Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on June 29, 2014, 11:36:24 PM
-
I thought this was both a bad shoot and an interesting aftermath because I don't recall past stories where there was this kind of an in person protest regarding the shooting. Possibly more to the story, but on the face of it, the officer was part of a team searching for a lost boy. If he's going into someone's backyard, maybe he should knock on the front door first. There was no indication of an emergency, like an abduction.
My dog loves people, but if someone enters her (and her pack's) enclosed area, she's going to take an aggressive stance to an unknown aggressive posture. She very likely wouldn't bite, but she'd sure bark. I would be pretty pissed if someone shot her for that. The dog's owner had it exactly right. 'Back out and shut the gate".
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/29/salt-lake-police-shooting-sparks-large-protest-for-victim-dog-named-geist/
ETA: It also seems like this would have been a scenario where pepper spray would have done the job if the cop really feared for his safety.
-
If someone comes in my backyard (or in my house) uninvited and shoots my dog, I'll assume the dog was not their real target. They better hope I don't have a rifle handy.
-
I hope this *expletive deleted*it stops. Soon. If not, me thinks dumb ass Leo's might just bite off more than they can chew.
-
If some one shoots (or shoots at) my dog in my fenced backyard I'll return fire.
I already I know what I need to about the target. PID has been achieved by the incoming fire. I'm comfortable posting this publicly.
My dogs are part of my Defense In Depth. If you assault that, be prepared for the escalation.
-
This one's been all over the local news here ever since it happened. Nothing more to the background of the story, there was a lost kid, the cops were searching the area. The cops claim he did knock on the door (owner was at work), and then entered the fenced backyard after receiving no answer. Agreed that pepper spray should have been the extent of his response. Or hey, fenced and gated yard, maybe rattle the gate and see if any dogs pop out before you go traipsing in.
-
Saw it on Facebook. Looks like social media is really sinking it's teeth into the cop's posterier anatomy on this one.
Brad
-
HEY NOW! We all know that the most important thing is that the cop got to go home at the end of his shift.
-
*expletive deleted*ck the cop. I go to jail if I assault a police dog. This shitbag LEO should be charged and tried.
-
Making the assumption that the majority of these police aren't bloodthirsty haters just itching to kill something... (Guy who cut the dog's throat notwithstanding...)
I think it comes down to the training. I'm guessing that we're now reaping the new generation of training of "YOU'VE ONLY GOT MICROSECONDS TO REACT BEFORE YOU'RE KILLED OR MAIMED ZOMG! ONEELEVENTY111!!!1!!111!!!" etc.
And since a dog < human, there's less benefit of the doubt to resist the training.
Dashcam video might be a secondary factor. Cops subconsciously don't want to be "that guy" with the quasi comical video of them getting up on the hood or the roof, and the dog is more likely to be ventilated for reasons of ego...
-
I think it comes down to the training. I'm guessing that we're now reaping the new generation of training of "YOU'VE ONLY GOT MICROSECONDS TO REACT BEFORE YOU'RE KILLED OR MAIMED ZOMG! ONEELEVENTY111!!!1!!111!!!" etc.
It could be other factors too, but the above does make sense. When I was a kid living in a tract home, my dog then was half lab, half German Shepard, so did have a protective instinct. Homes from that era were built with all the utility meters in the backyard. Meter readers came by once a month, and my dog barked at them everytime. When we were home we would just tell her to knock it off, but I'm sure when we weren't, she kept aggressively barking.
Not one meter reader was ever attacked. Somehow they seemed to know how to handle dogs in backyards. How do they have better training about it than cops? The other thing about AJ's post - most cops in the field that I have seen have one gun and 2-3 non-lethal weapons on them (taser, spray, baton). The training theory makes sense if the gun is coming out every single time versus one of the non-lethal weapons.
Another thing that bothers me is the fact that every time one of these incidents happen, the police management's response is always along the lines of "Well it was just a dog, and humans come first". Fine. Then how is it that I would end up in the pokey if I were to kick or shoot a K9? Some dogs are more equal than others, I guess.
-
I think it comes down to the training. I'm guessing that we're now reaping the new generation of training of "YOU'VE ONLY GOT MICROSECONDS TO REACT BEFORE YOU'RE KILLED OR MAIMED ZOMG! ONEELEVENTY111!!!1!!111!!!" etc.
I think you're right.
Many jurisdictions require their officers to regularly watch videos of cops getting killed and beat on as part of ongoing training.
-
Cops will continue to do everything they can get away with so long as there are no real consequences.
Many jurisdictions require their officers to regularly watch videos of cops getting killed and beat on as part of ongoing training.
I think it should be incumbent upon citizens to regularly watch videos of cops shooting dogs or beating people during traffic stops.
-
Controversial, but getting even further down to root causes, the whole "You've got the same rights as everyone else to go home at the end of the day."-mentality is to blame.
People are starting to make the argument that, "No, you don't. As an actor/representative for the State/.gov (despite Supreme Court rulings on "individuals") if you've got a duty to protect society, then at some point your mission has to come before your life."
I think it also comes as a corollary to the increasing militarization of the police. While they do everything possible in the military to minimize risks and maximize them for the enemy, the mission is deemed more important than the safety of troops. That's the nature of war. If the cops want to play soldier with surplus DHS MRAP's and SWAT gear, then the oaths they take need to be re-examined.
Out of 100 dog "attacks", the one cop that gets bit, or loses some fingers, gets a ripped up face or whatever, if the 99 dogs that didn't really bite keep on living, the benefit to society needs to be weighed.
-
Controversial, but getting even further down to root causes, the whole "You've got the same rights as everyone else to go home at the end of the day."-mentality is to blame.
People are starting to make the argument that, "No, you don't. As an actor/representative for the State/.gov (despite Supreme Court rulings on "individuals") if you've got a duty to protect society, then at some point your mission has to come before your life."
I think it also comes as a corollary to the increasing militarization of the police. While they do everything possible in the military to minimize risks and maximize them for the enemy, the mission is deemed more important than the safety of troops. That's the nature of war. If the cops want to play soldier with surplus DHS MRAP's and SWAT gear, then the oaths they take need to be re-examined.
.
In a lot of instances, the police make it very clear as to who the 'enemy' is. As to the war comparison- its my understanding that Cops have a much looser system of ROE as compared to our troops who were overseas.
They don't have to play on a level playing ground, the legal, their union,and the largesse of the taxpayer are all stacked in their favor.
-
Controversial, but getting even further down to root causes, the whole "You've got the same rights as everyone else to go home at the end of the day."-mentality is to blame.
People are starting to make the argument that, "No, you don't. As an actor/representative for the State/.gov (despite Supreme Court rulings on "individuals") if you've got a duty to protect society, then at some point your mission has to come before your life."
I think it also comes as a corollary to the increasing militarization of the police. While they do everything possible in the military to minimize risks and maximize them for the enemy, the mission is deemed more important than the safety of troops. That's the nature of war. If the cops want to play soldier with surplus DHS MRAP's and SWAT gear, then the oaths they take need to be re-examined.
Out of 100 dog "attacks", the one cop that gets bit, or loses some fingers, gets a ripped up face or whatever, if the 99 dogs that didn't really bite keep on living, the benefit to society needs to be weighed.
I don't think cops want to play "soldier" so much as "occupying army."
-
Controversial, but getting even further down to root causes, the whole "You've got the same rights as everyone else to go home at the end of the day."-mentality is to blame.
More to the point, they need to be reminded often that they have the same right as everyone else to go home well before the end of the day and seek other employment if it's just too scary for them.
-
I think that this could be a very interesting law suit. In many instances, an officer would be protected by sovereign immunity, provided that his actions were within the scope of his duties as a government employee. However, if he was acting ultra vires...beyond his powers...then he loses his immunity. When he went into private property without legal authority to do so (I can see no exigent circumstances, obviously no warrant), then he can be sued civilly for both the trespass and the destruction of the property (death of the dog).
Another thought...where is PETA in all of this???
-
I think that this could be a very interesting law suit. In many instances, an officer would be protected by sovereign immunity, provided that his actions were within the scope of his duties as a government employee. However, if he was acting ultra vires...beyond his powers...then he loses his immunity. When he went into private property without legal authority to do so (I can see no exigent circumstances, obviously no warrant), then he can be sued civilly for both the trespass and the destruction of the property (death of the dog).
Another thought...where is PETA in all of this???
Sovereign Immunity needs to be modified, badly. Not so far that criminals and prisoners can sue the daylights out of every cop, prison, and judge they've ever come across and bog down the legal system, but enough that police and DA's and judges are on the line for any egregious acts they take.
As to where PETA is? They downplay it, because it would gut their public and celebrity support, but as a core mission tenant, they don't believe people should have pets or companion animals, and that it harms the animals inherent dignity. That's why the lion's share of animals that wind up in PETA's care get euthanized and they make very little effort to place them.
So they won't stand up for police/pet shootings, because ideologically, they think the people shouldn't have had the pet in the first place.
I thought more people, at least the ones here, knew this? ???
http://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/pets/
We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals’ best interests if the institution of “pet keeping”—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as “pets”—never existed. The international pastime of domesticating animals has created an overpopulation crisis; as a result, millions of unwanted animals are destroyed every year as “surplus.”
This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to.
Read more: http://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/pets/#ixzz368Ytbd1X
IMO, hard-corps PETA members are fair game if the S ever HTF.
-
This time it was just a dog. Let 'em get away with it, and next time they will up the ante (shoot a toddler playing in the back yard)
Cop should be prosecuted for criminal trespass, destruction of property, and illegal discharge of a firearm in the city limits. He'll probably be acquitted, but let him sweat it out and pay his own damn lawyer fees.
And the chief should be fired.
-
Cops will continue to do everything they can get away with so long as there are no real consequences.
Bingo. Charge, try, and throw the found guilty ones in jail. Let "tiny" have their ass for 10-20.
Sovereign Immunity needs to be severely restricted, if not done away with entirely
-
Local articles point out that the cop was acting in accordance with National Missing Child protocols.
I don't condone the fact that he shot the dog, or the fact that the kid was found AT HOME 30 minutes later, OR the fact that the cop has been getting death threats. There's no need for that.
-
Local articles point out that the cop was acting in accordance with National Missing Child protocols.
I don't condone the fact that he shot the dog, or the fact that the kid was found AT HOME 30 minutes later, OR the fact that the cop has been getting death threats. There's no need for that.
Yeah, the empty threats just make them think they can get away with it. Do or do not as Yoda would say.
-
Local articles point out that the cop was acting in accordance with National Missing Child protocols.
I don't condone the fact that he shot the dog, or the fact that the kid was found AT HOME 30 minutes later, OR the fact that the cop has been getting death threats. There's no need for that.
Allegedly getting death threats. They haven't released the name of the officer, so I'm pretty suspicious of that claim.
-
They haven't released the name of the officer, so I'm pretty suspicious of that claim.
They did release his name:
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=30490406&nid=148&title=slcpd-identifies-officer-involved-in-dog-shooting-calls-for-civility
-
Also, is there really a set of missing child protocols that supersede the 4th amendment any time someone calls in a report? Within what radius of the alleged missing child does the Constitution no longer apply?
-
Yeah, the empty threats just make them think they can get away with it. Do or do not as Yoda would say.
Yes, because the proper response to an officer needlessly killing a dog is summary execution of said officer. Good to see APS is keepin' it classy as usual. I'm all for the officer getting fired and facing charges, but the frothing-at-the-mouth "kill 'em! kill 'em!" lynch mob in here is getting tiresome.
-
Yes, because the proper response to an officer needlessly killing a dog is summary execution of said officer. Good to see APS is keepin' it classy as usual. I'm all for the officer getting fired and facing charges, but the frothing-at-the-mouth "kill 'em! kill 'em!" lynch mob in here is getting tiresome.
I haven't seen that. Some of us have said we would return fire; that's not the same thing.
-
Also, is there really a set of missing child protocols that supersede the 4th amendment any time someone calls in a report? Within what radius of the alleged missing child does the Constitution no longer apply?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Also. Don't want death threats, don't shoot other peoples property. That damn simple
-
Yes, because the proper response to an officer needlessly killing a dog is summary execution of said officer. Good to see APS is keepin' it classy as usual. I'm all for the officer getting fired and facing charges, but the frothing-at-the-mouth "kill 'em! kill 'em!" lynch mob in here is getting tiresome.
One would have thought the Yoda reference would have conveyed the humorous intent.
Me personally, I find the fact that a certain class of people gets to violate the Constitution on a daily basis and is completely protected from negative consequences for doing so to be rather "tiresome." I swore an oath against all enemies foreign and domestic and the system is more and more establishing who those enemies are. I'd like to see the system reformed, and people being held accountable and obeying the law.
-
Yes, because the proper response to an officer needlessly killing a dog is summary execution of said officer. Good to see APS is keepin' it classy as usual. I'm all for the officer getting fired and facing charges, but the frothing-at-the-mouth "kill 'em! kill 'em!" lynch mob in here is getting tiresome.
I'd be curious of the police response to someone walking up to a police dog and shot it dead in cold blood...
As usual, some animals are more equal than others, and I can guarantee you that a police dog's life is more valuable than the life of one of the proles.
-
As to where PETA is? They downplay it, because it would gut their public and celebrity support, but as a core mission tenant, they don't believe people should have pets or companion animals, and that it harms the animals inherent dignity. That's why the lion's share of animals that wind up in PETA's care get euthanized and they make very little effort to place them.
So they won't stand up for police/pet shootings, because ideologically, they think the people shouldn't have had the pet in the first place.
I thought more people, at least the ones here, knew this? ???
Sorry. Never followed PETA, and didn't realize that I was on their list for another reason by having a dog in my house, where her natural instincts are suffering by being given a spot on my couch, food to eat, etc. [barf]
-
One would have thought the Yoda reference would have conveyed the humorous intent.
Fair enough.
Me personally, I find the fact that a certain class of people gets to violate the Constitution on a daily basis and is completely protected from negative consequences for doing so to be rather "tiresome." I swore an oath against all enemies foreign and domestic and the system is more and more establishing who those enemies are. I'd like to see the system reformed, and people being held accountable and obeying the law.
No disagreement from me there.
As to the returning fire thing, I guess that was merging in my mind with the death threats thing, though I still don't agree with it.
What I find tiresome I guess, and spilled out a bit here (despite it not really applying as this cop done wrong, no doubt) is the two camps on APS of "cops can do no wrong" (really only one camper there), and "cops can do no right". Yes, the prevalent cop culture is a major issue, the "police dog = police officer, your dog = simple property" is hypocritical, there are a lot of bad agencies and bad cops out there. There are also good officers in good agencies out there. They're probably more and more the minority, but they're out there. That said, SLC PD is not and has not been on my mental list of "good agencies". SLC local government leans pretty hard left, and SLC PD's handling of the proles is right in line with that.
-
I think of cops like all other arms of the .gov. Some small and insignificant fraction are truly good, some small fraction are truly evil, and most are just normal folks who happen to be proving Lord Acton right about the corrupting influence of power.
The thing is, I don't really care about the individual cops and agencies. As a whole, as a system, they are placed into a different caste. I oppose their group position, even if the individual cop or agency refuses to take advantage of it.
-
What I find tiresome I guess, and spilled out a bit here (despite it not really applying as this cop done wrong, no doubt) is the two camps on APS of "cops can do no wrong" (really only one camper there)
I used to be in the CSD camp, probably even a little to the right of him as little as 5 years ago. It might have been the constant bad news of bad shoots or other abuses committed by cops or their attitudes afteer the fact that eventually pushed me over to the opposite camp.
-
Another thought...where is PETA in all of this???
I'm sure the question was rhetorical, but PETA is firmly on the quisling statist team, just as you'd never see HCI or Million Mom March(are they even still around?) celebrating in the blood of a bad police shooting.
-
Yes, because the proper response to an officer needlessly killing a dog is summary execution of said officer.
I don't favor summary execution. I'm ambivalent, however, on the idea of dropping him into a pit of rabid rottweilers with a derringer and letting him choose his own punishment.
What I find tiresome I guess, and spilled out a bit here (despite it not really applying as this cop done wrong, no doubt) is the two camps on APS of "cops can do no wrong" (really only one camper there), and "cops can do no right".
I doubt anyone here would claim cops can't do anything good. Even Hitler was known to be kind to women and animals, after all. However, in either case, no amount of good compensates for any amount of unrepentant evil.
-
The thread started going towards "lock" territory, but the most previous posts are correcting that back into polite debate. Let's please continue with that.
I agree that a lot of the problem is institutional - from the militarization (in look even if not always in implementation) to the "police vs civilians" mindset even though police ARE civilians, to "officer safety at all costs" and to the point where LE have more freedom to secure their safety than the rest of us do. "Kill the cops" certainly doesn't help the argument from the side that wants to see changes. Not that it's prevalent on APS, but it is certainly out there elsewhere.
I just wish that LE management and unions would stop having a "circle the wagons" approach every time a bad cop or dumb cop does something bad or dumb. Punishment to an extent equal to what any other civilian would get for the same thing would go a long way towards reducing "us vs them".
-
There are no "good cops". No such animal exists. If you circle the blue wagons, take up for a bad Cop, only because he is a cop, your just as bad or worse.
When I see police officers actively seeking out, arresting and working with DA's to put the bad cops away (jail, not resignation or agency punishment), THEN and only then will I reevaluate my opinion. I'm not holding my breath
-
There are no "good cops". No such animal exists. If you circle the blue wagons, take up for a bad Cop, only because he is a cop, your just as bad or worse.
When I see police officers actively seeking out, arresting and working with DA's to put the bad cops away (jail, not resignation or agency punishment), THEN and only then will I reevaluate my opinion. I'm not holding my breath
There are good cops, that do what you want them to do. I've worked with them to do exactly what you ask them to do. They just don't get any press.
-
There are good cops, that do what you want them to do. I've worked with them to do exactly what you ask them to do. They just don't get any press.
In the context of this post?Sure.
A-holes just laughed at me when I was stuck in a snow bank last winter.Smug bastages sat in their warm car and watched.Where were the good,helpful cops then,huh? :laugh:
-
Me personally, I find the fact that a certain class of people gets to violate the Constitution on a daily basis and is completely protected from negative consequences for doing so to be rather "tiresome." I swore an oath against all enemies foreign and domestic and the system is more and more establishing who those enemies are. I'd like to see the system reformed, and people being held accountable and obeying the law.
This.
Reform the abuses before it gets uglier.
-
We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals’ best interests if the institution of “pet keeping”—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as “pets”—never existed. The international pastime of domesticating animals has created an overpopulation crisis; as a result, millions of unwanted animals are destroyed every year as “surplus.”
This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to.
Read more: http://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/pets/#ixzz368Ytbd1X
Apparently, PETA is not a fan of history.
Cats were never domesticated. They moved in on their own accord and acted like they owned the place. No joke, Egypt and grain storage areas. They came for the mice, saw that houses were comfy, and moved themselves in. Ergo, homes are their self-chosen habitat.
-
Apparently, PETA is not a fan of history.
Cats were never domesticated. They moved in on their own accord and acted like they owned the place. No joke, Egypt and grain storage areas. They came for the mice, saw that houses were comfy, and moved themselves in. Ergo, homes are their self-chosen habitat.
Speaking as someone who has volunteered many.many hours at a shelter,they're not totally wrong.Their IS a problem with overpopulation of pet animals.
Doesn't mean that they-as-an-institution aren't bug nuts though.
-
I tried finding the UT/federal laws/protocols, but my Google Fu keeps getting interrupted by the munchkins.
My big problem with this story, other than the poor dog, is:
WHY DID NOBODY SEARCH THE HOUSE FIRST? :facepalm:
When I'm frantic, I can't find stuff easily. Send a calm person/cop to search the house while others start searching public areas nearby. In this case, they would've found the kid asleep in the house.
If that step isn't on the list, it should be added.
That and yes, you don't ever own a cat. They adopt you - or at least your house and hospitality. =D
-
I used to be in the CSD camp, probably even a little to the right of him as little as 5 years ago.
And I used to be in the Balog/BMoZ/KD5NRH/most of APS camp. Spending some time with actual cops on duty has helped push me a little bit toward the middle. Plenty of room - no one seems to want to camp here. Hell, my camp is really set up just on the other side of the treeline from Balog and I'm still looked at like a holster-sniffing cop groupie half the time.
-
And I used to be in the Balog/BMoZ/KD5NRH/most of APS camp. Spending some time with actual cops on duty has helped push me a little bit toward the middle. Plenty of room - no one seems to want to camp here. Hell, my camp is really set up just on the other side of the treeline from Balog and I'm still looked at like a holster-sniffing cop groupie half the time.
I think my actual position (perhaps it doesn't come through well) is a bit different than you seem to think.
I don't care about the individual cop. I care about the place cops have in our system, regardless of if they choose to take advantage of it or not.
-
When I'm frantic, I can't find stuff easily. Send a calm person/cop to search the house while others start searching public areas nearby. In this case, they would've found the kid asleep in the house.
This; search the residence properly, and publicly accessible areas within a reasonable radius, looking into private yards where reasonable. Then, and only then, is it reasonable to start entering private property to search. I would make an exception if the child is known to frequent a neighborhood yard, or if a significant attraction/hazard like a pool with inadequate access control is known to be present, but not just carte blanche to start wandering through fenced yards before a basic walkaround has been done.
-
I tried finding the UT/federal laws/protocols, but my Google Fu keeps getting interrupted by the munchkins.
I had no luck either. Funny part is that with 20 years in the system, including a big chunk of time in the juvi system, and I've never heard of any federal missing child protocols.
-
I think my actual position (perhaps it doesn't come through well) is a bit different than you seem to think.
I don't care about the individual cop. I care about the place cops have in our system, regardless of if they choose to take advantage of it or not.
If that is indeed your position then I don't disagree much at all. What often comes across is less nuanced and more vitriolic.
-
If that is indeed your position then I don't disagree much at all. What often comes across is less nuanced and more vitriolic.
People (speaking generally, not of the APS membership) have an innate trust for authority. It takes time and effort to wear that down. Police (again, as a group in society not necessarily as individual officers or departments) are the enemy, and anything I can do in my own small and humble way to erode trust and confidence in them is all to the good. Cops aren't your friends, they're the enemy. Just like politicians. The sooner folks realize that (and in a concrete not abstract way), the better off we will be. I'm tired of congress having <%10 approval rating but what, like a %70 or so re-election rate?
Besides, I'm usually commenting on particular stories, about cops getting away with rape or assault or murder. Speaking on those particular cops requires no nuance, they're criminals and should be punished as such.
-
It could be other factors too, but the above does make sense. When I was a kid living in a tract home, my dog then was half lab, half German Shepard, so did have a protective instinct. Homes from that era were built with all the utility meters in the backyard. Meter readers came by once a month, and my dog barked at them everytime. When we were home we would just tell her to knock it off, but I'm sure when we weren't, she kept aggressively barking.
Not one meter reader was ever attacked. Somehow they seemed to know how to handle dogs in backyards. How do they have better training about it than cops? The other thing about AJ's post - most cops in the field that I have seen have one gun and 2-3 non-lethal weapons on them (taser, spray, baton). The training theory makes sense if the gun is coming out every single time versus one of the non-lethal weapons.
Some of you might remember that I spent nine months cataloging transformers here in CT from 2011-2012. The job required me to access private property all the time. I never went through a latched gate to access equipment without permission of the homeowner first. In all other cases, it was impractical to do so (I did 80-100 units per day), but common sense is that a latched gate = dog. It was stated on the first day of training.
An alibi of "bad dog" was perfectly valid, in fact, it was one of the default choices in the alibi drop-down menu. Knowing canine body language was also important, and on one very notable occasion I didn't even get out of my car in the face of two aggressive German shepherds. The one time I did get bit, it was a little Jack Russel terrier and the owner apologized. I didn't report it because the bite didn't break the skin, and because duh, the dog was doing what we've been training them to do for 15,000 years.
-
I can understand shooting a dog if one reasonably believes one is in fear of serious injury. Basically, find out the standards where it is ok to shoot a police dog, and then apply it to everyone.
-
I can understand shooting a dog if one reasonably believes one is in fear of serious injury. Basically, find out the standards where it is ok to shoot a police dog, and then apply it to everyone.
Depends on if one is somewhere they are legally allowed to be or not.
-
People (speaking generally, not of the APS membership) have an innate trust for authority. It takes time and effort to wear that down. Police (again, as a group in society not necessarily as individual officers or departments) are the enemy, and anything I can do in my own small and humble way to erode trust and confidence in them is all to the good.
Perhaps in the minds of your intended audience your crusade is making headway. For me specifically, it comes across as mindless, kneejerk reactionism which dilutes the laudable goal of publicizing, addressing and reducing real abuses of police authority. Your heavy-handedness in trying to show the violence inherent to the system make it seem that you are blinded by your own biases. Just as an anti-gun spokesperson considering gun safety, or a Klansman addressing Black violence lack credibility despite the fact that real issues exist, your intense prejudice significantly reduces the impact of your statements.
You've become essentially a mirror-image to CSD. If a cop story comes up, we know where you both will come down no matter what the facts of the story. Each of you appear to come at the situation not merely with a presumption of guilt or innocence, but an absolute assurance of it based solely on the fact that one party is a cop, and work backward from there to try to prove it.
Cops aren't your friends, they're the enemy.
If you said something like "The Police State Apparatus is not your friend, it is the enemy," I would agree. Of course, that goes beyond merely police and also includes prosecutors, legislators, lobbyists, judges, magistrates (not you Chris, you know we still love you), and bureaucrats where they further the police state or work to conceal malfeasance.
Alternatively, you would have been entirely correct saying simply "Cops are not your friends," and leaving it at that. One should not behave as though police have one's best interests at heart and should at all times be careful and guarded when interacting with them for a variety of valid reasons we don't need to elaborate on now. However, taking it to the next step and label all cops as enemies (whatever that means), you lose me.
Lawdog isn't an enemy. Matt G isn't an enemy. My close friend with whom I ride along with periodically isn't an enemy, nor is his brother. Hell, for that matter some random cop I don't know who truly serves and protects isn't an enemy. The only cops who are my enemy (each to varying degrees) are the ones who are either criminals, protective of criminals or supportive of an increased police state. That number is much smaller than I used to think it was.
I know, I know, "But I'm not talking about individuals!!!" Except when you say "Cops are the enemy," you kind of are. When someone labels Christians as enemies because they didn't like Westboro Baptist nutters, they are on equally bad footing. Moreover, you (and others here such as BMoZ in this very thread) have more than once averred that all or most cops are bad cops.
Besides, I'm usually commenting on particular stories, about cops getting away with rape or assault or murder. Speaking on those particular cops requires no nuance, they're criminals and should be punished as such.
When your comments are limited to guilty cops and those who protect them, sure. However, it isn't exactly rare that criticism of a lone scumbag cop becomes general criticism of everyone in the profession. Finally, you tend to treat any accusation of impropriety as the same thing as guilt when the accused is a cop.
-
I lack nuisance and tact, says the guy comparing me to a Klansman. :rofl:
-
Lawdog isn't an enemy. Matt G isn't an enemy.
Just a thought...but isn't that exactly what they would want us to think if they were trying to infiltrate our ranks? [tinfoil]
-
Just a thought...but isn't that exactly what they would want us to think if they were trying to infiltrate our ranks? [tinfoil]
Wow, I bet you are right. And ... Wait a second. That is exactly the kind of thing a deep cover infiltrator would say. [tinfoil]
-
Of course, that goes beyond merely police and also includes prosecutors, legislators, lobbyists, judges, magistrates (not you Chris, you know we still love you), and bureaucrats where they further the police state or work to conceal malfeasance.
Totally agree.
And that's the nicest thing anyone has said to me all week. =)
-
I lack nuisance and tact, says the guy comparing me to a Klansman. :rofl:
You have plenty of nuisance, actually ( =) ), and you are plenty smart enough to see difference between comparing ignorant biases and comparing you to a Klansman directly.
Great rejoinder, otherwise.
-
You have plenty of nuisance, actually ( =) ), and you are plenty smart enough to see difference between comparing ignorant biases and comparing you to a Klansman directly.
Great rejoinder, otherwise.
Damn you auto correct.
And if "Police organizations are the enemy, regardless of the intentions of individual officers or departments" is "kind of like" pulling a Charby and saying that all Christians who hold to orthodox doctrine are no different than WBC; then "You're as ignorantly biased as a Klansmen" is close enough to a direct comparison for our purposes here.
Sauce, goose, gander etc.
-
I'd just like to see the dog win one for a change in a "good dog vs. bad cop" encounter. :(
-
I'd just like to see the dog win one for a change in a "good dog vs. bad cop" encounter. :(
You will have to level out the disparity in weaponry first.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fc25WQxF.gif&hash=cc729bcf9ec5f20318d2974ff5ec09ed6db3859d)
-
*sigh*
I miss Bloom County.
-
And if "Police organizations are the enemy, regardless of the intentions of individual officers or departments" is "kind of like" pulling a Charby and saying that all Christians who hold to orthodox doctrine are no different than WBC; then "You're as ignorantly biased as a Klansmen" is close enough to a direct comparison for our purposes here.
Sauce, goose, gander etc.
Not really. I think I already addressed some of the serious inconsistencies within your recent and rather self-refuting claim that when you say "Cops are the enemy," you actually mean some impersonal entity is the enemy, not cops themselves.
Put another way, I think you do dislike the current law enforcement system, but also dislike individual members simply for being part of that system. This comes across very plainly whenever you post about cops and does indeed reflect the same ignorant bias as other examples cited.
-
People (speaking generally, not of the APS membership) have an innate trust for authority. It takes time and effort to wear that down. Police (again, as a group in society not necessarily as individual officers or departments) are the enemy, and anything I can do in my own small and humble way to erode trust and confidence in them is all to the good. Cops aren't your friends, they're the enemy. Just like politicians. The sooner folks realize that (and in a concrete not abstract way), the better off we will be. I'm tired of congress having <%10 approval rating but what, like a %70 or so re-election rate?
Besides, I'm usually commenting on particular stories, about cops getting away with rape or assault or murder. Speaking on those particular cops requires no nuance, they're criminals and should be punished as such.
Damn straight
-
*sigh*
I miss Bloom County.
And Calvin and Hobbes...
-
You know what cordex, I just don't care anymore. Liberals falsely accuse me of being a racist for wanting to secure the border and disliking Obama, libertarians wrongly call me a statist for not opposing public nudity laws, gay "rights" activists baselessly accuse me of being a homophobe for not wanting to redefine marriage: what the hell, let's add accusations of being as ignorant and hateful as a Klansman from the conservative wing because I oppose the police state and you read into my tone. Whatever helps you feel superior and self righteous man. I stopped caring what some random on the Internet thinks of me when they resort to silly straw men and ad hom comparisons.
-
let's add accusations of being as ignorant and hateful as a Klansman from the conservative wing because I oppose the police state and you read into my tone. Whatever helps you feel superior and self righteous man. I stopped caring what some random on the Internet thinks of me when they resort to silly straw men and ad hom comparisons.
Balog,
To be fair, my comparison was incendiary and intended to put your prejudice into a poor light, but instead just gave you an excuse to ignore everything else and pretend to be aggrieved.
I retract it and apologize, however I stand by the fact that your proven bias against police officers reduces the impact of the message you claim you are trying to convey - one that I agree with.
-
Apparently I really am doing a poor job in communicating here. Let me try again.
I don't care what you think of me or the way I communicate. Your opinion of me has no worth or value in mind. You insult me, and then in the guise of taking it back throw in another cheap shot about my "pretending" to be aggrieved.
I'm neither pretending nor aggrieved. I have no respect for you, no desire to hear your opinion of me, and give absolutely zero fcks about your mystical ability to see into my heart and discern my true motivations.
-
[popcorn]
(my money is on Balog)
[popcorn]
-
Thank you for your clarification, Balog. Through cogent argument and skillful debate you have truly bested me and shown me the error of my ways. Well done.
:-*
-
Completely not APS. RKL lost his bet. Locked.