what do you think of this

[Della]

(02-07-2009 08:26 AM)commonasmuck Wrote:  if you leave a dog in a car in this heat in imho you should be held responsible and lets face it police dog handlers should no enough about dogs to know that leaving them in a car in this heat is wrong.

Totally agree common. I wouldn't leave my dog in the car for one second in this weather. If I was in a car crash, I would scream for my dog to be rescued. I can't imagine a scenario where someone legitimately left a dog unattended in a car in this weather.

OK, let's have the investigation but unless it turns out that the person responsible died of a heart attack between closing the driver's door and opening the rear door or some such unlikely scenario, sacking is not good enough. A prison sentence and a ban from keeping or working with animals for life would be the minimum that I would see as just.

As a police dog handler, they really should have known better and the loss of life in inexcusable.

[Della]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/notti...528878.stm
Once again, someone getting off lightly in my opinion due to depression. Police officers are charged with a lot of responsibility. They can remove children from their parents (in an emergency), arrest people, enter your home (in an emergency or with a warrent). How on earth did someone who is unfit to look after a dog for medical reasons end up in this position of responsibility? Maybe I am being sceptical but so many people manage to live life despite various problems and illnesses but these all get dragged up as an excuse as soon as something goes wrong.

Two lives have been lost here. If he was unfit due to depression, his superiors should be in court for allowing this situation to happen. Someone should pay for the loss of life.

He has not even been banned from keeping animals in the future, not even until he is better. I wonder if that judge ever had a dog?

[Xtro]

(25-02-2010 07:48 PM)Della Wrote:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/notti...528878.stm
Once again, someone getting off lightly in my opinion due to depression. Police officers are charged with a lot of responsibility. They can remove children from their parents (in an emergency), arrest people, enter your home (in an emergency or with a warrent). How on earth did someone who is unfit to look after a dog for medical reasons end up in this position of responsibility? Maybe I am being sceptical but so many people manage to live life despite various problems and illnesses but these all get dragged up as an excuse as soon as something goes wrong.

Two lives have been lost here. If he was unfit due to depression, his superiors should be in court for allowing this situation to happen. Someone should pay for the loss of life.

He has not even been banned from keeping animals in the future, not even until he is better. I wonder if that judge ever had a dog?

I agree that the suffering of the dogs would have been terrible, but having read about this case I think the judgement is fair. I don't see what good prison would do - it wasn't deliberate cruelty and he seems to be full of remorse.

I take your point about depression, but there is still a lot of stigma about the condition and perhaps his superiors were not aware of his condition. He made a massive mistake, one that may well lead to dismissal, but I wouldn't put him in the same bracket as those that are deliberately cruel to animals.

[Della]

He may not have been deliberately cruel but he is clearly not well enough to be in charge of animals so should be banned at least until his health improves.

What really worries me is that his superiors get off scot free. 2 lives have been lost and someone should spend time in jail for this. For those who are not dog lovers, remember that policeman was empowered to remove children from their parents. Thankfully it was 2 dogs and not 2 children that he forgot about locked in his car. Management have responsibility for safety at work. He should not have been working unless suitable light work could be found.

[Moorial]

(28-02-2010 10:36 PM)Della Wrote:  He may not have been deliberately cruel but he is clearly not well enough to be in charge of animals so should be banned at least until his health improves.

What really worries me is that his superiors get off scot free. 2 lives have been lost and someone should spend time in jail for this. For those who are not dog lovers, remember that policeman was empowered to remove children from their parents. Thankfully it was 2 dogs and not 2 children that he forgot about locked in his car. Management have responsibility for safety at work. He should not have been working unless suitable light work could be found.

His superiors may not have been aware that he was suffering from depression. In the case of removal of a child, the child would be in the care of children's services not left in one officer's sole care. I actually find it astounding that you compare caring for a dog to caring for a child Should everybpody who suffers from depression be banned from keeping animals or just banned from keeping dogs? Maybe people with depression should be banned from having kids too cos that seems to be what you are implying.

[Della]

What I am saying is that the needs of vulnerable children and animals should be given priority for safety reasons. There have been several cases in the news recently of mothers suffering from mental illness killing their own children. This does not mean that someone suffering from depression or other mental illness should not have children or animals. The support should be there to make it safe for everyone, the person who is depressed or suffering from a mental illness and also the children or animals. Failing to provide this support is dangerous and should be taken seriously.

If a police officer believes that children are in danger, he can remove them from their parents, take them to a place of safety (normally the police station) and then call children's services. Thankfully this police officer didn't remove any children and forget he had locked them in his car, but he did forget about 2 dogs. His superior, with whom he had meetings, must have been aware that he was a dog handler and should have checked that he was in a fit state to look after those dogs.

I have every sympathy that he is ill. However, sometimes people are unable to do what they want for safety reasons due to illness, for example people with epilepsy can only drive a car if their condition is controlled by medication. There may well be times when, even with support, it is not safe for some people with depression or other mental illness to be allowed children or animals. When they are better, they would probably agree that they could not cope at that time but needed time to get themselves better so that they can in the future.