K9 Officer Dead, Town Outraged

Off Topic
162

[quote]fighting_fires wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
People that don’t like dogs are soulless cocksuckers.[/quote]

This has nothing to do with not liking dogs, this is about a man killing a dog that was going to attack/attack him. And, the town being outraged because a man was protecting himself.[/quote]

But the man was being attacked by a police dog, since the man robbed a place. why is this being ignored in all the arguments here? [/quote]

It’s not, but there is a difference between a man coming after someone and a dog coming after someone. I’ve been attacked by a police dog and a man. It’s not the same at all.

A dog can do serious damage from the start, a man can’t unless you don’t know how to defend yourself. I look at a dog in this situation more as a weapon than it is a police officer.

163

[quote]debraD wrote:
heh[/quote]

Lol.

164

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
It’s just an animal, people.
You can grow an attachement to anything but it’s just a mutt, at the end of the day.
Don’t really see the big deal. A dog died, boohoo, so tragic.
The guy was gonna get ripped to shreds. Can you fault him?[/quote]

Since you posted a photo of a dog roast being plated up to illustrate your point, we can assume then that the thought of eating a dog sounds appetizing to you (I’m not asking you if you’d eat one as a last-ditch alternative to starvation, but if you would regularly choose to eat one over say, a steak or chicken and enjoy it)?

You’re not as “de-sensitized” to fluffy creatures as you think you are.[/quote]

Irrelevant comparison. I’ve never tried dog, so of course I would choose a known quantity like steak, which is delicious. Now if you were to ask me if I would try dog, or cat, or horse, or any animal for the sake of trying it, I would say, “absolutely”.[/quote]

It’s not an irrelevant comparison. You didn’t make the point or post the pic. And stop trying to find argumentative loopholes. The question wasn’t “would you try roast dog if I hired a Michelin star chef to cook it and offer it to you for the sake of novelty?”. It was “are you so emotionally removed from domestic animals that you’d eat and enjoy dog flesh on a regular basis and of your own volition?”.

Clearly the answer for both of you “independent thinkers” is no, because you’d be eating it already. Amateur. [/quote]

Wow. You call me an amateur, and yet you’ve built a fine strawman yourself. I said nothing about requiring a professional chef to eat a dog. The reason I don’t eat dog is because it’s not available to me. However, if there was a local dog-slaughtering shop that provided dog at a reasonable price, I’d eat it all day long. The reason I eat a lot of cows, chickens and pigs is because I, like most everyone on this site, do not kill the animals I eat. Why is it normal for someone to raise a pig, an animal as intelligent or even moreso than a dog, only to kill and eat it? Because dogs have endeared themselves to our species by luck of the draw; their social structure is sufficiently similar to ours so as to allow them to slip effortlessly into our homes, nothing more. And quit trying to act so high and mighty because you’re in the majority. Go to a third world country and you would be considered a pariah for holding dogs in such high esteem.[/quote]

FREE THINK MOTHERFUCKER YOU’RE NOT FREE THINKING THIS SHIT!!!

165

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
People that don’t like dogs are soulless cocksuckers.[/quote]

This has nothing to do with not liking dogs, this is about a man killing a dog that was going to attack/attack him. And, the town being outraged because a man was protecting himself.[/quote]

This wasn’t directed at the article. It was directed at the people here acting like a dogs life isn’t worth a shit. How did you not get that?[/quote]

So far most of the people have prefaced or have talked about liking dogs. I like dogs, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t put a stray down if I saw it walking my property, though. And, sure as hell wouldn’t let a dog attack me.

166

[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
I had a debate with a lady friend about this a while ago. I argued the point that our intelligence is what makes us different from other animals but not necessarily better. That feeling of superiority is a byproduct of said intelligence. On a base level we have the same biological needs as other animals. Yes, We have adapted and changed our environment to suit our needs.

But if you put me out in the wilderness toe to toe with another ultra predator with nothing but what god gave me when I was born. I’m a dead man. All my supposed superiority is out the window, as I pass through the animals digestive track. To argue if we are “better” or worth more than another animal is a purely selfish self preservationist view. Because if you stand between a mother Grizzly and her cubs she is going to look at you as a lesser being standing in the way of her and her cubs.

So my point is, in the grand scheme of things we all (humans & other animals) want the same things. Some food, some sex, and a quiet place to take a shit.[/quote]

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think you have the right angle. She doesn’t think that you are less than her, I don’t really think there is “thinking” going on. She is instinctively protecting her cubs.

When it comes to dumb animals, the proper angle to look at is if it is okay for us to kill an animal, say for food. Yes it is. Is it proper for humans to kill humans for food, no it isn’t. Is it proper for animals to kill humans for food, no it isn’t. Humans are distinctively superior to other animals, or dumb animals.[/quote]

So by your logic a Shark should never eat a dolphin or a seal because a Shark is a “dumb” animal and the dolphin & seal are distinctively superior to the Shark because of their natural intelligence.

Or are you being sarcastic? Because that was a uncharacteristically stupid statement.

[/quote]

Lol, sorry. Okay, as Aquinas the philosopher called them, dumb animals, in as all animals that are not human are dumb animals. Not that they are dumb, or smart, or whatever but that don’t have the intellectual and reasoning capabilities that we have.

167

[quote]Loudog75 wrote:

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
In fact, if you view a dog as having more worth than, say, a turtle, I think you are a soulless cocksucker.[/quote]

lulz! no one cares about turtles you turd[/quote]

We have two pet turtles and they are a part of the family (unless we get a desire for turtle soup).

I don’t get why people are so damn crazy over cats and dogs.

Cats:
Independent creatures that show little affection.
They lick themselves and other cats.
Eat Rodents and Birds.
Scat and Pee in your House.
Claw up your furniture.
Suck your childs breath (never seen it/myth???)
Climb their nasty azz up on your counters where you prepare food.
Shed.

Dogs:
Scat and P in your house.
Lick their genitals and then like your face.
Sniff other dogs and then get in your face.
Eat Scat.
Chew up furniture and shoes.

I’m sure there are more but this is the big one for me - You people have cats and dogs that go # 2 and I have yet to see a cat or dog wipe afterwards. When they are done, they hop in your bed. That is disgusting!!!

Again, I like dogs as much as most normal people do but I refuse to have a nasty animal in my home. I’m oldschool. Pets belong outside. The only reason I don’t have a dog now is because
A. I don’t want to run around cleaning up poop in my backyard.
B. I live in Houston TX. I think its cruel to have a dog pent up in a yard with this heat.[/quote]

I don’t like some people’s dogs because they don’t train them correctly, but my house dog (I have six dogs, which all are hunters except the house dog he lost all his teeth and can’t hunt anymore) doesn’t do any of that stuff. He’s not allowed on the furniture, he doesn’t touch the furniture at all, house broken and doesn’t eat scat either. Eating scat is usually a sign of nutrition being off.

168

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]cct wrote:
So you would save your dog before you save your own mother, wife, and kids?!
Get out of here. You’re a disgrace to the human species.
Why don’t you become a dog, you wanna-be-dog. Why don’t you go marry a dog and go live the forest with the rest of the wolf pack?[/quote]

^^hahahahahaha! That sounds like response of a 9 year old!

“Oh yeah! You wanna-be-dog! Get out of her doggy dog boy! Go marry a dog if you love dogs so much!” hahahaha lulz![/quote]

Good catch I missed that one.

At first I thought it was one that you may have changed in a “Let me fix that for you” way…but no, you sadly hadn’t changed it.

169

[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Um scuse me - I need internet acknowledgement!

I said - people will have dogs who go sheet outside and then have them jump right in their bedz. If that aint nasty then what is?

Speak up if you let your dog lay down in your bed. [/quote]

I don’t. Dog stays on the ground.

170

[quote]Loudog75 wrote:

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
In fact, if you view a dog as having more worth than, say, a turtle, I think you are a soulless cocksucker.[/quote]

lulz! no one cares about turtles you turd[/quote]

[/quote]

We have two pet turtles and they are a part of the family (unless we get a desire for turtle soup).

I don’t get why people are so damn crazy over cats and dogs.

Cats:
Independent creatures that show little affection.
They lick themselves and other cats.
Eat Rodents and Birds.
Scat and Pee in your House.
Claw up your furniture.
Suck your childs breath (never seen it/myth???)
Climb their nasty azz up on your counters where you prepare food.
Shed.

Dogs:
Scat and P in your house.
Lick their genitals and then like your face.
Sniff other dogs and then get in your face.
Eat Scat.
Chew up furniture and shoes.

I’m sure there are more but this is the big one for me - You people have cats and dogs that go # 2 and I have yet to see a cat or dog wipe afterwards. When they are done, they hop in your bed. That is disgusting!!!

Again, I like dogs as much as most normal people do but I refuse to have a nasty animal in my home. I’m oldschool. Pets belong outside. The only reason I don’t have a dog now is because
A. I don’t want to run around cleaning up poop in my backyard.
B. I live in Houston TX. I think its cruel to have a dog pent up in a yard with this heat.[/quote]

171

172

I like that cat and dog gif…we need another with the dog talking.

173

[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Um scuse me - I need internet acknowledgement!

I said - people will have dogs who go sheet outside and then have them jump right in their bedz. If that aint nasty then what is?

Speak up if you let your dog lay down in your bed. [/quote]

174

well… as the law would have it, … " if not but for his actions this dog would not have been released" so he is ultimately responsible for the death of this dog.

If not but for…

remember that. Every criminal is responsible for what happens.

The piece of trash criminal is responsible for this.

that is all.

175

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

well… as the law would have it, … " if not but for his actions this dog would not have been released" so he is ultimately responsible for the death of this dog.

If not but for…

remember that. Every criminal is responsible for what happens.

The piece of trash criminal is responsible for this.

that is all.

[/quote]

Completely disagree. The “butterfly effect” theory don’t fly here…pun intended.

176

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

well… as the law would have it, … " if not but for his actions this dog would not have been released" so he is ultimately responsible for the death of this dog.

If not but for…

remember that. Every criminal is responsible for what happens.

The piece of trash criminal is responsible for this.

that is all.

[/quote]

If you apply that standard to all people I am sure that you havre many friends and are great fun at parties.

177

Does anyone else think the police are making stuff up? I see it happening like this…

Robbers: OH NO! IT’S DA FUZZ!

Police: Go get 'em Rover!

Rover: Straight into oncoming traffic.

178

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
Does anyone else think the police are making stuff up? I see it happening like this…

Robbers: OH NO! IT’S DA FUZZ!

Police: Go get 'em Rover!

Rover: Straight into oncoming traffic.
[/quote]

While I could imagine that, I sure hope that canine “officers” are not that retarded just because they became a member of a police unit.

I think it takes at least a badge and a gun to lower the IQ by that much.

179

I have no mercy for criminals. Rules are absolutely necessary in a civilized society. Don’t like it, don’t do the crime. Hang up by their nuts as far as I am concerned.

180

181

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

well… as the law would have it, … " if not but for his actions this dog would not have been released" so he is ultimately responsible for the death of this dog.

If not but for…

remember that. Every criminal is responsible for what happens.

The piece of trash criminal is responsible for this.

that is all.

[/quote]

Completely disagree. The “butterfly effect” theory don’t fly here…pun intended. [/quote]

It isn’t the butterfly effect, it is legal theory and will be applied to his case. Same thing if a person commits a burglary and the victim in fear suffers a heart attack and dies the burglar will be charged with the murder or manslaughter of the victim. Although the burglar didn’t intend the death of the victim, if not but for his actions the death would not have happened.

“if not but for” is a legal theory relating to the outcomes from criminal actions.