proves to me that they really did feel that it was their only decision.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Cops often have to make such decisions without the luxury of time or hindsight.
Click to expand...
Given how often other forces have previously sorted this sort of thing without going in so heavy, I'd say there's plenty of hindsight to call on.
I'd also expect an official procedure of some kind to now be written for future incidents.

Freefaller said:
People are stupid. Of course the owner is also to blame and the dog is innocent, but you know, life sucks sometimes and it might not have been the best resolution, but frankly, it does not need this amount of excessive exaggeration.
Click to expand...
It's more because no-one knows why the dog was there - Perhaps the owner took a fall while out walking and the dog went looking for help, or it escaped from a dog-fighting ring or.... I dunno, any number of things, only to get blatted by a cop car just for being frightened.
It's not as if Police can pull the dog over and have it explain itself, like you can with people and that's why people get all outrageously protective over this sort of thing.
 
McGray said:
Animals stray on to the carriageway daily, everything from sheep to escaped zoo animals.

Is Police procedure at removing these animals just to mow whatever it is down with the car, or is that just dangerous and reckless?
Click to expand...

Like all aspects of policing, there's really no single good way of doing things. It's all dependent on the judgement of the individuals, the scenario they're in and the resources available.

thebennyboy said:
Couldn't care less whether it has a negative effect on a member of the force, if it's investigated properly and they find protocol was properly followed then nobody suffers as a result. Don't see the issue with complaining. How can i be ignorant when i'm basing what i said in my complaint on the statement they THEY THEMSELVES RELEASED.
Click to expand...

You really think being put through a PSD/IPCC investigation isn't going to have any adverse affect on the officers concerned? It's not a friendly, pleasant process.

thebennyboy said:
A police dog handler maybe? :rolleyes:

Would have had much more of an understanding of how the animal was likely to behave given the circumstances.
Click to expand...

The clue is in the name; they're dog handlers, not dog catchers.

ttaskmaster said:
Cops have these hazard lights and FLIPPIN' BRIGHT flashy blue lights and road cones and warning triangles and a FLIPPIN' MASSIVE great car, with which to close the road and warn people.
As mentioned, there are plenty of matrix signs along this stretch, too.
Click to expand...

Operating on fast roads is always dangerous, it's not as simple as just leaving your car in the middle of the carriageway with lights on whilst you chase a dog around for an hour. Emergency vehicles get struck on motorways quite often because people aren't paying attention, so if the resources aren't available to put a full closure in place properly they're not going to do it at all. Even the Highways Agency have trucks with huge buffers at the back that they use at incidents and road works because cars end up striking them and taking people and vehicles out in the process.

ttaskmaster said:
This force probably has K9 units, as well as a nearby RSPCA peeps and even other officers experienced handling errant animals.
Click to expand...

They probably do, but that doesn't mean they're available or within a reasonable distance to get there rapidly.
 
ttaskmaster said:
Given how often other forces have previously sorted this sort of thing without going in so heavy, I'd say there's plenty of hindsight to call on.
Click to expand...

I would imagine BECAUSE they have dealt with issues like this so much that they have the ability to accurately gauge whether past circumstances would suit that specific situation and make an appropriate call on it.

It has been mentioned that they deal with this stuff all the time, only they know the full story, it was not the usual result of these kinds of incidents but the decision was not taken lightly.

If they did not follow rules and procedure appropriately, they will be called up on it.
 
TheVoice said:
You really think being put through a PSD/IPCC investigation isn't going to have any adverse affect on the officers concerned? It's not a friendly, pleasant process.
Click to expand...

Never said it would be, if anything it'll make them consider the course of action they took. You're also in no position to claim how the IPCC will handle the investigation.

TheVoice said:
The clue is in the name; they're dog handlers, not dog catchers.
Click to expand...

They sure do know how to handle a dog though... :rolleyes:
 
thebennyboy said:
Most of the A55 immediately surrounding the conwy tunnel and the other two tunnels have a 50MPH limit so they would have been breaking the speed limit.
Click to expand...

The majority of your posts in this thread show that you either don't use the A55 often or you have your eyes shut while using it. The 50mph section is through Colwyn Bay and the coastal path by Penmaenmawr is 30MPH.

Where this incident occurred it was almost certainly 70mph at the time and very possibly unlit at 3am.
 
Last edited:
Skillmister said:
The majority of your posts in this thread show that you either don't use the A55 often or you have your eyes shut while using it. The 50mph section is through Colwyn Bay and the coastal path by Penmaenmawr is 30MPH.

Where this incident occurred it was almost certainly 70mph at the time and very possibly unlit at 3am.
Click to expand...

My mistake then, i was unsure about the speed limits due to all the lighting work going on in the tunnels. It is however completely lit from the Conwy tunnel to the Llanfairfechan roundabout. I can't find anything to suggest the lights are turned off at certain times.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom