Police in Oklahoma killed a family's dog. Should police carry tranquilizers instead?

  • Yes, they should carry tranquilizers. t

    There should be other non lethal methods of control in a police officers arsenal. Or if they are not going to carry tranquilizers, they should have access to a member of animal control and have them handle the animal instead. Using a gun on a otherwise docile animal is not appropriate.

  • Yes, police should carry tranquilizers instead.

    Police officers should not use deadly force against family pets. Instead, law enforcement should carry pet tranquilizers to subdue animals. Losing a pet can be devastating for a family. Furthermore, this does not create goodwill for the police department either. The best solution for situations where police must subdue a pet is to use a tranquilizer instead of killing it.

  • Police killings are getting out of control

    Headlines have been made criticizing the police for the killing of black men, but violence perpetrated by police extends to animals as well, with the recent news that a family's dog had been killed by a cop. Police forces should be made to carry tranquilizers instead so that they can't commit such atrocious acts.

  • Police should carry tranquilizers

    Police should carry tranquilizers in the case that a harmless animal is in jeopardy. In the case the animal is causing harm to humans, however, more serious measures should be taken. Police should be armed with both measures to reach the best consequences and to be ready for any situation involving an animal.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.