Dog Shot in Face by Park Ranger [CJP]
A Travis County park ranger shot a harmless dog in the face. But, I also happen to know the two ladies that own the dog. They work at my favorite place to get a drink. It is a very Pro Service Member place and was always the first place I went to when I was on my mid-tour leaves and coming home. They have always been good to me so I wanted to return the favor. The park ranger who shot the dog is named Antonio Aguilar and was not punished at all. Furthermore, he is alleged to have pulled his gun on campers for playing their music too loud after this incident happened. So far the Travis County park service has not offered to cover the Vet bills. The video is below:
I urge you to call the Travis County park rangers office and ask why this Antonio Aguilar still has a job and why the vet bills where not covered since clearly he’s in the wrong. These are NOT attack dogs.
They can be reached at 512-263-9115.
Category: Politics
I’m an old country girl. Man shoots my dog, it better be because the cur has its teeth buried to the gums in some part of his anatomy.
Let me preface my thoughts with the following: 1. I do not know anything more about this incident than what Casey J. Porter has posted. I’m using the wireless signal in a Starbucks in Kuwait, headed home from Iraq, and I can’t play the video for some reason. 2. I love dogs. I raised my best friend Alex from a puppy. We were together through thick and thin for almost 13 years. He passed away in my arms and I miss him greatly everyday. 3. I have been menaced by dogs before. Some of these dogs were “cute” and had never threatened anyone (as far as I was told) before threatening me. I have never had to shoot one but if it comes down to getting attacked or shooting a dog, I will shoot a dog every time. Let me add a few facts: 1. Any dog can be a threat, even nice, cute, friendly “harmless” dogs that are owned by nice people we know and like. Even dogs that have never appeared aggressive or vicious before can and will bite. They are animals and can be unpredictable. 2. Dogs can do incredible amounts of damage to tissue, muscle, tendons, etc. Dog bites are very serious and a dog that is threatening to bite should be treated as a serious threat. 3. It can be difficult, if not impossible, to determine if a dog acting aggressively is “bluffing” or a true threat. Waiting to find out can mean the difference between being bitten and not. No one, not even Park Rangers, has the obligation to get bitten before protecting themselves. So having said that, let me say this: This post is so biased as to be ridiculous. Mr. Porter, how do you know this dog is harmless? Because you have patted its head before? Were you there to see what threat (if any) the Park ranger faced before he shot the dog? Are all the facts known about this incident? Are you calling for him to be punished/fired before all the facts are known? While the dog in question may… Read more »
I don’t mind the counter argument but you haven’t watched the video so you are assuming a lot.
The ranger got out of his truck and started yelling at the owners of the dog. Sure, he did not know for sure, but why not pepper spray or something less harmful? This ranger panicked and pulled a gun. I’m not even sure why they are allowed to carry. It’s not like Pace Ben Park is over-run with criminals.
Bottom line is he over reacted and pulled a firearm and discharged with other people and families around. He acted
stupidly.
“This post is so biased as to be ridiculous. Mr. Porter…”.
You mean, biased like the one in which you wrote (in an earlier blog post) that anyone who declines your request to conduct a search of their vehicle incident to a stop based on a simple traffic violation is probably trying to hide something from the police; that “good guys” cooperate with the police (implying that “good guys” willingly hand over their rights to the police)…that kind of biased?
Maybe they’re like me, and don’t care for a perfect stranger pawing though the stuff in their car.
Don’t even go with the “anti LEO” angle, as that dog won’t hunt.
I’m a retired US Army MP LTC; my father was a 30 year Federal LEO, I had an uncle who was a retired Memphis PD Sgt, and another uncle who is a retired DA Chief Criminal Investigator and Chief Deputy Sheriff. Stop me for a violation, and I’ll courteously and cheerfully accept a ticket, no worries. Ask me for a consensual search, and I’ll turn you down flat.
Watch the video when you can…hopefully, a fair investigation will be conducted and truth will prevail. If the ranger had no legitimate reason to shoot the animal, I trust he will be working the counter at Wendy’s or as a Mall Ninja in short order.
Finally, thanks for your service and safe travels to your home and family!
Mike
I’m actually not assuming anything. I’m keeping an open mind. I’m not flying off the handle and making a lot of claims that I have no way of backing up. I’m pointing out some facts and expressing my displeasure with this type of post. I’m bored…our flight got backed up 36 hours. If you want to talk about why he didn’t use pepper spray (assuming of course that he even had it, which I don’t know…do you?) I can’t say. Again, I wasn’t there, but I can tell you that pepper spray isn’t always effective on people or dogs, generally takes longer to access and utilize then a holstered pistol, and is affected by factors such as distance and wind. Maybe he decided that it wasn’t his best option for defending himself. Maybe he didn’t even have it. I don’t know…do you? What other “less harmful” thing would you have him use? What options other than his firearm did he have? I don’t know…do you? If you’re not sure why Park Rangers are allowed to be armed, you should educate yourself as to the realities of law enforcement in the United States. If you seriously believe it’s safe to be an unarmed Peace Officer anywhere these days, I both pity and admire your innocence. Regardless, those things have nothing at all to do with the dog getting shot, and neither does the Ranger allegedly pointing his gun at some people for loud music or yelling at the owners of the dog, but feel free to try and shift the focus of the issue some more. I mean, that’s your complaint, right? That he shot the dog and it wasn’t necessary in your expert opinion? Or are you planning on complaining about everything he did, even things you don’t know happened, in order to get people to call this guy’s boss and get him fired? Bottom line is that I certainly don’t know enough about this to know if this guy “panicked,” “over reacted,” or “acted stupidly.” You seem pretty confident in making that assessment, but you’ll understand if I don’t… Read more »
Now I know Dogs can be vicious etc, but shooting a dog not coming at you seems a bit craven. Not saying you wait until it’s jaws are around your throat, but I take my dog to the dog park every day and there’s nothing but barking, fighting and rolling around going on.
Just glad the dog is okay.
Spigot, I was two fingering it while you were posting. Then I had to go back and re-read my comments since I couldn’t remember my exact words. I wrote:
“My thoughts on this are pretty simple: the innocent have nothing to fear from me. A person who refuses consent, which is their absolute right, probably has a reason to not want me in their car, and that reason is probably criminal in nature. Good guys support and cooperate with cops.”
I stand by what I said, which is good guys support and cooperate with cops. We can agree on that, I hope, although we might have different definitions on what “cooperate” means to each of us, especially in regards to consensual vehicle searches.
I also stand by saying most people who refuse consent are hiding something. There are lots of reasons why folks might refuse consent. In my experience, which is pretty extensive but by no means all encompassing, the most common reason for refusal is criminal in nature.
I don’t really see that as me being biased, but I guess you do. Personally, I see it as an opinion formed by years and years of experience with car stops, consensual searches and taking bad guys to jail for stuff I find in their cars. Experience which, and I say this with all due respect, you probably don’t have as an MP officer.
Regardless, that was that post and this is this one. Thanks for your good wishes, sir, and thank you for your service, as well.
Jack,
I agree with you that your experiences as a civilian LEO are of greater depth than those of the average MP, particularly in my case as my time was primarily in Tactical MP assignments. No argument there at all.
I also agree that many people who do decline to consensual search (many…not most, but that’s just my personal opinion) DO have some type of contraband in their vehicle. I’m also aware than many run of the mill crooks are stupid enough to grant consent anyway…you clearly know that better than most. And even if they are dirty, decline and you send them on their way due to insufficient PC to hold them, you know as well as I do that their time will come…it usually does.
Just consider that for many of us, declining a request to search is not because we’re “bad guys” and not because we are trying to be an uncooperative ass clown…it’s something deeper and more fundamental and critically important to what we are as a nation. I think our differing opinions here are more philosophical than practical.
In any event, once you are safe at home and back on the job, “Good Hunting” and Be Safe!
Casey- Why do they guns? Because they face the chance of armed drunks, unarmed but dangerous drunks, wildlife, rabid animals, etc.
Jack- Why wouldn’t they have pepper/OC spray? I would expect anyone authorized to carry an instrument of deadly force to have escalation of force measures. For the military, that can mean a lot of things including lasers. For LEO, that generally means an OC spray of sorts and a baton.
I think it’s sad a dog was shot, if he was indeed truly harmless. I think it’s also on the owners for not following the leash law. If that dog was on a leash and had been shot- it would have helped the owner’s case. As such, I have a feeling that Hegelian dialectic plays a part as usual: Thesis+ dynamic opposition+antithesis= Synthesis.
As to consensual search of a vehicle over a true traffic stop- no thanks. Give me my ticket and let me on my way. If you have reason to suspect me of something, initiate arrest procedure and let the process work itself. I’m not about to give up my 4th amendment rights because some dude with a badge says so.
I believe the phrase is: ” I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.
So, are these PARK Rangers sworn law enforcement? If they are not, and this guy draws down on the wrong person, he just might get whacked.
If they are, maybe someone should be following him around, documenting his actions. The Truth, no matter what color you paint it, is still the truth.
Siege of Rotterdam (1500″s)
“Kill them all my son, God will know His own”
Siege of Western Civilization (9/11 – present)
“If you kill them all, there will be NO hearts and minds to win.”
I’ll bet his “training kicked in” or something. As a soldier, I’m tired of all the passive-voiced “my training kicked-in and the perp was engaged by me” excusifying by civilian cops for sh*t that would’ve gotten me Article-15ed or chaptered for being irresponsible and/or stupid lately. Dude, WTF?
When I was a kid, some a-hole shot my dog, while my dog was fenced in in my back yard. I got home from school and wondered why my dog could not use his front left paw. My mom took him to the vet and we found out why he was in pain. A 22 rifle round hit his leg and traveled up into his shoulder. The damage was massive and he had to be put to sleep. People shoot dogs for no reason, because people are often dirtbags. Even some park rangers are dirt bags. While I cannot say this dog was harmless, there have been far too many cases of police shooting pets for little or no reason. Recall the SWAT team in Missouri (iirc) that raided the guys house (over a bag of weed) and shot his dog. The whole thing was on video and mad quite a splash on the interwebs – and it was a small dog. Not a threat.
I wonder what other levels of force this guy had. Could he have used OC? A Taser? I’ve seen a dog get tasered, and it sure as hell stopped him cold. Certainly there are better options than shooting a taxpayers dog in the face.
My non-park ranger opinion – next time, if you see dogs off leash around your vehicle, don’t escalate the situation by getting out of your truck and running into a lake and shooting a dog. And for dog owners – keep the dang leash on.
Some people are just scared of dogs, period. Maybe this Park ranger misinterpreted the dogs actions or maybe the dog was genuinely being over-aggressive. Without being there it is hard to tell. My neighbor has a boxer that plays with my lab all the time. Great people dog, but if any motorized vehicle gets around him (lawnmower, ATV, car, etc) he goes apeshit. He’s been known to delay neighbors for up to ten minutes by planting himself in front of their car and trying to bite their tires as they drive down the road.
What Pat said is true as well; many people are just plain cruel. An acquaintance told me he had a dually work truck swerve into his driveway years ago and hit his lab. He was a kid at the time and it seems the driver was just getting his kicks. I’ve seen people swerve into various creatures just to take them out. I, for one, always try to avoid hitting anything, be it an armadillo or a dog.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by dana l dillon, A Proud Veteran. A Proud Veteran said: Dog Shot in Face by Park Ranger. [ CJP ] http://bit.ly/be4Ng6 Via This Ain't Hell […]
I have some experience in parks with dogs and dog owners as a volunteer in a national park. From the training I have had, I know that NPS personnel are very cautious about dog and dog owner interactions. I know people who have been threatened up to the point of a bite by allegedly harmless dogs. Dealing with argumentative dog owners is one of the principal reasons volunteers give for leaving the park.
This is not to say that these people in this case were that sort of dog owners, just that there are rude dog owners out there and many times I think park staff develop a certain unfortunate expectation about how a dog interaction is going to go.
With that in mind, I noticed two things in the video:
They owner said the “dogs were off the leash.” There was more than one dog, and they were not in the control of their owner.
The owner also said “As I’m trying to get out of the water to go talk to him the dogs run up, run up, and start barking at him.” The owner was apparently not near the dog(s) and they were running at the Ranger and barking. From his perspective they could have appeared to be attacking as a group. The other witness did say he “ran into the lake” so obviously he felt threatened.
I wouldn’t suggest this guy is a hero or a zero based on this alone. But I think there may be more nuance to the story than we have here. It is easy to assume that the situation could and should have been handled differently. I’m just not sure we have enough information for a public flogging.
PS:
This is what Travis County has to say about their Park Rangers:
“They also enforce the county’s park rules and state laws. As certified peace officers, they sometimes make arrests. Unlike police agencies, however, whose primary duty is law enforcement, our Park Rangers duties are 70% park visitor services, 10% law enforcement, 10% emergency medical and 10% paperwork. Our Park Rangers are Travis County’s “Ambassadors” to the parks.”
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/tnr/parks/park_rangers.asp
I know the dog was loose in an area where he should have been on a leash. However, to shoot an innocent dog just because it was barking is just plain wrong. Not to mention with children nearby. It’s one thing however if the dog is threatening or attacking the park ranger or others for him to use guns, since that is SELF DEFENSE and safety of others.
I was also shocked that this park ranger was threatening some campers at gunpoint for playing their music too loudly. In my opinion, this park ranger should be fired, and he should not be a police officer at all. I also found out the park ranger was with the Border Patrol for a while, and on Wikipedia, boxers are not aggressive dogs.
If I was a park ranger and I saw a loose dog in a leash zone, I would go to the owners, and give them a warning that their dog is loose in a leash zone, and instead of being armed with guns, I would be armed with leashes to put on loose dogs. As with loud music, I would just give the campers a warning, and make them lower their volume to acceptable noise levels.
Simple truth: This is a rogue cop who needs to be fired and be banned from any kind of law enforcement work fields.
“As certified peace officers…”? WTF! BS Flag.
Siege of Rotterdam (1500?s)
“Kill them all my son, God will know His own”
Siege of Western Civilization (9/11 – present)
” Kill them all, and there are NO hearts and minds to win.”
After I retired, I was working cable TV for a rural cable tv provider. A deputy happened along and we were shooting the breeze for a moment. AS we were, this huge St Bernard came towards us at a decent clip. Not a run, but not a slow walk, either. The deputy had his hand on his sidearm and was ready to draw and fire, if necessary. I yelled at the dog, as did he, the dog slowed and ultimately turned around and went back towards his house. I guess my point is that people don’t always know what a dog may do. Sometimes, their actions can be interpreted as an act of aggression. I’m not condoning the officer’s actions, but he may have reacted out of some sort of fear. Had the owners had the dog on a leash, this probably wouldn’t have happened. It would be interesting to hear BOTH sides of the story. It does seem as if this particular Park Ranger has some issues when other stories are being brought to light.
Jack seems to have given all the benefit of the doubt to the park ranger. That seems overly generous to me.
While all his points (Jack’s)are possible, so are all those made by the dog’s owner. The simple fact is, we don’t know who is telling the truth. Frankly, I see no reason to give the benefit of the doubt to either party.
The one item that raises my suspicion is where the park ranger’s chief ranger says that the 4 year old child was “never in any danger.” Since he wasn’t there, he doesn’t know that for a fact. The BS alarms should be audible by now.
The ranger may have “been in fear for his life”, but we have no way to judge if that fear was reasonable, or if he was an asshat who just wanted to fire his sidearm.
An as an aside, regarding the issue of giving consent to search…. I tell everyone to NEVER give consent. That is the legal advice you’ll get from any legal counsel. To all you LEO’s out there, you darn well know why.
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik&feature=related
There’s certainly a lot of dog lovers out there, huh?
Hey, anyone remember during the fighting in Fallujah, that Marine shot a terrorist who was “playing possum” in a mosque? The shooting was caught on tape by an embedded cameraman. Man, what an outcry there was for that Marine’s hide by some people. Seems like there was a lot of folks who looked at that footage (which admittedly wasn’t pretty,) and decided then and there that that Marine was out of control and had committed murder.
They didn’t know the whole story, didn’t understand the situation, and took some limited and out of context information and quickly leaped to a judgement. That reminds me of something, not sure what though…
All sarcastic kidding aside, I would just suggest yet again that it might be best to know all the facts before we call for this Park Ranger to be strung up.
@ Jack: Perhaps I’m a sick bastard or maybe just a realist. When that Marine shot that terrorist, I thought…….. Good for the Marine!! I had already read of terrorists pulling stunts like that or firing upon our troops from a mosque. We aren’t prosecuting the war in Iraq or Afghanistan like we should be. Find the enemy and KILL them!! Imagine had we fought WWII with the rules our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, & Marines are constrained with today??