Skip to comments.
Slain Pa. officer had pointed stun gun at 2 dogs
Associated Press ^
| August 12, 2011
Posted on 08/12/2011 12:20:01 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 261-262 next last
To: SaraJohnson
Yes, I am........... and bless your little heart.
181
posted on
08/12/2011 6:18:06 PM PDT
by
Gator113
(Palin 2012, period.....)
To: goodwithagun
What do you have against private property? The airlines want terrorists kept off their planes. I don't want them taking over those planes and dive bombing my house.
Do you think you have a right to pull a gun and walk on an airplane or what?
To: JRandomFreeper
The price of shooting at citizen's dogs just went up.My first thought as well.
But the price for shooting a cop remains the same. This guy will fry, if PA has the death penalty.
Yes, because some animals are more equal than others.
183
posted on
08/12/2011 6:24:14 PM PDT
by
zeugma
(The only thing in the social security trust fund is your children and grandchildren's sweat.)
To: RickB444
According to the article, the homeowner told the officer to leave and return with a warrant. The officer called his chief. Yes, this matter was so pressing that the officer did not immediately pursue his course to defend the honor of the woman who may or may not have been the victim of the “domestic disturbance.” Not domestic violence, disturbance. At that point, the police chief told the officer to shoot the dogs. If you go by what the article says, there are some questionable issues here. It is a damn shame anybody had to die, especially a police officer. I'm no paulbot, btw. He was such an embarrassment last night.
184
posted on
08/12/2011 6:25:51 PM PDT
by
goodwithagun
(My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
To: Responsibility2nd
Why?I'm with you on this. It's a worthwhile read that should get better visibility. Posting a link to it is better by far than reposting the article as many times as some others do.
185
posted on
08/12/2011 6:30:47 PM PDT
by
zeugma
(The only thing in the social security trust fund is your children and grandchildren's sweat.)
To: muawiyah
Wow, I don't even know where to start with that one. Um, what do you have against this guy's private property when he told the officer to leave and come back with a warrant? What do you have against this guy's property (dogs) when the police chief told the officer to shoot them? As to planes dive-bombing your house, you are not important enough for terrorists to think twice about. Your home is safe. TSA agents are not protecting private property. They are making unconstitutional searches and seizures of American citizens of all ages in the name of security, which has not worked yet btw. Nobody can take our rights away from us, whether we choose to fly or not. The founders have got to be spinning like rotisseries right now. I never insinuated that I would pull out a gun and walk on an airplane, although I have flown with my guns on several occasions. They were of course properly inspected and stowed. There are other methods, such as those used in Israel, that accurately detect and prevent terrorists. If you search their methods they actually align with our rights. This situation is just so terrible. Nobody should have died.
186
posted on
08/12/2011 6:36:33 PM PDT
by
goodwithagun
(My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
To: muawiyah
Who were the armed men on the rooftops that scared the passengers so much, muawiyah?
To: goodwithagun
Not just last night. Paul is an embarrassment all the time. In my view he would be just as bad as the current occupant in the white house.
In the incident the thread is based on I would say it would be better to have shot the a$$hole who owned the property first. He sounds like a real scumbag. If an officer has been dispatched and his superiors have given him orders then he has a job to do. He was murdered by a jerk and I find it offensive so many on here would side with the jerk over the officer, but seeing so many on here who just hate cops regardless of the person behind the badge it doesn’t come as a surprise. The constitution does not give us the right to kill. This guy, nor his animals were in any grave danger. No justification for his behavior.
188
posted on
08/12/2011 6:44:19 PM PDT
by
RickB444
(What one receives without working for, another must work for without receiving.)
To: goodwithagun
You know I've never once in my life flown in a government owned airplane. They've all been PRIVATELY OWNED and I put on hundreds of thousands of miles ~ so what kind of planes do you imagine TSA is "protecting"?
Another thing, the plane that hit the Pentagon actually flew South around the Beltway and turned left DIRECTLY OVER MY HOME.
Yeah, you don't have to be important. Friend of ours living down in Arlington lost her rooftop antenna to that plane. Several folks in this neighborhood died there. My cousin was saved by one of my neighbors when the plane slid in under the classroom he was in.
Say what?
Real people who write stuff on FR have actually been attacked by terrorists or affected by them directly.
To: SaraJohnson
In that part of Chicago they come in two flavors ~ all the same color though. One source of armed men are criminals ~ protecting turf. Another source of armed men are the residents. Keeping an eye on the criminals.
One inspector had had some direct experience with the phenomenon so we didn't laugh at him. He was just nervous.
To: muawiyah
Your stories have nothing to do with what I posted. You either drink too much or not enough. I’m not sure which. If it’s not too much please have one for me. I can’t until baby girl arrives in about three weeks. Good night. Mama’s back is throbbing.
191
posted on
08/12/2011 6:56:48 PM PDT
by
goodwithagun
(My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
To: KrisKrinkle
IF an officer goes to a door and hears nothing amiss, he has no rational reason for demanding entry, absent a warrant. While officer A is gone for a warrant, presuming probable cause, officer B can sit outside to maintain a listening watch and, should violence break out, he’s there to intervene. Otherwise, a warrant, naming the person or persons sought and the items to be seized and the reason why it’s believed they are on this premise can CONSTITUTIONALLY get the cop through the door. What’s so hard about doing things the RIGHT way for a change?
192
posted on
08/12/2011 6:57:09 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
(A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
To: goodwithagun
At #182 you said ".......Your home is safe. TSA agents are not protecting private property. ........" and you belittled me by suggesting I'm not important enough to be targeted by terrorists.
Now what did all that have to do with private property?
To: goodwithagun
At #182 you said ".......Your home is safe. TSA agents are not protecting private property. ........" and you belittled me by suggesting I'm not important enough to be targeted by terrorists.
Now what did all that have to do with private property?
To: KrisKrinkle; dcwusmc
Kris, DCWUSMC is of the impression that there are NO REASONABLE SEARCHES ~ yet it’s been the case in English common law for a thousand years (as well as Roman law) back 2700 years, and probably even Babylonian law ~ maybe even Sumerian law going back 8,000 years THAT the king’s constable is entitled to act on what he sees ~ he is NOT required to ignore what his eyes tell him.
To: RickB444
If you should kill a police k-9, you can be charged with murder most places, even if there is total video coverage of the dog attacking YOU. If the cops’ dogs are so valuable, why would it be any different for YOUR dog? And if killing your dog can be so construed, then wouldn’t it be defense of self and others to kill the would-be murderer before he can kill the dog?
196
posted on
08/12/2011 7:11:45 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
(A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
To: muawiyah
So you’re all too willing to give up someone else’s rights just so YOU have the illusion of safety. Pitiful.
197
posted on
08/12/2011 7:18:44 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
(A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
To: muawiyah
Nothing in the article indicates that the domestic disturbance call came from the same residence.
It may very well have been a neighbor.
198
posted on
08/12/2011 7:21:28 PM PDT
by
Bigh4u2
(Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
To: muawiyah
Do you imagine that someone who accidentally ends up on something you think is your property is deserving of a death penalty?If that someone is on my property after dark, in Texas, and doing mischief..... by law, yes, deadly force is authorized.
And you aren't too big on property rights either, by the 'something you think is your property' comment.....
Do you, muawiyah, believe in private property rights?
/johnny
To: muawiyah
REASONABLE searches require a WARRANT unless the cop actually sees or hears something that clearly shows a life is in danger. In this case, unless the guy had blood on his hands or someone was screaming, which apparently was not the case, there was no CONSTITUTIONAL CAUSE for him to attempt to enter OR to shoot or taser the dog. None whatsoever.
Now it’s known that you have no respect for rights; probably a real good thing you’re only a mail flunkey and not a cop, where you could do some real damage.
200
posted on
08/12/2011 7:31:41 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
(A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 261-262 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson