Mike Moon: Should police dogs be valued more than humans?

(From Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove)

In the Bible, we learned that God gave Adam dominion over every living thing. In essence, mankind is superior to animals. With this in mind, it would make sense that when it comes to ‘rights’, an animal’s rights would be less than that of humans.

Now,, please understand, I am not advocating for the abuse of animals. Nor am I promoting animal rights above humans. I believe that we must be good stewards of God’s creation and proper care and respect should be given to all.

So, here’s the question: If a dog attacks a person, should the person be able to protect themselves from the animal?

What if the animal is employed by law enforcement?

About four years ago, a canine used by a Missouri law enforcement agency ‘took a bullet’ intended for a police officer. The dog, Max, died from its wounds.

While it’s sad that Max died, it’s great that he protected his human partner. Here’s a bit more of the story:

https://www.senate.mo.gov/Media/NewsDetails/1079

Now, let’s consider some other instances. What if the one being pursued by the canine committed no crime and is simply an innocent bystander? Should the individual be allowed to defend themselves from an unwarranted attack?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/10/15/police-k-9-dogs-involved-excessive-force-allegations-bystanders/3652320001/

SB 754

Here’s a portion of the summary of SB 754 taken from the MO Senate website:

MAX'S LAW (Sections 575.010, 575.353, 578.007, & 578.022)
This act creates "Max's Law."

Under current law, the offense of assault on a law enforcement animal is a class C misdemeanor. (Class C misdemeanors are punishable by up to fifteen days in jail, a fine up to $750, or both. Examples of Class C misdemeanors include: violation of child labor laws and canine cruelty.)

This act provides that the offense of assault on a law enforcement animal is a class A misdemeanor, if the law enforcement animal is not injured to the point of requiring veterinary care or treatment (Class A Misdemeanor – up to one year in jail and/or a fine not to exceed two thousand dollars.); a class E felony if the law enforcement animal is seriously injured to the point of requiring veterinary care or treatment (Class E felonies are the least severe class of felonies in terms of punishment. A Class E felony is punishable by up to four years in prison or one year in jail. The court also can impose a fine of up to $10,000. There may also be a chance for probation under this felony class); and a class D felony if the assault results in the death of such animal (Class D felonies are the next-lowest class of felonies that one could be charged with. A Class D felony MO is punishable by up to seven years in prison or one year in the county jail. The court also can impose a fine of up to $10,000).

Additionally, exemptions to the offenses of agroterrorism, animal neglect, and animal abuse shall not apply to the killing or injuring of a law enforcement animal while working.

Finally, this act adds that any dog that is owned by or in the service of a law enforcement agency and that bites or injures another animal or human is exempt from the penalties of the offense of animal abuse. This is what is known as qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is just that – qualified.

In other words, it is not blanket immunity, and not immunity with impunity. In the words of the U.S. Supreme Court, “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would.*

*https://nationalpolice.org/main/what-the-public-needs-to-know-about-qualified-immunity/?info=EG0101&ad=684722434037&kw=qualified%20immunity%20definition&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAuYuvBhApEiwAzq_YiR52QyYtnklVfhJVAPwW4QfAQW51UmRFKGiHIbE4CQSuL5UepjcLahoCClsQAvD_BwE

The courts view the use of canines in law enforcement situations as another tool at the officer’s disposal, similar to a firearm. If this is the case, should the dog handler be held responsible for any harm done by the tool (dog) used by the officer?

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/10/02/when-police-violence-is-a-dog-bite