Police abuse

I sense a straw man fallacy

unsung said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:

It was answered. I'd use common sense.

See I believe that it's irresponsible to shoot a dog or a person without clearly accessing the situation. I've posted numerous reports of police shooting dogs, including shooting one through a car window.

Ironically many of you that don't want me to be able to carry a defensive firearm have no problem letting the police discharge weapons around children.

You really answered your own question btw.

He did clearly assess the situation. Just as you say you would have done.

If you bothered to read the piece you contributed, you would know that the owner stated that he understood why the cop shot the dog. So... the one person who would make the strongest argument against shooting the dog and be angry towards the officer for doing so... isn't.

Kind of tells you something about yourself... don't you think? Do you really stand behind your comment where you said you don't hate cops? It sure seems like you do.

If you bothered to read it you'd understand that it's more than that and the officer refused to allow the animal to be helped.

what is it more of. explain to me what the officer in that story did wrong? do you know what the protocol that the police office missed?

unsung said:

He missed having compassion and common sense.

oh please! that is so easy to say when you are not in their shoes. did he follow protocol? if yes then he did his job.

with so many stories to show how some cops are bad, you nit pick at one story. its a shame cause like I said before, police violence is a worthy topic that you belittle with this story.

unsung said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:

It was answered. I'd use common sense.

See I believe that it's irresponsible to shoot a dog or a person without clearly accessing the situation. I've posted numerous reports of police shooting dogs, including shooting one through a car window.

Ironically many of you that don't want me to be able to carry a defensive firearm have no problem letting the police discharge weapons around children.

You really answered your own question btw.

He did clearly assess the situation. Just as you say you would have done.

If you bothered to read the piece you contributed, you would know that the owner stated that he understood why the cop shot the dog. So... the one person who would make the strongest argument against shooting the dog and be angry towards the officer for doing so... isn't.

Kind of tells you something about yourself... don't you think? Do you really stand behind your comment where you said you don't hate cops? It sure seems like you do.

If you bothered to read it you'd understand that it's more than that and the officer refused to allow the animal to be helped.

I had said so in an earlier response and Fife has since tried to help you understand that there are protocols- which have been established for good reasons- that police must follow when called to a home alarm and following a discharged weapon.

You keep insisting the officer was deliberately trying to be cruel. Others think that likely isn't the case.

unsung said:

I understand what others are saying.

He's a great cop, he was just doing his job, right?

you might be reading what others are saying but i would say you are not understanding at all. you are showing him as a bad cop but you have not shown any reason to say that.

instead you say things like he lacks compassion whatever that means. again I will restate what i have said before and that is: with all the stories out there about about cops being abusive you pick a story about a cop who shot a dog after going to a house that had a potential break in and seeing a dog running at him. this is not a story of a bad cop.

unsung said:

No, I do understand. I understand how he wouldn't let the owner try to save its life. He was just doing his job, following procedures.

I find it funny that you know downplay procedures at this moment since you always seem to like procedures and following the rule of law.

i know 2 good cops...they both quit because you cant be a good person and get along in todays police force... Bosses wanted more life ruining citations, other police ostracized them for caring, threatened them to keep the silence on their sadistic ways. Always beating on "lowlifes" and molesting decent looking women. The kind of person who becomes a cop nowadays is usually the lowest caliber in most ways. Jocks who want to relive their power days, geeks who want revenge, and twisted 2nd and 3rd gen folks who believe they are above the law cuz their daddy and grandaddy was law men. Sad.
Those who crave positions of power are the least appropriate people to whom power should be given.

rgambs said:

i know 2 good cops...they both quit because you cant be a good person and get along in todays police force... Bosses wanted more life ruining citations, other police ostracized them for caring, threatened them to keep the silence on their sadistic ways. Always beating on "lowlifes" and molesting decent looking women. The kind of person who becomes a cop nowadays is usually the lowest caliber in most ways. Jocks who want to relive their power days, geeks who want revenge, and twisted 2nd and 3rd gen folks who believe they are above the law cuz their daddy and grandaddy was law men. Sad.
Those who crave positions of power are the least appropriate people to whom power should be given.

sorry have alot of questions around this post. I will first say that cops are people and like every other person, some are good and some are really bad. I am a social worker and I know many social workers who are very mean people. I deal with police on a daily basis and have become friends with many of them. most police are good people who care about the public they serve, some are assholes who should not be a cop.

my question for you is what do you mean by saying "those who crave positions of power"?