Man Arrested Trying to Save His Dog

Off Topic
101

[quote]Christine wrote:
The guy in the video waited for other people to come and help him. He could have chosen to attempt to rescue his dog on his own, but didn’t. The guy in the video then threw a hissy fit while waiting for people to come and rescue his dog.
[/quote]

Like I said earlier, if people had thought this out for a minute, they could have rescued the dog before waiting a half an hour for the ice rescue team.

I would have called the cops to help me. It would have been extremely dangerous for the owner to just jump in and try to save the dog by himself, but with the help of the cops, it could have been done. I know (well, I’d certainly hope) I’d be able to rely on the police to get to my location fairly quickly. (ie, less than thirty minutes) I’d also expect them to be in halfway decent shape, and relatively smart.

The owner, with the help of the two police officers (who, by the way, are required to know CPR), a rope, and an already warmed up car, could have rescued the dog much faster than half an hour.

If I knew the cops were going to act as they did in the video, they’d sure as shit have to call that rescue team to either hurry up because it’s owner is in the lake and in trouble, too, or that they dont have to bother because I already saved him.

As a sidenote, it’s clear that many people here consider their dogs part of their family and put priceless values on their dogs lives.

Question:

How many of you would be able to stand on shore and stare a helpless human (let alone family member) in the eyes while you mouth “help is on its way”?

102

[quote]ouroboro_s wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?

Wouldn’t even think twice about it.

Remarkably cold-hearted.

See, I think the same thing about anyone who would choose an animal over a human. I guess there are PETA freaks who would probably agree with you.

I suppose you would have no problem with me saving a cat instead of your child (or brother, sister, best friend, etc.)?

This is a really stupid rhetorical question. of course I would prefer that you save MY child/brother/etc over some animal to whom I have no connection. But then again I would prefer that you save MY child/brother over your own child/brother/etc. The fact that you wouldnt save my brother over your own brother doesnt mean that I dont understand your decision.

Is the fact that this hypothetical boy in the lake somebody’s son what is driving you? What if he’s an orphan? What if he’s a drifter? Really, what is the connection, here, what is the imaginary dividing line in your mind?

I called you cold-hearted because you’re ignoring your emotions; while I have emotions, common human empathy, for the hypothetical boy in the lake, those emotions are not as strong as the ones I woudl feel for my hypothetical dog. The fact that you are saying that you could love, care for, raise and share your life with your dog and then - snap - turn those emotions off just like that, like a robot, is so frightening to me and makes me question whether or not you’re capable of those very feelings that you claim to be able to possess.

I’m going to risk jumping in for Christine since I agree with her position entirely. She didn’t once say she is ignoring her emotions. If she is anything like me, it would be acting in spite of those emotions. In my opinion, there is no imaginary dividing line. The importance of a human life will always trump the importance of an animal’s life. Life is sometimes about difficult, heart wrenching decisions. Because you believe you would make certain decisions in spite of your emotions does not make you heartless or robotic.[/quote]

This may be semantics but to me acting “in spite of” emotions means that you are not making the decision your emotions are telling you to make and are in fact going against them. If the emotions do not play a role in supporting your final decision then you are ignoring - at the very least discounting - your emotions. To me that’s cold-hearted. I dont know, maybe you see it as doing somehting but feeling bad about it, but we could probably talk in circles about it and not accomplish anything.

It is not a fact that the “importance” of a human life will always trump the importance of an animals life. I still have yet to hear what justification there is for this, beyond some misguided sense of loyalty to the species.

People vary in their worth greatly. There are some who would give someone the shirt off their back adn more, there are others who would kill you for $5, or commit unspeakable acts for their own twisted sense of amusement. Most of us fall somewhere in between. But the bottom line is that outside of my family and a few very close friends, I dont really owe my loyalty to anybody. I don’t know whether it’s some leftover religious teachings that we all have a spark of the divine in us or some crap, or if it’s simply some primal instinct to align most closely with those who look most like you, but this notion that we are all somehow connected simply does not ring true to me.

103

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

Question:

How many of you would be able to stand on shore and stare a helpless human (let alone family member) in the eyes while you mouth “help is on its way”? [/quote]

That is what I can’t figure out here. If this dog was really a part of the guy’s family, why didn’t he attempt a rescue sooner?

If this guy’s feelings for his dog are as strong as his feelings for his kids, he would have been in the water (or maybe not… I also assume that the rescue team would have been there much sooner if the report was that of a child in the water, not a dog).

104

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Christine wrote:
I wouldn’t save a dog’s life over a human life.

I would attempt to save a dog’s life. Just not at the expense of my own or another human life.

This has nothing to do with ever having owned a dog or not.

Christine, what I was trying to say is that I think people who have owned dogs understand the bond that a dog has with his/her owner. Have you ever owned a dog?

I didnt get a dog until I was 14 or so, and I do remember before then thinking that some people I know are crazy for doing some things they do for their dogs. Now that I’ve had my [amazing] dog for 6 years, I honestly would bare the brunt of jumping into that frozen lake to save my best friends life.[/quote]

We had a dog when I was growing up.

105

[quote]Christine wrote:
ouroboro_s wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
Christine wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
you’d let another human being die while you saved the dog?

You’d let a being that you’d raised since birth, cared for, loved you and were loved back by in return, die while you saved some total, complete stranger just because he more closely resembles what you see in the mirror?

Wouldn’t even think twice about it.

Remarkably cold-hearted.

See, I think the same thing about anyone who would choose an animal over a human. I guess there are PETA freaks who would probably agree with you.

I suppose you would have no problem with me saving a cat instead of your child (or brother, sister, best friend, etc.)?

This is a really stupid rhetorical question. of course I would prefer that you save MY child/brother/etc over some animal to whom I have no connection. But then again I would prefer that you save MY child/brother over your own child/brother/etc. The fact that you wouldnt save my brother over your own brother doesnt mean that I dont understand your decision.

Is the fact that this hypothetical boy in the lake somebody’s son what is driving you? What if he’s an orphan? What if he’s a drifter? Really, what is the connection, here, what is the imaginary dividing line in your mind?

I called you cold-hearted because you’re ignoring your emotions; while I have emotions, common human empathy, for the hypothetical boy in the lake, those emotions are not as strong as the ones I woudl feel for my hypothetical dog. The fact that you are saying that you could love, care for, raise and share your life with your dog and then - snap - turn those emotions off just like that, like a robot, is so frightening to me and makes me question whether or not you’re capable of those very feelings that you claim to be able to possess.

I’m going to risk jumping in for Christine since I agree with her position entirely. She didn’t once say she is ignoring her emotions. If she is anything like me, it would be acting in spite of those emotions. In my opinion, there is no imaginary dividing line. The importance of a human life will always trump the importance of an animal’s life. Life is sometimes about difficult, heart wrenching decisions. Because you believe you would make certain decisions in spite of your emotions does not make you heartless or robotic.

Thank you, ouroboro. The funny thing here is that I really don’t like people all that much. They sort of annoy me, generally speaking that is.

But yes, KBC, I would choose any of my own relatives above yours. But I also have no doubt I would let any animal die before sacrificing almost any human life. And I only say almost in the case I run into Bin Laden or someone equally as horrific. You would have to be a very seriously bad person before I would consider the life of an animal before yours.
[/quote]

Yes, it was a rhetorical question - you would save your relatives before mine, i would save my relatives before yours, and my dog before your relatives.

The idea of judging the human in the water makes this even more hypothetical. In reality, you’re never going to see bin laden in the water. But, if this absurd situation of dog vs human ever came to pass, how do you know that the person youre saving isnt a homicidal maniac or child molester, just less-publicized than bin laden? Why assume goodness? I dont say that you should assume badness, but this notion of judging teh human in the water, while totally unrealistic, is indicative to me that at least SOME human lives are NOT worth saving over the dog’s, and if that is the case then what is so damn special about all the other human lives that makes them worth saving over the dog? What is so inherently special about people? Nothing.

106

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
What is so inherently special about people? Nothing.[/quote]

I was going to bring up this point. There are tons of threads on here pointing out how stupid, ridiculous, and absurd the average human being is.

Edit:

I’d be willing to bet that your average dog is way more innocent than your average human. Just sayin’.

107

[quote]Christine wrote:
rrjc5488 wrote:

Question:

How many of you would be able to stand on shore and stare a helpless human (let alone family member) in the eyes while you mouth “help is on its way”?

That is what I can’t figure out here. If this dog was really a part of the guy’s family, why didn’t he attempt a rescue sooner?

If this guy’s feelings for his dog are as strong as his feelings for his kids, he would have been in the water (or maybe not… I also assume that the rescue team would have been there much sooner if the report was that of a child in the water, not a dog).
[/quote]

I cant speak for the guy in the video, but again, I would have waited (not a half an hour) for the police to come to help me. I also said that if I knew they were NOT going to help me, I would attempt to get my dog out of the water by myself.

I’m no parent, but I cant imagine any parent assigning equal value to both their child and a family pet. I merely said I consider my dog a part of my family; I would not, however, value my dogs life over any of my human family members.

I agree that a response time to a human in that lake SHOULD be faster, if we’re arguing semantics, but quite frankly, not by much. Did the ice rescue team finish their hot cocoa before they left?

Speaking of which, the camera turns and those ice rescue guys are walking around the corner. How did they get there? Did they walk? I dont get it.

108

[quote]threewhitelights wrote:
matsm21 wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:
TC wrote:

For all intents and purposes, these dogs are my children and I tell you without hesitation or exaggeration that if someone came to my house to destroy them, I would do whatever was necessary to thwart them. And, if I had to, I would kill the intruders using whatever tool was available, a butcher knife, a chain saw, a baseball bat, my bare hands, or a gun.

For the record, I’m not the only one that feels this way…

Dude, no one thinks your fucked up for saving a dog. A dog over a human yes, but that was a tangent that wasn’t really related to this situation.

You apparently do. I call my dog “my baby” and you think it’s fucked up.

matsm21 wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:

Yes, I treat my dog as I would treat my child. Is there a problem with that?

yes. your values are fucked up.

[/quote]
yea, I guess that was a little harsh. To bad the situation got out of hand, but if you want the police to help you have to expect them to take control of the situation and do it the way they think it best. That guy acting like he did changed everything.

109

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
It is not a fact that the “importance” of a human life will always trump the importance of an animals life. I still have yet to hear what justification there is for this, beyond some misguided sense of loyalty to the species.

People vary in their worth greatly. There are some who would give someone the shirt off their back adn more, there are others who would kill you for $5, or commit unspeakable acts for their own twisted sense of amusement. Most of us fall somewhere in between. But the bottom line is that outside of my family and a few very close friends, I dont really owe my loyalty to anybody. I don’t know whether it’s some leftover religious teachings that we all have a spark of the divine in us or some crap, or if it’s simply some primal instinct to align most closely with those who look most like you, but this notion that we are all somehow connected simply does not ring true to me.[/quote]

Human life to you may not always trump the life of an animal. To me, however it will. Always. I can’t offer you a well thought out rationale except to state that it is a deep down, visceral reaction. I’m not sure it requires more than that. Perhaps it is the belief that within each person resides a spark of the devine. I’m not a religious person but am fairly spiritual. This to me is a belief that defies spreadsheet logic. For me, it just is.

I don’t question your reactions but I don’t find mine especially cold.

Happily, for most of us, we won’t have to make any sort of choice.

110

The cops urgency would have been 10 fold if it had been a human in the water. A human life is not a tradeoff for a dog, whether he is a member of the family or not. As has been said, the guys two kids had more sense than he did. And knowing the redneck population of Baca County like I do, he was probably strung out on meth, partially explaining his irrational behavior.

I am not a big fan of the police. I know a few cops who are good guys, I know some that are dickheads. But this video really illustrates the thankless nature of their job.

111

[quote]40&Big wrote:
But this video really illustrates the thankless nature of their job. [/quote]

What did they do deserving of thanks? They drove in a car, made a phone call, insulted an emotionally distraught man, then arrested him, taking away the free use of his property (his life) to rescue the dog.

Now, I’ve read though this thread and am rather frustrated. I love my dog. She is part of the family, but you can bet your ass that I’d save a random person over my dog. People and dogs are not on par.

If you’re a cop, your obligation should be to do the right thing. If you’re worried about lawsuits or losing your job, then you’re in the wrong profession. Your priority should be on serving justice, not violating it to cover your ass. I’ve seen this type in the Corps. These are the career SNCO’s who don’t let you train hard for fear of some kid crying to their mom and getting a poor fitrep from their CO. The result tends to be dead Marines on a battlefield.

In this specific situation the cops should have imparted on the guy that help was coming and endured whatever F-bombs thrown their way instead of insulting the guy. Finally, if the guy wanted to run for it, that’s his life. I’d tell this whiskey tango dipshit that if he went after the dog I’m NOT coming after him and he’s going to leave his kids without a dad. Unfortunately I’d be lying because I would go after him but I’d be pissed afterwards for risking my life for a moron. But guess what gents, that’s part of the job. Stop blowing yourselves as heroes if you don’t want to act the part.

Being a cop should be hard. That’s why you’re a trusted part of the community.

mike

112

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
40&Big wrote:
But this video really illustrates the thankless nature of their job.

What did they do deserving of thanks? They drove in a car, made a phone call, insulted an emotionally distraught man, then arrested him, taking away the free use of his property (his life) to rescue the dog.

Now, I’ve read though this thread and am rather frustrated. I love my dog. She is part of the family, but you can bet your ass that I’d save a random person over my dog. People and dogs are not on par.

If you’re a cop, your obligation should be to do the right thing. If you’re worried about lawsuits or losing your job, then you’re in the wrong profession. Your priority should be on serving justice, not violating it to cover your ass. I’ve seen this type in the Corps. These are the career SNCO’s who don’t let you train hard for fear of some kid crying to their mom and getting a poor fitrep from their CO. The result tends to be dead Marines on a battlefield.

In this specific situation the cops should have imparted on the guy that help was coming and endured whatever F-bombs thrown their way instead of insulting the guy. Finally, if the guy wanted to run for it, that’s his life. I’d tell this whiskey tango dipshit that if he went after the dog I’m NOT coming after him and he’s going to leave his kids without a dad. Unfortunately I’d be lying because I would go after him but I’d be pissed afterwards for risking my life for a moron. But guess what gents, that’s part of the job. Stop blowing yourselves as heroes if you don’t want to act the part.

Being a cop should be hard. That’s why you’re a trusted part of the community.

mike [/quote]

Yes, being a cop is hard. But your right, thats part of the job. Thats why i value my job, and would not throw it away to let some guy jump in the water to save his dog. Your right, in certain situations you dont have time to think about those things.

However, in this situation you better believe I am weighing out the pros and cons. I can think of several scenarios where I would be willing to lose my job or give my life for “justice”, but saving a dog is not one of them.

113

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I love my dog. She is part of the family, but you can bet your ass that I’d save a random person over my dog. [/quote]

This is an inherent contradiction - if she’s part of the family you’d save her over a random. If you’d save a random over her, then she’s not part of the family, and you don’t “love” her anymore than you love your new car or your iphone, or any other possession

For the other people writing in this thread, I disagree with them, but at least they are (for the most part) consistent in their beliefs and manage not to contradict themselves in the very next sentence

114

The cops probably did him a favor, he had no rope and I am guessing no plan