Animal Abuse or Abuse of Power in Ludington?

[XLFD]

It was bound to happen in a police department in a city that allows a vigilante group to carry guns, wear police uniforms, and enforce laws without any legislative authority (the Ludington Reserve Police Department, solely under LPD Chief Mark Barnett). 

They say when you're carrying a hammer that all the problems begin to look like nails.  So is it any wonder that if you have the ability to wield authority to enforce the law on those who you believe have broken it, you may start trying to mitigate those problems with the threat or application of your ability to use that authority, even if the law doesn't back you up on it?

I have my own case in point with the local authorities six years ago.  I did not come to a complete stop at a stop sign on my bicycle when crossing an intersection that was clear of traffic.  I have yet to see any law in the state or local codes that says a bicyclist needs to do so, and I can maintain a long list of reasons why it is more safe, more efficient, and aids in the traffic flow better than coming to a totally unnecessary stop at an intersection where you are going slow enough to see and hear any cross traffic.   I think the much less than ten percent of bicyclists that actually do stop at all stop signs are either liars or fools, much like the police who stop bicyclists who pass through a stop sign, after safely yielding the right of way if needed. 

That being said, there was a local problem over this last weekend in the city of Ludington, which came up and was brought to my attention.  Like the bicycle stop it was a minor incident, but caused the citizens involved some grief because of the lack of legal rigor involved by the attendant policeman.  In the end, nobody was arrested or even given a citation, primarily because the out-of-town citizen complied with what the LPD officer suggested, so all I would like to do at this point is elicit discussion.  Here's the facts as they were explained to me.

A couple came into town with their vehicle and their dog to visit, parking on the side of the street in front of the person's house they were visiting.  The landlord of the house they were visiting does not allow pets at the property without express permission, and so the dog was left out in the car.  The windows were cracked for ventilation, there was dog food and water in the car, and the temperature was around 40 degrees. 

You may ask why they brought the dog with them; to my understanding, it was because they were temporarily homeless but living out of town.  They visit for an hour or so, and then the house gets a visit by a member of the Ludington Police Department; a tall, fit, dark-haired man in his twenties, acting on an alleged complaint of a dog being left in a car.  The dog owners are confronted and they make their case that the car is effectively being used as a temporary dog house, where the dog has food, water, freedom of movement, fresh air, and informs them of their situation. 

The LPD officer claims that doing so is a form of animal abuse and against the law.  He intimates that if they do not remedy the situation, a citation, seizure of the dog, or worse will be initiated.  Facing enough financial troubles already, the couple leaves without further argument, though the friends of them try to understand what law they were breaking by having the dog in the car on this day, which the officer never explains other than by using the term 'animal abuse'.

Obviously, people shouldn't be leaving their pets in cars on very warm or very cold days, or without at least some water and ventilation.  But is it "animal abuse" in Ludington Michigan to leave a dog in a car in such situations as was laid out here?  A look at the Ludington charter and code using the three terms of 'animal', 'dog', and 'abuse', lead to nothing about leaving dogs or animals in vehicles.  Which was surprising since this was the city which recently made it a minor crime to feed your cat outside or birds at the park.

Nor does a check in the voluminous amount of state laws we have bring anything out about dogs in vehicles, which was also surprising given the number of odd laws they have in their books.  Thinking I may possibly have overlooked something I checked out the Animal Legal and Historical Center website which has a convenient chart for most legalities concerning animals.  The following concerns laws about leaving dogs in cars:

Michigan has no law concerning leaving animals in a parked car, even in extreme temperatures.  Now, one can perhaps claim a more general term of 'animal abuse' if there is some injury suffered to the animal because of the exposure or the lack of water and ventilation, but if there is none of that, and they are just using the vehicle as a temporary shelter, a mobile dog house if you will, there is nothing that comes close to even a civil infraction.   

In this situation, the LPD officer allegedly claimed there was animal abuse and a violation of the law, but could not back up his assertion with any statute, ordinance or clear authority.  When a police chief can snub his nose at legislative codification and authorization for his own police reserve unit, why would it be too surprising to find that his officers would enact their own legislative authorization to mitigate a situation so they don't have to deal with it, or have to tell the complainant that no law is being broken, no animal is being harmed? 

When we can't expect law enforcement officers to tell us the truth or to tell us what to do without them using any legal authority as a back up, have we not began the devolution into a police state where officers can enforce whatever they choose to?

[Katarina Hoadley]

Oh my goodness why isn't this NOT surprising of course our law officers think they are above the LAW.

[Willy]

There must be some history here between the dog owners and neighbors or other person who they might be feuding with because who would call the police about a dog in a car unless it was 90 degrees out or zero degrees. It seems obvious to me that someone recognized the car with the dog in it and called the police to cause the pet owners some grief. So the officer, not wanting to make a big deal about it, made up the story so the pet owner would remove the dog either from the vehicle or removing the vehicle with the dog.

[XLFD]

The neighborhood itself is far from a ritzy neighborhood on the south section of town with a lot of inexpensive rental properties.  The dog, a pit bull, was allegedly not barking or acting aggressively even while the officer was there, plus the owners had it on a secured leash, just in case it freed itself (it apparently had been able to push the slightly open windows down before).

As John says, many local officers will treat the down and out in the poor section of town with a lot less respect than they show the 'Forest Hill' folks, it's the same as with many of the fire department personnel. 

[Jane]

Just because it was 40 degrees out--if the sun was shining it could very quickly get to hot in a vehicle for a dog. Park your car in the sun on a cool yet sunny day roll each window down two inches, let it sit there a couple hours and then go sit in the car for another hours. It will be to warm for a pet at that point. There are many of us animal lovers out there who will report dogs in vehicles if we feel there is a likely hood that it could become to warm. WE are advised by police that we are able to free the animal through whatever means necessary(breaking window) without fear of arrest. Usually this is a problem at Walmart/Meijer in the summer months, but it is getting to be the time of year that we will start watching for pets left in vehicles for longer than a few minutes.

[XLFD]

Looking out for animals is good, but if a police officer advises you that you can vandalize a vehicle for a varmint, you open yourself up for arrest by an officer who follows the letter of the law, and for civil remedies by the car owner. 

Like Wind chill factors that don't exist in warm temperatures above 40 degrees, the warming you mention does not take place in cars in cool temperatures of 60 degrees or less.  So if the animals have adequate ventilation, leave those windows intact for now.

[Willy]

Your not going to roast a dog in 40 degree weather. What about people driving down the road in 40 degree sunshine weather with windows up. Are the police going to pull them over and make them exit their cars?

[AQUAMAN]

Suffice it to say, that LE in Lud. does abuse and exceed their authority on a regular basis, esp. against the locals. When the dog law is applicable, and reasonably applied, I agree with it. There have been many pets lost to this, esp. in the summer months, and the southern states. Fl. has this law on the books. I dare say the LE in our area will repeatedly tell you they are risking their lives in this little town everyday, when mostly what I observe is nitpicking taken to the extreme.

[XLFD]

And that's the general point of the post, Aquaman.  Our law enforcement has the duty to enforce the laws on the books, not create new ones, or say that they will not enforce certain laws that don't strike their fancy, or when certain people break them. 

Meanwhile, it's hard to say that being a police officer doesn't have a degree of danger, but it becomes less and less dangerous the more you follow protocols, the laws, your training, and common fairness/courtesy towards the public.