The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Probably applies to one third of
Probably?
No
BLM your trigger?
I have no idea what you want to hear from me here?
That cop we just agreed was an idiot is an idiot. One third of cops are not.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Probably applies to one third of
Probably?
No
BLM your trigger?
I have no idea what you want to hear from me here?
That cop we just agreed was an idiot is an idiot. One third of cops are not.
I thought we agreed he probably shouldn't be a cop? I'm saying a third shouldn't be.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Probably applies to one third of
Probably?
No
BLM your trigger?
I have no idea what you want to hear from me here?
That cop we just agreed was an idiot is an idiot. One third of cops are not.
I thought we agreed he probably shouldn't be a cop? I'm saying a third shouldn't be.
I was confused by your vague BLM trigger comment.
We can disagree on your opinion about one third being dickheads.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Finally an Intelligent Post Thirty...
Pardon me? Are you implying that ThirtyBU hasn't made intelligent posts before?
While Thirty and I disagree in many areas his positions are pretty much always well thought out and expressed, even though we seem to have different values and reach different conclusions. He adds a lot to the discussion on AMT. Your comment baffles me (though if I misunderstood what you meant I apologize)
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Finally an Intelligent Post Thirty...
Pardon me? Are you implying that ThirtyBU hasn't made intelligent posts before?
While Thirty and I disagree in many areas his positions are pretty much always well thought out and expressed, even though we seem to have different values and reach different conclusions. He adds a lot to the discussion on AMT. Your comment baffles me (though if I misunderstood what you meant I apologize)
Cheers, Often!
I could easily express the same for yourself. You like many others challenge my way of thinking and thus... the MT is significant to me.
I'm thinking... or at least I'm hoping... ilovit is messing with me.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Finally an Intelligent Post Thirty...
Pardon me? Are you implying that ThirtyBU hasn't made intelligent posts before?
While Thirty and I disagree in many areas his positions are pretty much always well thought out and expressed, even though we seem to have different values and reach different conclusions. He adds a lot to the discussion on AMT. Your comment baffles me (though if I misunderstood what you meant I apologize)
Cheers, Often!
I could easily express the same for yourself. You like many others challenge my way of thinking and thus... the MT is significant to me.
I'm thinking... or at least I'm hoping... ilovit is messing with me.
Cheers right back.
If you're right and s/he is just yanking your chain, then.....okay.
But if the post was serious, then i_don't_love_it.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Well if you have the constitutional right to dress that way... don't you think a cop should have the same right... let alone be prepared for some nut exercising these rights when he's called to a scene (don't want to be bringing rubber bands to a knife fight)?
You can't demand constitutional rights that allow anyone to arm themselves like Arnold in Commando... yet at the same time expect cops to patrol with nothing more than a billy club.
There's probably some context there? No? Is that guy just regulating traffic?
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Going after a dog that barked at one of those chickenshits.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
The latest video out of Ft. Worth shows that calling the police is a potentially stupid mistake if you are not in danger.
Black woman calls police because adult neighbor is alleged to have assaulted her minor son. Officer arrives and directs his scrutiny towards the black people who called the police. Officer is reluctant to deal with the matter and questions her parenting. Black woman gets angry, says that the adult neighbor has no right to put his hands on the child. Officer asks, "Why not?" Black woman gets angry at such a ridiculous thing to say so the officer assaults her and another victim and takes them to jail.
That cop has no business being a cop. What an asshole.
Finally an Intelligent Post Thirty...
Pardon me? Are you implying that ThirtyBU hasn't made intelligent posts before?
While Thirty and I disagree in many areas his positions are pretty much always well thought out and expressed, even though we seem to have different values and reach different conclusions. He adds a lot to the discussion on AMT. Your comment baffles me (though if I misunderstood what you meant I apologize)
Agreed.
It also should be mentioned that acting like that in front of cops isn't smart, it shouldn't have bad consquences, but everyone knows it can. The young girl steps in because she knows it's heading in a bad direction, but she was too late and moved too suddenly.
Dumb. They should be allowed to gas the place first so there is zero danger from a savage animal especially pit bulls that some on here defend. Chickenshits?, again, dumb.
Dumb. They should be allowed to gas the place first so there is zero danger from a savage animal especially pit bulls that some on here defend. Chickenshits?, again, dumb.
Lol
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
Courts have also ruled that cops have no obligation to serve or protect.
Oh no, you said I don't have credibility, what will I ever do with my non-bootlicking time?
If dogs were such a threat then how does the post office manage?
The reality is that many cops are worms that are "just doing their jobs" of which is blindly following orders and laws created by corrupt politicians. They are the part of the system that ensures the revenue doesn't stop and will kill or kidnap if you don't play along.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
Courts have also ruled that cops have no obligation to serve or protect.
Oh no, you said I don't have credibility, what will I ever do with my non-bootlicking time?
If dogs were such a threat then how does the post office manage?
The reality is that many cops are worms that are "just doing their jobs" of which is blindly following orders and laws created by corrupt politicians. They are the part of the system that ensures the revenue doesn't stop and will kill or kidnap if you don't play along.
The post office manages by being rushed to emergency on a regular basis. My wife delivers mail and was attacked and mauled by some mutt. Three others this year have as well.
Some houses need to come to the post office to get their mail because their dogs are vicious. Cops don't have that option.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
Let me understand this for a second, there are no official statistics on humans getting shot by police but if canines were getting shot by police we would hear about it?
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
If you followed any cop-watch organizations on social media you would see a couple dozen a year. Still a very small percentage, but significant to those effected.
The really bullshit part is that the police can bring a dog into your home specifically to bite private citizens, but your dog that lives there is legally liable to be shot unless it is motionless and silent.
Police dogs are bullshit, they shouldn't exist at all.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
Let me understand this for a second, there are no official statistics on humans getting shot by police but if canines were getting shot by police we would hear about it?
Follow along. The internet allows us to do this.
We don't hear of every dog shot... I'm sure of that, but we definitely don't hear of every dog that was successfully managed in tense situations.
Currently, someone is suggesting cops not defend themselves against dogs until (essentially) they have been bitten. Do you agree with such an assertion? If not, we're on the same page.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
If you followed any cop-watch organizations on social media you would see a couple dozen a year. Still a very small percentage, but significant to those effected.
The really bullshit part is that the police can bring a dog into your home specifically to bite private citizens, but your dog that lives there is legally liable to be shot unless it is motionless and silent.
Police dogs are bullshit, they shouldn't exist at all.
I think they have a purpose.
And yah, outside of the 'wrong house' scenario... if the police have been called to deal with you at your house and you haven't restrained your dog... you're more at fault than the cops.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
Let me understand this for a second, there are no official statistics on humans getting shot by police but if canines were getting shot by police we would hear about it?
Follow along. The internet allows us to do this.
We don't hear of every dog shot... I'm sure of that, but we definitely don't hear of every dog that was successfully managed in tense situations.
Currently, someone is suggesting cops not defend themselves against dogs until (essentially) they have been bitten. Do you agree with such an assertion? If not, we're on the same page.
I was on the same page until I read rgambs above, which until then I never thought about the duplicity. Cops should defend themselves against humans and canines, defending oneself doesnt mean riddling with bullets.
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
Thankfully a court has ruled that a homeowner can shoot people who enter the wrong house in no knock raids.
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
If you followed any cop-watch organizations on social media you would see a couple dozen a year. Still a very small percentage, but significant to those effected.
The really bullshit part is that the police can bring a dog into your home specifically to bite private citizens, but your dog that lives there is legally liable to be shot unless it is motionless and silent.
Police dogs are bullshit, they shouldn't exist at all.
I think they have a purpose.
And yah, outside of the 'wrong house' scenario... if the police have been called to deal with you at your house and you haven't restrained your dog... you're more at fault than the cops.
The point though is that you don't know the cops are coming so you don't have the opportunity to restrain.
What purpose does a police dog serve?
Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It's a little more complicated than that though, for one, these commando SWAT cops that prefer action to thought are known for attacking the wrong house or attacking based on bad intel. SWAT busts into the house of a dude with an 8th of weed and now his best friend is dead. Not cool. It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense. The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences. I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
I hear what you are say, but let me temper it by stating that in most cases... the dogs aren't getting shot- cops are restraining themselves with good judgement. Otherwise, we would be hearing of many more situations.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
If you followed any cop-watch organizations on social media you would see a couple dozen a year. Still a very small percentage, but significant to those effected.
The really bullshit part is that the police can bring a dog into your home specifically to bite private citizens, but your dog that lives there is legally liable to be shot unless it is motionless and silent.
Police dogs are bullshit, they shouldn't exist at all.
And if you shoot a police dog it is considered the same as shooting a human cop.
Comments
No
That cop we just agreed was an idiot is an idiot. One third of cops are not.
We can disagree on your opinion about one third being dickheads.
While Thirty and I disagree in many areas his positions are pretty much always well thought out and expressed, even though we seem to have different values and reach different conclusions. He adds a lot to the discussion on AMT. Your comment baffles me (though if I misunderstood what you meant I apologize)
I could easily express the same for yourself. You like many others challenge my way of thinking and thus... the MT is significant to me.
I'm thinking... or at least I'm hoping... ilovit is messing with me.
If you're right and s/he is just yanking your chain, then.....okay.
But if the post was serious, then i_don't_love_it.
You can't demand constitutional rights that allow anyone to arm themselves like Arnold in Commando... yet at the same time expect cops to patrol with nothing more than a billy club.
There's probably some context there? No? Is that guy just regulating traffic?
http://wishtv.com/2016/12/23/federal-court-rules-police-can-shoot-a-dog-if-it-moves-barks-when-officer-enters-home/
You think cops should be bit before defending themselves? Comments like these are where you lose credibility. We know you hate cops and we know you think they are operatives of the state with the intent of enslaving everyone... but in reality, they are people like us doing a dangerous job servicing everyone.
A dog's life is more important than a cop's health. Good one.
It also should be mentioned that acting like that in front of cops isn't smart, it shouldn't have bad consquences, but everyone knows it can. The young girl steps in because she knows it's heading in a bad direction, but she was too late and moved too suddenly.
They should be allowed to gas the place first so there is zero danger from a savage animal especially pit bulls that some on here defend.
Chickenshits?, again, dumb.
Oh no, you said I don't have credibility, what will I ever do with my non-bootlicking time?
If dogs were such a threat then how does the post office manage?
The reality is that many cops are worms that are "just doing their jobs" of which is blindly following orders and laws created by corrupt politicians. They are the part of the system that ensures the revenue doesn't stop and will kill or kidnap if you don't play along.
It happens at least several times every year and the victims have to spend years in litigation to have a slim hope of recompense.
The Constitutionality of attacking a person's home by forced entry, with military weapons at the ready and military tactical grenades in use is pretty iffy, and I think we can all agree that it is pretty bullshitty to use those tactics on non-violent drug offenders.
I don't want cops to have to be bitten before they can act, but every single dog in the world will move and bark when a person comes into their home uninvited. It sounds like this ruling gives permission for police to shoot dogs with total immunity to consequences.
I haven't read the court ruling, but it sounds like it might even allow for shooting dogs restrained in cages!
Some houses need to come to the post office to get their mail because their dogs are vicious. Cops don't have that option.
As to the rest of your post... come on, man.
The law allows for cops to ascertain risk and manage accordingly.
Still a very small percentage, but significant to those effected.
The really bullshit part is that the police can bring a dog into your home specifically to bite private citizens, but your dog that lives there is legally liable to be shot unless it is motionless and silent.
Police dogs are bullshit, they shouldn't exist at all.
We don't hear of every dog shot... I'm sure of that, but we definitely don't hear of every dog that was successfully managed in tense situations.
Currently, someone is suggesting cops not defend themselves against dogs until (essentially) they have been bitten. Do you agree with such an assertion? If not, we're on the same page.
And yah, outside of the 'wrong house' scenario... if the police have been called to deal with you at your house and you haven't restrained your dog... you're more at fault than the cops.
Cops should defend themselves against humans and canines, defending oneself doesnt mean riddling with bullets.
What purpose does a police dog serve?