Posted on 08/12/2011 12:20:01 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Now, considering the number of times I've read about police killing harmless (and restrained) dogs of late, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on the dogs to the owner, not the police.
Exactly. Well said.
Very true.
What, you mean like Yoshihiro Hattori, who was shot trespassing on someone's property?
Funny thing is, the shooter was not charged with murder. You should look it up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshihiro_Hattori
Police officer attacked by dog
A dog attack doesn't have to be fatal to be a terrible event for the victim.
Yeah ~ we all know that. And if the child had been a white English speaking kid he probably wouldn't have been shot.
Louisiana law did make it OK to murder people just for the hell of it.
There've been some changes since then, but FUR SHUR even you wouldn't want them next door ~ imagine if your power was out, your house was starting to burn and you needed to go NEXT DOOR for help summoning the fire department.
Then the crazy woman says to hubby "Hey, there's those trouble makers again, go kill them"!
Does your wife, or your daughter, know that you would be more concerned for the dog?
Big government? You can’t get more local than this ~ it’s a town policeman!
On the other hand we have the internet to entertain us with the exceptions ~ particularly when a cop responds to a call for help.
No, cops don't have to get warrants to respond to a call for help, and as we all know our primary reason to keep our guns loaded and at the ready is WHEN SECONDS COUNT THE COPS ARE 90 MINUTES AWAY (as in Norway recently).
So, if you want the cops to get a warrant every time they respond to a call for help you will have a lot of people die ~ probably even you!
I suppose you’re going to claim you’ve never heard of Quartzite, Arizona? Small town but HUGE tyranny. Check it out before you pop off about small towns again. On the other hand, it might just be YOUR kinda place!
Everybody has heard about quartzite. Still doesn’t make it a big city or “non local” ~
Who’s been talking about big cities? Besides you, I mean? And it were YOU who started talking about such things, accusing me of not thinking the Constitution should apply because this place where the cop was killed was not a big city...
Who’s been talking about big cities? Besides you, I mean? And it were YOU who started talking about such things, accusing me of not thinking the Constitution should apply because this place where the cop was killed was not a big city... the Constitution applies EVERYWHERE IN THESE UNITED STATES, no exceptions.
Somebody said “big government” ~ all I did was remind you (and others) that this is pretty small potatoes ~ a local township in fact ~ not “big government” at all ~ unless you have a different sort of definition of “big government” than everybody else.
"police officer mauled by dog"
and I got numerous accounts of the same story, "retired police officer mauled by dog he had rescued..." - happened in Minesota in 2009.
For "police officer injured by dog" I got a total of five hits, of which only two referred to actual incidents.
1 - Pittsburgh, March 2011, officers dispatched to scene in response to reports of loose dog:
<"Officials say the female officer was scratched by the pit bull at the scene. She was taken to a local hospital for treatment of her injury"
2 - Charles County, Md, 2010, officers in response to assault call, attacked by a pit bull that the perp had set loose on them. Dog "tried to bite" one cop on the ankle. Cop shot dog.
The idea that cops need to shoot the myriad dogs that they are shooting, for fear of their safety, is a view held only by extremely ignorant people.
Big government- your apparent favorite flavor- can exist ANYWHERE that good people allow it by their negligence. Doesn’t matter the size of the area or the population.
I'm not surprised that you got only few hits when you tried “police officer mauled by dog” or police officer injured by dog.” It's probably a rare event.
And here's why. An armed person, cop or not, is simply not going to let himself be mauled or injured by a dog. He is going to shoot the dog and so avoid the injury.
I am not arguing that a cop should simply shoot every dog he encounters. What I am saying is that I put a human being's safety before that of an animal. It's a judgment call, one that a cop should have to defend in court if need be.
And I do find it ironic that I must defend this position. I like dogs, particularly Golden Retrievers.
And I do not particularly like cops. I have had a couple of bad experiences with them. But that's another story.
Eternal rest Officer Robert Lasso.Prayers for his family.
Don’t be silly. One police chief dealing with a dangerous nut case is NOT BIG GOVERNMENT.
If said police chief thinks, reasonably for the area, that he can ignore the Constitution with impunity, it’s because government is WAY, WAY too big and overweening, period. I can’t say with certainty that he DID think that way, but given what I have been able to read about this case, I’m not betting AGAINST it. Whatever else you can say, that’s big government.
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.