Brown Sauce Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-30947899 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 I do not get it why would you not just shoot it strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardo Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 more paperwork once you discharge a firearm no doubt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STOTTO Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 You beat me to it. Having had in the past to dispatch a very badly injured small animal, (broken back, run over by a vehicle) with a wheel brace I still have no sympathy with these officers as a deer is a different prospect altogether and these officers had the means of a much more humane alternative. Very poor judgement in my view and in the view of their superiors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Perhaps the drinking water in Durham Constabulary needs looking into; there may be something contaminating it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumpy69 Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Depends on the species of deer, for small species like roe I would say it was acceptable discharging a firearm may have been deemed unacceptable due to public etc. If it was a stag like in the article probably not but to the press a deer is a deer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Well they're not on the Firearms Team any more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 I reckon it would have been a right messy site. Like the last bit of Casino when Joe Pesci's character gets it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Depends on the species of deer, for small species like roe I would say it was acceptable discharging a firearm may have been deemed unacceptable due to public etc. If it was a stag like in the article probably not but to the press a deer is a deer. I am surprised you would think it is acceptable to beat any deer to death with a crowbar , regardless of its size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumpy69 Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 I am surprised you would think it is acceptable to beat any deer to death with a crowbar , regardless of its size. What would you have done, left it lying there suffering? It had been hit by a car two days earlier and they responded to reports of a deer lying on the road, they hit it to " make sure the deer was dead and not suffering further". If unsafe and not authorised to use firearms it is the best course of action to end its suffering quickly and efficiently. The first blow would have rendered it at least unconscious and another blow or two to ensure death, either way it would have been a quicker death than leaving it lying on the road until a vet or RSPCA turn up to euthanize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 What would you have done, left it lying there suffering? It had been hit by a car two days earlier and they responded to reports of a deer lying on the road, they hit it to " make sure the deer was dead and not suffering further". If unsafe and not authorised to use firearms it is the best course of action to end its suffering quickly and efficiently. The first blow would have rendered it at least unconscious and another blow or two to ensure death, either way it would have been a quicker death than leaving it lying on the road until a vet or RSPCA turn up to euthanize. The police in question had firearms , would I beat it to death no because that may be construed as causing even more unesccasary suffering , why do you think the police got a final warning if the practice is acceptable , if I came across one I would call the police and let them deal with it rather than beat it to death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumpy69 Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 A quote from a vet on the stalking forum who also frequents this site. "If I came across such an incident then blunt force trauma to the head is an acceptable method IMO. I imagine not quite as large a stag as in the stock photo....." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuddster Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 in the circumstances of a injured deer, the armed officers do not have the necessary authority to draw and discharge their weapons for an animal destruction-the matter would be referred to a supervising officer who would either provide that authority or not as the case may be. other resolutions would include the proximity of a vet whose willing to turn out for free and sometimes the BDS. so if the authority was not given I suspect the cops, as most likely any other layman would try and do the best in the circumstances to despatch the animal. no paperwork needed for the officers just record discharge in ammo store and clean weapon-simple as. personally, I believe the greatest failing lies with the firearms commander for not giving the authority-if he or she had, the deer would have had an effective despatch like the dozens I 'm sure occur every day and this story would have been avoided. f. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Unless I am mistaken there was a 2 day lapse between first attemting to assist the deer and then bludgening it to death! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) in the circumstances of a injured deer, the armed officers do not have the necessary authority to draw and discharge their weapons for an animal destruction-the matter would be referred to a supervising officer who would either provide that authority or not as the case may be. other resolutions would include the proximity of a vet whose willing to turn out for free and sometimes the BDS. Mr Banks said two officers responded to a call at Tanfield Lea near Stanley in the early hours and called for assistance to "humanely destroy" the deer. He said: "Two other officers with the skills and relevant equipment were despatched to deal with it. "There is currently an investigation under way because we do not believe the deer was killed in the humane way that it should have been. Reading the report above it looks like that had been considered already, or am I reading it wrong.? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-28558929 Edited January 23, 2015 by Bazooka Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytree Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 The police in question had firearms , would I beat it to death no because that may be construed as causing even more unesccasary suffering , why do you think the police got a final warning if the practice is acceptable , if I came across one I would call the police and let them deal with it rather than beat it to death. Difficult one really, if I found a deer in that condition I couldn't just leave it, it's already in pain, confused and bewildered. Calling a vet or police is an option if you can't catch it but if it's already down then it needs finishing. Perhaps if they'd cut its throat and said it was "Halal" they would have got a commendation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 in the circumstances of a injured deer, the armed officers do not have the necessary authority to draw and discharge their weapons for an animal destruction-the matter would be referred to a supervising officer who would either provide that authority or not as the case may be. other resolutions would include the proximity of a vet whose willing to turn out for free and sometimes the BDS. so if the authority was not given I suspect the cops, as most likely any other layman would try and do the best in the circumstances to despatch the animal. no paperwork needed for the officers just record discharge in ammo store and clean weapon-simple as. personally, I believe the greatest failing lies with the firearms commander for not giving the authority-if he or she had, the deer would have had an effective despatch like the dozens I 'm sure occur every day and this story would have been avoided. f. According to the link Durhams policy is for a firearms officer to use their weapon , on this occasion they have been discliplined for not following it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuddster Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 the ACPO manual on the police use if firearms is the point of reference- available on line. officers may only self authorise in the event of an immediate threat to human life-animal destructions are not covered by this provision. f. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) Two Durham Police firearms officers may face criminal charges after an injured deer was apparently killed with a crowbar. The officers had been dispatched to destroy the animal, which was believed to have been hit by a vehicle. But it is understood that, instead of using a firearm, the officers used a crowbar to kill the animal. The force's deputy chief constable, Michael Banks, said the Crown Prosecution Service had been informed. The officers, who have not been named or their ranks revealed, have been moved to other duties. Mr Banks said the deer should have been destroyed humanely with firearms, but had apparently been killed with a crowbar taken from a police vehicle. I must still be reading it wrong then.? Edited January 23, 2015 by Bazooka Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 As a kid when beating years ago a guns lab chased a three legged roe, caught and pinned it causing a fair bit of damage (it was a very rough farmers shoot) ripping the skin etc. I killed it easily with a blow to the back of the head from a decent heavy stick. I would have no reservations about using a similar object to put a wounded deer out of its misery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 the ACPO manual on the police use if firearms is the point of reference- available on line. officers may only self authorise in the event of an immediate threat to human life-animal destructions are not covered by this provision. f. Surely if Durhams policy is for the officers to use a weapon then they have prior authourisation ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Surely if Durhams policy is for the officers to use a weapon then they have prior authourisation ? Perhaps their radios and mobile phones did not work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Too much paperwork involved if firearms used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyska Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Call a vet or a knackerman. No excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Call a vet or a knackerman. No excuse. Who hardly ever turn out in my experience. So there is an excuse to act quickly in the animals best interest if it's suffering unnecessarily. Regardless of how easy it is to shoot a deer this is still discharging a police owned firearm in the public arena, it's a big deal and should be run the same way as any firearms job. It isn't just a case of there's an injured deer I've got a gun, bang! Although it would seem the drama this has caused they'd have been better off doing that? It's a little unsavoury but it was dispatched quickly, which I believe falls into the category of humanely. I think the punishment is a joke considering their records. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.