LEO orders man to decapitate his dead dog or go to jail

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by Dawgdoc, Dec 5, 2017.

  1. Dawgdoc

    Dawgdoc Active Member

    1,317
    3
    38
    Here is a stellar example of government failing the people.

    http://www.macon.com/news/local/article188038824.html

    http://www.13wmaz.com/news/local/cr...ptions-before-cutting-dogs-head-off/496959377

    Normally, a dog that bites a person is kept under observation for 10 days. In cases where the animal can't be observed, because it is dead, the only way to know for sure if it was rabid is to test the brain. There is a specific way that the head is removed to minimize exposure to potentially-infected neurological tissue. When I have to do this, I am alone in a closed room without help because I have been vaccinated for rabies; I also use proper protective clothing to minimize the risk of disease transmission.

    Either the health department contact who told the cops what to do is a moron, or the cops majorly misinterpreted what needed to be done. Regardless of the unnecessary risk on multiple levels, no one should be forced to do such an act or face arrest.

    The article indicates that they gave the owner the option of taking the body to a vet and paying for decapitation, but that is not his responsibility either. Once the government decides it needs to do a rabies test because of public health, it is the State's responsibility to accomplish the testing. Since testing is so critical for the bite victim's health, you would think that they would want everything done correctly to ensure a valid test, similar to securing the chain of evidence, so to speak.
     
    AtlPhilip likes this.
  2. phantoms

    phantoms Senior Mumbler

    5,239
    10
    38
    I hope there's some serious training that comes out of this. I can only imagine how bad it was for the owner after having to deal with his dog being shot, to then be told (basically forced by threat of arrest) that he had to decapitate him.
     
    AtlPhilip likes this.

  3. gsusnake

    gsusnake Token Liberal Hippie

    I have some knowledge and experience of and with all the individuals mentioned in the Telegraph story. I worked EMS in Crawford County for some time.

    All involved are misrepresented in some way. Not very good reporting. I don’t have direct knowledge of the story (second and third hand from folks knowledgeable about the events) but the story and video were evidently pretty heavily edited.
     
  4. Dawgdoc

    Dawgdoc Active Member

    1,317
    3
    38
    There is no getting around the fact that someone in government screwed up in making an untrained person cut off a rabies suspect head. Even if the video was heavily edited, and there were other "options," they should never have made (or let) him decapitate the dog. Once the State decides it needs the head for public health concerns, it falls upon them to transport the body to the properly trained people who can remove the head. The health department has the authority to demand the head, but in my experience, they always want someone else to remove it. If anyone in the health department suggested that the owner be potentially exposed to a fatal disease, they need serious retraining.

    The LEOs may be ignorant of the process, but they should know that they only have authority to confiscate the dog's body and cannot compel any actions on the part of the dog owner. Even in the edited video, it certainly sounds like Investigator Hollis is threatening to arrest the dog owner for not complying with his demands, whether it be do the decapitation there or transport the body to the vet. It is also shameful that the animal control officer has not been trained about this type of situation. Where I work, animal control is often tasked with obtaining the head (either they do it themselves or pay a vet to do it).
     
  5. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,631
    14
    38
    The reality is that no one actually suspected rabies. That was extrajudicial punishment and an attempt to justify the shooting.
     
    gunsmoker likes this.
  6. Dawgdoc

    Dawgdoc Active Member

    1,317
    3
    38
    I would say the decapitation was necessary, because it is the only way to rule out rabies after death. When I have explain this to people, I tell them that even if there is only a 0.001% chance of rabies, the disease is nearly 100% fatal in humans, so we have to test.
    The way that they went about it was wrong.
     
  7. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,631
    14
    38
    I agree, If there was any reason to suspect the animal might be rabid. But there wasn't. From the news article, "{the owner} replied that Big Boy had been vaccinated but says the officers wouldn't let him leave the scene to get the paperwork"



     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  8. psrumors

    psrumors Active Member

    4,723
    10
    38
    That simply is not true. A post bite vaccination administered prior to the onset of symptoms has shown to be very successful in treating suspected exposure.
     
  9. Dawgdoc

    Dawgdoc Active Member

    1,317
    3
    38
    When a person or animal "has rabies," we are referring to the actual symptoms (the disease) caused by the virus. Once you have symptoms, it is nearly 100% fatal. In other words, infection with the rabies virus is not fatal with appropriate treatment, but people with the clinical manifestation of rabies infection in the brain nearly always die.

    My statement draws a distinction between "infected" and "diseased," which is true for a whole lot of infectious organisms.

    Post-exposure vaccination prevents the disease caused by the virus. Since it takes weeks to months for the virus to travel from the bite wound to the brain, we don't consider the victim to have the disease; they are infected with the virus, which can be countered by the post-exposure treatment.

    In regards to a case like this, the reason that rabies must be ruled out is that post-exposure treatment has inherent risks (allergic reactions that can be fatal), so testing prevents unnecessary treatment for people who are not infected (which is the vast majority of dog bite victims in the US.)

    In the case of domestic animals, we often have the luxury of waiting to make sure the biting animal does not die within a week (in which case it was not rabid) or testing the brain to make sure it was not rabid. In comparison, wild animal bites often do not have that benefit. Animals can bite and escape into the woods, and the victim gets treated as if the animal was known to be rabid just in case.

    By the way, if you ever wake up and find a bat flying around your room or tent, assume you have been bit. There have been people who died of rabies from bat bites they never knew they had because the teeth can be very tiny.
     
    AtlPhilip likes this.
  10. tsangster

    tsangster Member

    560
    0
    16
    The first person known to have survived rabies after becoming symptomatic (Jeanna Giese) contracted the disease via bat bite. A co-worker of mine had the opportunity to meet Jeanna and discuss her treatment, recovery, etc. The number of known survivors is quite low.