Texas Police Shoot Dog and Then Taser Dog’s Deaf Elderly Owner For Failing to Obey Commands

Police in Bruceville-Eddy, Texas shot and killed a dog that they insist was threatening them and then tasered its elderly owner for failing to obey their commands. The man turns out to be deaf and there is still no word on the investigation that began in March in the incident.

A woman called police to say that two dogs had chased her into her home. The police and an animal control officer found the two dogs at the man’s home and one of the dogs, a mixed breed mastiff-pit bull, charged at their cars. A deputy constable proceeded to shoot the dog. When the owner ran outside, the officer told him to stop and go back into his house. He did not and so they tasered the elderly man. He is deaf.

For the full story, click here.

28 thoughts on “Texas Police Shoot Dog and Then Taser Dog’s Deaf Elderly Owner For Failing to Obey Commands”

  1. It bugs you that they ‘taser because they didn’t obey us’? It should bug you because obeying is not supposed to be a condition to avoid being tasered! This, like all forms of physical harm, is only supposed to be used by police to protect THEMSELVES from harm and yes, I will admit I consider that a responsible position. Someone who cares about their community takes a job that is inherently dangerous and they have a right to protect themselves but here… just what were they protecting themselves from? Looking like a couple of assholes in front of the neighbors who were gathering? An old man comes running out of his home after they shoot his dog? Where was the threat to the police? They were ‘losing’ control of the situation? They never had control. The ‘threat’ id the dog, was dead. If anything, keeping the man outside with them likely kept them safer by suggesting he go back in the house wouldn’t they have been making it easier for the man to get a weapon at that point – putting the police in a more vulnerable position?

    It’s sad that it’s gotten to the point that if a police officer so much as makes eye contact with you, they define you as the bad guy. Do they truly believe that 99% of the civilian population is the criminal element?

  2. “I think the police will be using the infamous Texas defense”

    Isn’t it curious that States in this country that elect politicians who are so interested in not curtailing our “citizen’s rights” and ensuring that inefficient government is kept small, are the same places that accept this kind of Police misconduct on a regular basis. They can’t wrap their minds around that dichotomy.

  3. rcampbell,
    You took the words right out of my mouth. You couldn’t make this stuff up when it comes to Texas justice. I think the police will be using the infamous Texas defense, “he needed killing”!

  4. Mike K

    Note a deaf person may be able to hear but not able to distinguish words in the noise. His hearing may be subject to distortion so that he can hear a ruckus, dogs barking, shooting etc but not make sense of words shouted at him.

  5. Even if someone is not deaf, that does not mean they will understand orders when several different police officers shout at them simultaneously.

  6. Not to pick but if the guy was deaf why did he “run out of his house” when the dog was shot?

  7. All these stories of police assaults with tasers are frustrating to read. Tasers were intended to substitute for bullets, and should never be used in a situation where the use of bullets would not be justifiable. This needs to be written into law. In cases where the police exercise poor judgment in tasering someone, they should be disciplined or fired. In cases in which they taser a person who is already handcuffed, taser someone in the back when he is walking away from them, or taser someone for talking back to them without threatening them, they should go to prison. Is there any group that is working on this — writing a model statute, perhaps, and lobbying to get it enacted in every state?

  8. One of the taser myths is “Just obey the police and you won’t be tasered.” It’s sometimes true, but it’s often nothing but a damn lie. Too many examples to list.

  9. The United States has a cruel society. Canada seems like the easiest non-crazy country to emigrate to (there’s just a line to get in) but Australia would be a more desirable location I think.

  10. One taser story we haven’t seen (but that I would expect to see eventually), is the use of a taser by a law enforcement officer on his own children as a systematic form of discipline. When this case surfaces and gets to the courts I expect that tasers as discipline could be protected in the same way the courts protect other physical forms of child abuse.

    At that point we might even expect to see tasers “augment” traditional forms of abusive corporal punishment in the public schools. Southern states will be first since they use corporal punishment most widely. It may be useful to rename the device, however, in order that the public doesn’t equate these devices with law enforcement. If it sounds medical and affirmative people may buy in more easily. Perhaps Electro-intervention Unit or Child Safe-T Guide? I’ll have to work on the brand angle.

    Our society accepts torture, and our society even accepts the torture of children. We will live in an increasingly violent world.

  11. The issue of “we shot because the individual didn’t obey us” has bugged me for quite a while – it assumes that the individual can hear and understand English. How many people are shot/tasered/tackled because of this problem?

    Also, this is one of those situations where I have to ask, “or what?” The deaf guy turned to go back in his house. So the police tasered him – or what? So what if he had stormed off? I certainly understand the (slim) potential that the guy could have gone back in his house and grabbed a gun. But it seems that “back off and give things a few minutes to see what’s going on” would be a better approach than “shoot/taser now!” Amadou Diallo’s death seems like a “worst case” example of exactly this issue.

  12. From article: “They used a Taser to subdue the elderly man, who reacted angrily to the dog’s death, after the man ignored an order to stop and turned to go back into his house.”

    The old guy had apparently stopped chewing the police out and was going inside- did they taser him in the back? Seems like it but the linked article doesn’t say. That’s going to be one rich old guy, as well as he should be. He’s going to make his lawyer rich too. Is this the ‘jobs’ program we have to look forward to in the declining days of civil rights?

    Actually shooting the dog is, in the absence of a good description of what it was doing or footage of it, is the least objectionable part of the story: a largish dog can kill you.

  13. When are you civilians (non-police) going to realize there are consequences for not obeying our commands? Some of you believe that we are here to protect and serve you. How foolish and naive. We are here to control you and to stoke our egos in the process. The only people we protect and serve are those that run things and God help us if we erroneously violate their rights.

  14. Well what would one expect from a town, far, far away from reality? A town in the Southern Bible Belt? Yes, turning the other cheek only applies to you. We do believe in righteousness and We have deemed you not so. This is McLennan County, home of Waco, Baylor and a town called Crawford not to far away. What do you really expect? This is about all they have to do. Deaf people, Homo’s they are all dispensable. George Bush is our Mascot and Dick Cheney our Leader. R. Allen Stanford lived not to far away….

  15. So were the commands they were yelling to the deaf person “roll over”, “heal”, “sit”, or what?

    It is a wonder they did not shot the deaf person first then taser the dog.

Comments are closed.