Animals trapped in cars...

OhEsEcks said:
http://www.snopes.com/crime/safety/response.asp
Click to expand...

:)

Haggisman said:
Wow. You actually believed that was a true story, and not an amusing anecdote?

Also, even if it were true, it's hardly a mind-blowing revelation that the police would prioritise a multiple murder over someone robbing a shed.

Nice try though, stick it to the man and all that, yeah!
Click to expand...

No. But it makes a good point.
To many people saying the same excuse over and over again. The cops number one excuse is
"we have learned from our mistakes and will try hard next time" been hearing that for 30 years.
 
It doesn't make a good point though. If you read the snopes page;

The concept of telling a lie to get the police to a crime scene more quickly keys on a basic yet false assumption that if officers of the law are tardy in responding to a summons for aid, their seeming non-response is prompted by sloth. Police have to prioritize calls for assistance based on the comparative severity of presenting events and/or the potential for further harm to those involved. Under such a formula, investigating a stolen car report will never be on par with breaking up a domestic disturbance, because the vehicle will remain just as stolen even if the investigation does not begin for another two hours, whereas the screaming and shoving match may turn into an assault with a deadly weapon if not broken up immediately. Likewise, putting officers on the still-hot trail of a rapist or drunk driver makes more sense than does sending those same officers to look into a "strange noises in my shed" situation — the one may get a danger to society off the streets before he harms anyone else, while the other might only net a miscreant making off with a garden hoe.

This tale might be a great story for telling, but not for taking as advice. Not unless one has a hankering to spend a night in the hoosegow, keeping the bedbugs company.
Click to expand...
 
deuse said:
No. But it makes a good point.
To many people saying the same excuse over and over again. The cops number one excuse is
"we have learned from our mistakes and will try hard next time" been hearing that for 30 years.
Click to expand...

What point?

When an "excuse" is true, it's called a "reason".

In fact given the cuts in police resources over the past few years, it's even more of a valid "reason". :rolleyes:
 
gradyhawks said:
You shouldn't be smashing anyone window in regardless. Is a job for the police.
Click to expand...

What a stupid comment :rolleyes:
What if a child or dog is clinging to life and doesn't have time to wait for PC plod to turn up :confused:
Utterly depressing that many people can make such a cold, materialistic and inhuman statements :(

A living breathing sentient being has infinitely more importance than a bloody car window which can be easily replaced, I think whenever a baby or pet is locked in a car on a hot day we should always air on the side of caution and take action, the consequences of getting it wrong can be horrific. Let the selfish soul-less ahole pay for a new window, perhaps then they might think twice before effectively torturing a living breathing creature and potentially boiling the poor thing to death :mad:
 
Steedie said:
Hey all,

Was just having a discussion with the girlfriend after seeing a story on the news about a dog that died today after being left in a car for four hours with no windows open.

Now, if ever I was in a situation where I saw a dog distressed and trapped in a hot car, I'd smash the window without hesitation and get the poor little guy out of there. And I'm sure most on here would do the same.

The discussion we were having was that obviously that would be criminal damage, and if the owner saw you and reported you to the police, they'd probably charge you and go through the motions with a court case or whatever may happen in that situation. But in this particular situation, with the owner of the animal obviously breaking the law with regards to animal cruelty, would you be let off given the circumstances or would you both in fact be charged with a crime?

It may be a very simple answer and no discussion required, I was just curious!

Thanks
Click to expand...

The police (at least in this area) have asked that you dial 999 if you see an animal in distress in a car. They have also said that if you do take action yourself then it can be regarded as criminal damage and you should be prepared to defend yourself in court. I'd guess that if the owner wanted to take you to court, then that's what would happen. If the owner was grateful or talked down at the scene then I can't see it going to court.
gradyhawks said:
You shouldn't be smashing anyone window in regardless. Is a job for the police.
Click to expand...

Yes, you should. The life of an animal is worth much, much more than a window (and the owner ;)).
 
Last edited:
godinman said:
I wouldn't call 999 for a dog stuck in a car.
Click to expand...

p0OPrhk.gif.png

What a loving, caring and empathetic human you are! And you're proud of it!!
Have an internet cookie :rolleyes:

**EDIT**
Do you get all your morals or ethics from whats legal or recommended by the police :confused:
Sounds a bit subservient for my liking!
 
Last edited:
godinman said:
I wouldn't call 999 for a dog stuck in a car.

Edit, didn't see that the police themselves actually recommended it. Maybe I would then!
Click to expand...

Dog stuck in a car suffering is an emergency, even if the police don't recommend calling 999.

So either way, regardless of what they recommend, call 999 or smash the window, or both.
 
godinman said:
I wouldn't call 999 for a dog stuck in a car.

Edit, didn't see that the police themselves actually recommended it. Maybe I would then!
Click to expand...

My post earlier in the thread linked to this advice. The instruction to dial 999 in the instance of finding a distressed dog in a hot car is approved by:

The ... PDSA, RSPCA, The British Veterinary Association (BVA), National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC), Battersea Cats & Dogs Home, Blue Cross, The Mayhew Animal Home, Wood Green, The Animals Charity and the National Animal Welfare Trust.
Click to expand...

Don't just dial 101, and don't be fobbed off if they start talking about the RSPCA.
Linky.
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
http://i.imgur.com/p0OPrhk.gif[MG]

What a loving, caring and empathetic human you are! And you're proud of it!!
Have an internet cookie :rolleyes:

**EDIT**
Do you get all your morals or ethics from whats legal or recommended by the police
Sounds a bit subservient for my liking![/QUOTE]

Oh shove it up your arse.

My point was that it doesn't seem a 999 situation to me, it's a dog in a car not a person bleeding to death. The 999 system is already stretched and 101 can easily get a police office or whoever to you anyway.

You seems to have read a lot into it, who said I'm proud of this viewpoint? It slightly differs from someone calling 999, big woop.

And, if you could have held back your self righteous vitriol then maybe you would have noticed my edit stating that under police advice I probably would use 999.

Also, lol at your edit? Subservient because I take police advice? And it isn't moralistic advice you bell, it's procedural advice. My morals haven't changed, the number I'd call has.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
godinman said:
Oh shove it up your arse.

My point was that it doesn't seem a 999 situation to me, it's a dog in a car not a person bleeding to death. The 999 system is already stretched and 101 can easily get a police office or whoever to you anyway.

You seems to have read a lot into it, who said I'm proud of this viewpoint? It slightly differs from someone calling 999, big woop.

And, if you could have held back your self righteous vitriol then maybe you would have noticed my edit stating that under police advice I probably would use 999.
Click to expand...

Before I start, to avoid any confusion: I know that post was aimed at someone else and I'm not replying to jump on that particular disagreement. Just highlighting the need to take immediate action for dogs in distress.

Advice on when to dial 999:

Metropolitan Police said:
The police should only be called on 999 when:

  • There is a danger to life or a risk of injury being caused imminently. Examples include serious road accidents, assaults or serious disorders.
  • A crime is in progress. Examples include assault, burglary, and theft or if an offender is still on scene, or has just left the scene.
  • Police attendance is required immediately such as to prevent a breach of peace, someone acting suspiciously or someone who is about to commit an offence.
Click to expand...
Danger to life? Check. Danger of damage to property? Check. Crime in progress (under the Animal Welfare Act)? Check. Police attendance required immediately (to prevent loss of life, criminal damage to property and to enforce their statutory obligations under the Animal Welfare Act)? Check. As you said in your edit, definitely a 999 job.
 
godinman said:
No, I was arguing with crazy. Rainmaker has been friendly and informative rather then condescending and..um, knob-like.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should communicate better then, your un-edited post was very blunt and made it look like you were at best indifferent to animals suffering and could also have been at worse taken as a statement from someone who has a strange dislike to animals.
I apologize if I mistook your true feelings on the subject :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom