Morning Links

Friday, May 28th, 2010
Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

60 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  Mike Leatherwood | 

    Know Your Rights, Lose Your Job…..Yuhp, sounds about right.

  2. #2 |  J sub D | 

    Norfolk, Virginia teachers suspended for showing students the Flex Your Rights video. Sad how making students aware of their constitutional rights is interpreted as “teaching them how to hide drugs.”

    One thing America doesn’t need is citizens who are aware of their rights. High school students should instead be taiught to buff the cop’s boots after licking them.

  3. #3 |  Stephen | 

    Re: puppycide – I am not nearly as outraged by this one. If your dog gets off of your property and out of your control and is causing trouble for someone else on THEIR property, then I don’t think you have grounds for complaining about what the police do to it. Be glad that the animal did not bite anyone and thus you getting sued.

    If your dog comes after me or my kid on MY property, I will shoot it myself.

  4. #4 |  fish | 

    In hindsight, the Three Christs study looks less like a promising experiment than the absurd plan of a psychologist who suffered the triumph of passion over good sense.

    Or the most promising sitcom plot you’ve heard all year.

  5. #5 |  John Wilburn | 

    As a private citizen, the law does not give me the right to use lethal force against a dog, if I feel that the dog is acting in an aggressive,or threatening manner – as far as I know, neither can mailmen, meter readers, paper boys, girl scouts selling cookies, door-to-door salesmen and etc.

    Someone needs to explain why police are free to commit acts that would be crimes, if committed by the rest of us…

    “Because they carry guns,” isn’t acceptable, as a justification – a lot more of us law-abiding “civilians” legally carry them also…

  6. #6 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    How the hell did a teacher’s union allow one of their own to get suspended?! Something doesn’t sound right.

  7. #7 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    In the 70s, the Astros had three Jesuses on the team.

  8. #8 |  Stephen | 

    “#4 | John Wilburn | May 28th, 2010 at 9:46 am

    As a private citizen, the law does not give me the right to use lethal force against a dog, if I feel that the dog is acting in an aggressive,or threatening manner”

    A dog can quite easily be lethal. Are you saying that I cannot defend myself just because it is a dog?

  9. #9 |  damaged justice | 

    When a teacher works for the State, they teach what the State wants them to teach.

  10. #10 |  John Wilburn | 

    @Stephen

    I don’t know how the law works where you live, but in Maryland & Virginia (where I grew up, and live, respectively) you can’t pull out a gun and shoot a dog, just because he barks, growls or runs at you. When I was a kid in Maryland, the only justification for shooting a dog, was if it was chasing deer.

    Things may be different for someone on their own property, but I’ve never heard of an instance where a cop shot a dog on his (the cops) own property…

  11. #11 |  Stephen | 

    #10 | John Wilburn |

    I live in Texas. I don’t think I would get in trouble here for shooting a dog in self defence. I am not talking about just shooting a dog because it came onto my property but actual defence against an aggressive animal.

    The problem with most of these puppycide cases is that the cops are doing stuff that almost guarantees a defensive response from the animal. The dog is just being a good dog and gets blasted as part of standard procedure. Seems almost like a dog hunt sometimes when the cops bust in. More cops went after the dog in the Missouri case than went after the guy they were arresting.

  12. #12 |  Aresen | 

    Boyd Durkin | May 28th, 2010 at 9:47 am
    How the hell did a teacher’s union allow one of their own to get suspended?! Something doesn’t sound right.

    The teacher was teaching about civil rights, not union entitlements. Obviously, the union doesn’t care about the former.

  13. #13 |  Sean L. | 

    A public service announcement

    Why can’t Helen Keller drive?

    She’s a woman.

  14. #14 |  MacGregory | 

    The “teachers suspended” article just rang a bell with me. Often, the local media here covers a story of cops going to area high schools and doing the whole fake drunk driving crash thing; complete with students bloodied up and posing as corpses.

    What I would like to see is to have attorney be allowed to do a follow-up presentation on what to do if you’re pulled over. This is never taught to anyone, anywhere, anytime. It’s one of those things you have to learn the hard way.

    In fact, it wouldn’t even have to be a lawyer. I could do it. Having been put through the wood chipper that is DUI, I know quite a bit about it.

    If you have had anything to drink at all, refuse to be a party to the roadside circus show. Do not blow into anything.. Never assume you are under the “legal limit” (whatever the fuck that means, even if you really are that machine won’t say so) Ask for an attorney.

    Most likely you’re going to be arrested but that was probably going to happen anyway. In my state, refusing the breathalizer is an automatic 6 month license suspension. At least though, by not giving them any “evidence,” you have a fighting chance.

    Of course, none of this will happen. Such a thing would obviously mean that you’re an advocate of drunk driving.

  15. #15 |  ka | 

    I’m sorry, but almost the entire original Flex Your Rights video is geared toward hiding illegal behavior. It is good to know your rights and if they had made a video to teach people that it would have been fine. I bought that video to show the kids I am involved with, but after previewing it realized I couldn’t show it to them. Very disappointing.

  16. #16 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Interesting article on judicial nullification of child porn laws.

    Good for Judge Weinstein. Kiinda makes you wonder how someone with a sense of justice and, even more rarely, balls got into government.

  17. #17 |  travis | 

    I need to not read the comments on the general Internet.

  18. #18 |  Andrew S. | 

    #15 | ka | May 28th, 2010 at 10:52 am

    I’m sorry, but almost the entire original Flex Your Rights video is geared toward hiding illegal behavior. It is good to know your rights and if they had made a video to teach people that it would have been fine. I bought that video to show the kids I am involved with, but after previewing it realized I couldn’t show it to them. Very disappointing.

    In other words, if you’re doing something illegal, you shouldn’t be getting those constitutional protections? Is that what you’re saying here?

  19. #19 |  Marty | 

    around here, in our white-middle-class-low-crime world, the high schools subject the kids to random drug testing, search their cars ‘just because’, have ‘lock downs’ where kids are locked into their classrooms while dogs search the school for drugs, and the kids are subjected to searches of their lockers or persons. the school administrators do not want these kids knowing what kind of rights American citizens are supposed to have. the teacher showing this video directly contradicts school policy.

    My 9th grader has seen the last of public schools- we start homeschooling in July.

  20. #20 |  Mario | 

    I really like the Flex Your Rights videos, and I’ve also taught a government class in a New York high school. The videos themselves aren’t so bad, and their pedigree is the ACLU.

    I think the thing that really put these teachers in hot water was the flyer.

    The flyer is an excellent material, too; but it’s put out by some self-styled “anarchist” group. I’m sorry, but just as when dealing with police you have to use your common sense and best judgement, when dealing with parents and their “little darlings,” you have to do the same.

    I think they could have defended the videos, but the teachers should not have distributed this particular flyer — for their own good. At “anarchist” the parents and school board will just go apoplectic.

  21. #21 |  Cynical in CA | 

    “Norfolk, Virginia teachers suspended for showing students the Flex Your Rights video. Sad how making students aware of their constitutional rights is interpreted as “teaching them how to hide drugs.””

    These teachers work for the State, right? They need to do as they’re told then. No controversy here whatsoever.

    The greatest example of cognitive dissonance in the US is the idea that there can be freedom where the State is concerned. Pure delusion.

  22. #22 |  Zargon | 

    #15
    I’m sorry, but almost the entire original Flex Your Rights video is geared toward hiding illegal behavior. It is good to know your rights and if they had made a video to teach people that it would have been fine. I bought that video to show the kids I am involved with, but after previewing it realized I couldn’t show it to them. Very disappointing.

    Well yes, while it’s important to know your rights under all circumstances, it’s really especially critical to know your rights when a cop is trying to get you to admit or show him evidence that you’ve committed some victimless crime so he can lock you in a cage. That may be why the video focuses so much attention on those situations.

  23. #23 |  Athena | 

    “I’m sorry, but almost the entire original Flex Your Rights video is geared toward hiding illegal behavior. It is good to know your rights and if they had made a video to teach people that it would have been fine. I bought that video to show the kids I am involved with, but after previewing it realized I couldn’t show it to them. Very disappointing.”

    When I was 21, I took custody of my 16 year old sister. My circumstances at the time were less than ideal (I lived in the hood below some pretty serious drug dealers), but I believed I could provide her the structure she needed to finish out her high school years successfully (which I did, by the way).

    Police were always sniffing around our apartments as a result of the constant illegal activity. One day, unbeknownst to me, my sister brought some friends home for lunch while I was at work to smoke some weed. Not long into things, police knocked on our door. They threatened her in typical cop fashion: “We smelled weed. You can consent to a search now and we’ll take it easy on you, or you make us come back with a warrant and we’ll tear this place up.”

    My sister let them in. The cops found nothing, but that’s not the point. When I got home, I was more upset that my sister failed to exercise her right to tell them to go ahead and come back with that effing warrant than I was about the fact that we were searched or even the fact that she was bringing people to my apartment to get high.

    That night, I asked her to invite all her little stoner buddies over so they could get a lesson in civil liberties, constitutional protections – you know, all the things they WEREN’T learning in school. They listened intently, but not for a second did they get confused about where I stood on their behavior. I wasn’t condoning it, but I wasn’t going to allow them to walk around defenseless, either.

    When I read a post like yours, I hear the same flawed logic behind abstinence-only education – that, to teach them how to protect themselves will be condoning the act. But we know where that gets us, don’t we?

    I don’t know what relation these kids are to you, but I would put a little more faith in the values they’ve been instilled with. Giving a child the tools to physically defend themselves doesn’t mean they will run around beating kids up; giving them the tools to protect themselves from STDs doesn’t mean they will suddenly become promiscuous; giving them the tools to defend against manipulative authority does not mean they’ll put themselves in a position to get screwed with by cops. But to shelter them from these topics out of fear is guaranteed failure.

  24. #24 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #5 | John Wilburn — “Someone needs to explain why police are free to commit acts that would be crimes, if committed by the rest of us…”

    Didn’t you just know that I’d be your huckleberry, John?

    I’ve explained this ad nauseum. The State defends its agents against all comers — human, dog, whatever. State agents are an elevated class, not part of the general population. This is essential for the State to preserve its supreme status as the monopolizer of the initiation of violence within its territory.

    If State agents were held to the same standard as ordinary citizens, then there would be no State. That would be called … wait for it … anarchy.

    You’re not telling me that you’re ready for anarchy now, are you John? Just because a poor dog was shot and killed?

  25. #25 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #20 | Mario — “The flyer is an excellent material, too; but it’s put out by some self-styled “anarchist” group.”

    Do you have a link to the flyer? I’m curious to see it.

    “At “anarchist” the parents and school board will just go apoplectic.”

    Yes, you are correct, statists have redefined that word beyond all reason. It’s time for a re-branding so statists can have fun destroying another word and demonizing all who adhere to moral first principles. I suggest “radical individualist.” Oh wait, it has the word “radical” in it. My bad. I guess “voluntaryist” is out there, but the word seems clumsy to me. “Agorist” is also out there for freemarketeers, but it’s too esoteric.

    You know what, I’m gonna stick with anarchist after all. Let the apoplexy begin.

  26. #26 |  Steve Verdon | 

    If your kid comes after me or my kid on MY property, I will shoot it myself.

    There fixed it for you. People after all are far, far more deadly than dogs. So get your kids on a leash.

    I’ve explained this ad nauseum. The State defends its agents against all comers — human, dog, whatever. State agents are an elevated class, not part of the general population. This is essential for the State to preserve its supreme status as the monopolizer of the initiation of violence within its territory.

    In other words, keep your mouth shut John you low life peasant and get back to work so you can pay for your masters’ upkeep.

  27. #27 |  Marc | 

    I can’t call that puppycide. The dogs were already aggressive and were loose. He captured one, but when they other was got away with the potential to run into another victim – to wait for a tranquilizer gun would have been wrong. Can you imagine the outrage, if the dog found a 2 year old an ripped him apart while the officer was waiting for a tranquilizer gun? The officer was in a bad situation and made the best decision he could. I would commend him on capturing one before resorting to deadly force.

  28. #28 |  Cynical in CA | 

    From Question Your Law:

    “4.Public law in Mbaiki is justified by claiming private law would impose overly severe punishments. But is there evidence for this, or is it a just knee-jerk rationalization? Your arguments for public law over private law in your world may be similarly weak.”

    This guy Alex is a dangerous, dangerous thinker. He should be at least imprisoned if not outright executed for writing such dangerous ideas. How dare he question the sanctity of public law?

    /sometimes there’s not enough sarcasm in the world…

  29. #29 |  Charlie O | 

    The saddest part of the Norfolk story are the comments posted. Most of them seem to think there’s something wrong with actually knowing your constitutional rights. They are indicative of why I doubt things will ever change much with respect the burgeoning police state this country has become. They have the attitude of “if you’re not doing anything wrong, why do you need your rights.” American are waaaay too ready to bend over and take it up the ass from anyone with a badge and a gun.

  30. #30 |  Mark R | 

    I like how the civil servant was somehow fully trained in the use of lethal force but wasn’t trained well enough to fire a tranquilizer gun.

    To me, that’s the bad government lesson to draw from this. Not trying to use this to justify your ideology that the state is inimical to freedom. Just that government often gets things ass-backwards, like training a dog catcher in how to fire a gun with live ammunition but not how to fire a tranquilizer gun.

  31. #31 |  CRNewsom | 

    @#15 Ka: The Flex Your Rights video is not geared toward hiding illegal activity. It is geared toward giving the police no more information than that to which they are legally entitled. There are enough laws on the books that, intentionally or not, you’re probably breaking some.

    Any argument against the video smells, to me, of “if you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide.”

  32. #32 |  Stephen | 

    #26 | Steve Verdon | May 28th, 2010 at 11:53 am

    ” If your kid comes after me or my kid on MY property, I will shoot it myself.

    There fixed it for you. People after all are far, far more deadly than dogs. So get your kids on a leash.”

    From Wikipedia (whatever that is worth)

    On March 27, 2007, Governor Rick Perry signed Senate Bill 378 into law, making Texas a “Castle Doctrine” state which came into effect September 1, 2007.[230] Residents lawfully occupying a dwelling may shoot a person who “unlawfully, and with force, enters or attempts to enter the dwelling”, or who removes or attempts to remove someone from that dwelling, or who commits or attempts to commit a “qualifying” felony such as burglary, arson, rape, aggravated assault, robbery or murder. In addition, a shooter who has a legal right to be wherever he/she is at the time of a defensive shooting has no “duty to retreat” before being justified in shooting; the “trier of fact” may not consider whether the person retreated when deciding whether the person was justified in shooting.

    So yeah, I guess I could shoot your kid too under the right circumstances. Although if he/she is smaller than me, I would probably just kick their ass.

    I would fear a 60 lb dog more than a 60 lb kid. A 6’3” 210 lb 17 yr old might get shot if they don’t back off when I pull the gun.

  33. #33 |  PW | 

    It shouldn’t come as any surprise, but take a look at what this cop did to a bunch of cows while employed as a dairy worker in between police jobs and a a stint in the army:

    http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2010/may/27/14/bond-set-worker-accused-cow-abuse-video-ar-90364/

  34. #34 |  John Wilburn | 

    @Cynical in CA

    You know, Cynical, I think you’d be surprised at how much I agree with (some of ) your views – the problem is not your message, it’s your delivery…

    Condescension, arrogance, name-calling, cheap shots, etc., are not received in a favorable light, by anyone, and certainly don’t win arguments – what they do, is convince your adversary that they are dealing with a wayward 12-year-old, who isn’t worth troubling themselves over. This may be why you’re feeling some resistance (anti-anarchism) to your views.

    I’m abundantly aware of the actions of the government, how step 1 for any government is to enact laws that protect the government and its lackeys from the consequences of its / their actions (to over-simplify things) and step 2 is to enact so many laws that citizens are guilty of something. (I read “Atlas Shrugged” also – probably before you were born).

    (This is the result of citizens not watching these government employed assholes, and requiring a close accounting from them. (Giving the keys for the chicken house to the fox, because he says “I’ll take care of it.”))

    (A society of law-abiding citizens has no need of a government…)

    My statement “someone needs to explain…” was rhetorical. It is extremely arrogant of you to assume (as you often do, judging from your comments) that I, or anyone else, need you to explain how things work – it’s conceivable that you aren’t nearly so clever as you think – especially since you’re simply repeating ideas, theories and points of view that have been espoused by others (your views aren’t original)…

    You define anarchism as an arrangement where people voluntarily and peacefully co-exist in a mutually beneficial society, where no one compels anyone else to do anything they don’t wish to do – this is a legitimate (although rarely used) definition for the word, in a theoretical sense, at least.

    (A guy named Lenin once (forcibly) created a society based on similar ideals – I won’t bore you with how that turned out…)

    The problem is that most people understand the word anarchism in its most common use, which has decidedly negative connotations (chaos, disruption, disorder, etc.), which compels you to interrupt your own dissertations, in order to explain, “No, I mean the OTHER kind of anarchism…”

    (Incidentally, that creative little “lesson” of yours – “an = no” (actually, it means “not” or “without”) “arch = ruler” (actually, it means “chief”) “ism = system” (bingo!) “Anarchism = a system where there is no ruler,” supports, in equal measure, the common definition of anarchism (chaos, disruption, disorder, etc.))

    I believe in EXTREMELY limited government – but I do believe that some “civil service” is necessary. Even enforcement of a very short list of laws (limited to punishing actions committed by one person, against another). I have little faith in people choosing to “do the right thing” when it comes to social-interaction. History dictates that people will abuse their fellow man as often and as much as they can get away with it…

    I also believe in Mr. Jefferson’s position that citizens need, periodically, to remind our (limited) government, not to piss us off – we have guns…

    Pax…

  35. #35 |  InMd | 

    At #29

    I found it similarly disappointing. Sometimes I think that Americans are some of the most cowardly and determinedly unsophisticated people on the planet.

    By the way I think people constantly referring to public schools as “government schools” sound idiotic. That criticism has merit when it’s aimed at the Department of Education and federal initiatives but considering that public schools in the United States are primarily run at the local level (in Maryland they’re almost totally funded by county property taxes) I’ve never understood the idea that they are some sort of wild overreach by a distant government. For the most part they’re run at the level where government in my experience is most accountable and individuals have the most say. Now obviously the local level lends itself (as with local police departments) to the most reactionary whims of the populace but when things are done at that scale it’s easy to escape. The dumb crap they do in the public school districts in other parts of this country have no impact on anyone who doesn’t want to be impacted as opposed to federal regulations which are unavoidable.

  36. #36 |  Daniel Veazey | 

    I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but “Dr Domino dominorum et Rex rexarum, Simplis Christianus Puer Mentalis Doctor, reincarnation of Jesus Christ of Nazareth” is my PS3 gamer tag. Odd.

  37. #37 |  nemo | 

    A long time ago, when on active duty, I was sent to Holland as part of the yearly war games, and got to speak with Dutch police about the quasi-legal cannabis system they had. The Rijkpolitie officer on counter-terrorism duty I spoke with said they were being up front about it all because the older generation had deep memories about what life was like when the Nazis were there. He said that, quote: “My father told me what happened during that time, and we will not do that to ourselves.

    Well, IMHO, we here in Uh-merikah seem hell bent on ‘doing it to ourselves’, partly because we haven’t been inoculated by having raw, pure fascism rammed down our throats instead of the aspartame-flavored, velvet-touch crypto-fascism we endure today. The way things are going, we might well have a kind of re-awakening to the joys of civil liberties again…but not until a lot of people wind up as ‘statistics’.

  38. #38 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #34 | John Wilburn — “You know, Cynical, I think you’d be surprised at how much I agree with (some of ) your views – the problem is not your message, it’s your delivery…”

    Touche John, you’re right, I get bored sometimes and like to vent. I’ll try to tone it down a notch, although I don’t think I’m as rude as you make me out to be — easy for me to say.

    At the end of the day, I’m just a proponent of ideas, they’re not my ideas per se. Thanks for letting me know that the messenger is part of the message.

  39. #39 |  Tom G | 

    @25, Cynical in CA – have to agree about the term “anarchist”; although I’ve sometimes used other terms, I am unafraid of that one. For the same reason, I refer to myself as an atheist rather than a humanist or a “Bright”.
    (for me personally, anarchy is a goal to be striven for but unlikely to be achieved in real life in my lifetime. Classical liberalism, otoh, is a political state that I’d be willing to settle for AT A MINIMUM in terms of personal freedoms, which could definitely be reached if those who claim to value freedom really meant what they said).

  40. #40 |  TDR | 

    Too bad about the false witchcraft prosecutions, but there are a lot of real (so to speak) shamans in Africa that should definitely be prosecuted. The very same ones that preached to thousands of men that they could get rid of HIV by raping women and having unprotected sex.

  41. #41 |  Cynical in CA | 

    @ John: Year of birth — 1967. Year of reading Atlas Shrugged — 2005.

  42. #42 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Last @ John: sarcasm is very difficult to discern in writing (unless Dave Krueger is doing the writing!); thus when I am sarcastic, I close my posts with the “/sarcasm” tag to inform readers. I was oblivious to your tone in your earlier comments, my bad, but please forgive the common error.

    I don’t mean to make enemies of those who believe in limited government, I think we’re all trying to find the margin where government is just as big as it needs to be. Jefferson also said that government should be as small as possible — I simply take it to its logical conclusion that as small as possible means reduced to the individual level. I think we can agree that the system as presently constituted is unsustainable regarding individual freedom.

    Here’s to a more constructive dialogue.

  43. #43 |  Dakota | 

    @15

    So what. Getting a felony possession with intent to distribute (for as little as a half ounce in VA) can be 10 years in prison.

    No amount of pot smoking will do more damage to an 18 year old then doing a dime in prison. Sorry.

  44. #44 |  Aresen | 

    ka | May 28th, 2010 at 10:52 am
    I’m sorry, but almost the entire original Flex Your Rights video is geared toward hiding illegal behavior. It is good to know your rights and if they had made a video to teach people that it would have been fine. I bought that video to show the kids I am involved with, but after previewing it realized I couldn’t show it to them. Very disappointing.

    Given the propensity of police to “find” evidence where there is none and invoke Civil Asset Forefeiture, I would say you are being incredibly naive. When the police are chosen solely from among the angels, then I might buy your argument. Even then, however, I would point to the fact that there are so many laws on the books that it is virtually impossible for anyone not in a coma to go through a day without breaking one.

  45. #45 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #39 | Tom G — ” have to agree about the term “anarchist”; although I’ve sometimes used other terms, I am unafraid of that one. For the same reason, I refer to myself as an atheist rather than a humanist or a “Bright”.”

    I’m partial to “rational” myself. I don’t use “atheist” because it frames the debate in my opponent’s terms. Of course, the antonym of rational isn’t exactly conducive to friend-making, but what the hey. Politics and religion, after all….

  46. #46 |  Tom G | 

    Cynical – Rational works fine too. In fact, I was always annoyed with Star Trek (mainly Spock) insisting that Vulcans were “logical” as opposed to “rational”. I knew the difference when I was watching original series re-runs in the late 1970s (in high school).

  47. #47 |  John Wilburn | 

    @Cynical in Ca

    Year of birth – 1954 – year of reading “Atlas Shrugged” – 1967

    Now that we understand each other a little better, we can be friends…

    Sincerest apologies for any blood I may have drawn…

    Pax…

  48. #48 |  Kevin | 

    #44 | Aresen “I would point to the fact that there are so many laws on the books that it is virtually impossible for anyone not in a coma to go through a day without breaking one.”

    Case in point – I broke at least 3 laws today while driving to and from lunch.

  49. #49 |  Jon Gray | 

    OT: Rand Paul apparently opposes giving the citizenship to children born in the US unless they have a parent who is a citizen.

    http://bluegrasspolitics.bloginky.com/2010/05/28/paul-opposes-citizenship-for-babies-of-illegals/

    Disclaimer: I have only read the article. I’m at work and can’t watch the video.

  50. #50 |  MikeZ | 

    “I can’t call that puppycide. The dogs were already aggressive and were loose. He captured one, but when they other was got away with the potential to run into another victim – to wait for a tranquilizer gun would have been wrong. Can you imagine the outrage, if the dog found a 2 year old an ripped him apart while the officer was waiting for a tranquilizer gun? The officer was in a bad situation and made the best decision he could. I would commend him on capturing one before resorting to deadly force.”

    Personally I think my problems with this are more with him being an unqualified animal control officer. Shouldn’t a designated Animal Control officer that we are paying to Control Animals be able to stop a dog? They probably should be able to do it without a tranq gun, but should the need arise they should definitely know how to use their own tools. I found it interesting they they didn’t mention anyone getting bit here. I’m pretty sure they would have mentioned that in the article. So perhaps the animals were being aggressive but the toddler and her grandmother were able to call police and wait for them to come without harm. So it doesn’t quite sound like “cujo aggressive” here. As a last point, somehow the dog’s remains were destroyed and nobody knows how. If they are incompetent enough to accidentally cremate your dog it doesn’t seem like a stretch that the animal control officer was incompetent enough to escalate the situation to where the dog needed to be put down.

  51. #51 |  matt | 

    Reading the comments on the puppycide link I’m amazed my entire family hasn’t been killed and eaten by our pit bulls….

  52. #52 |  Stephen | 

    #33 | PW |

    So.. he has to stay away from animals but he can still be a cop. At first I thought “wow” but on reflection I guess that is normal these days.

  53. #53 |  Philly Girl | 

    The cop that shot Bella has stated that he never saw any aggression. Witnesses to the incident have stated that they did not see any aggression from Bella.

    Some people are super afraid of dogs, no matter what size or temperament. I would bet the woman who called the police was fearful of Bella, but that Bella was actually not aggressive toward her and the children.

  54. #54 |  Rick H. | 

    PW (#33):
    Jesus F. Christ. That dairy farm video was horrible. It sent me into a nuclear rage. For scumbags like Gary Conklin and his gang of hired filth, no punishment is too cruel or unusual. They should all suffer.

  55. #55 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    #42 Cynical:

    “don’t mean to make enemies of those who believe in limited government, I think we’re all trying to find the margin where government is just as big as it needs to be. Jefferson also said that government should be as small as possible — I simply take it to its logical conclusion that as small as possible means reduced to the individual level. I think we can agree that the system as presently constituted is unsustainable regarding individual freedom.”

    Well said, Cynical. And I certainly agree w/ you about the current system being unsustainable.

    This is heady, complicated stuff, and no one is going to agree on every single aspect of it. If people learn to, by and large, take care of themselves and their families, and government is forced (by an informed, engaged population, and some civil disobedience when necessary) to stay out of people’s affairs IF they are not ripping people off or putting others in danger, we will be well on our way. But limiting government is the job of the people, not politicians. But if people don’t want to step up, we will keep taking one step forward and two steps back.

  56. #56 |  Judi | 

    #13 | Sean L. | May 28th, 2010 at 10:40 am
    A public service announcement

    Why can’t Helen Keller drive?

    She’s a woman.

    No Sean, it was because she attended the Stevie Wonder School of Driving.

  57. #57 |  Cynical in CA | 

    “But if people don’t want to step up, we will keep taking one step forward and two steps back.”

    With statements like these, hopefully becoming more and more common and mainstream, there may be some hope Helmut.

  58. #58 |  ZappaCrappa | 

    Re: puppycide: Sounds to me like the cop just ran out of patience. Sigh…yet ONCE A-FREAKING-GAIN…I work with dogs on a daily basis. Food. Huh? You know…treats? I use them to my advantage regularly. I can get dogs to pretty much do whatever I want them to…go where ever I want them to go using food/treats. Freaking duh. I knew that BEFORE I was working with dogs. Why is interaction with dogs such a damn mystery to the police? Radley? You have dogs. Let me guess….treats/food is the BIGGEST attention getter in your house isn’t it? It is mine. My dogs even understand the words “treat”, “Pancake” “waffles”, “eggs”, and a few more…seriously. Wow…who would have guessed…dogs like food. What a revelation!

    Maybe I should start a program in training the police in canine interaction…lesson one…this is a dog….a bark doesn’t mean it wants to eat you so put your gun away please. Try sticking your hand out with your fingers curled inward for a start so the dog can smell you and determine if you are a complete asshole or just one when you put the uniform on. Next lesson subject..A ball in the mouth and a wagging tail are NOT aggressive canine actions so put your gun away again.

  59. #59 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    Zappa Crappa: “Maybe I should start a program in training the police in canine interaction”

    Sounds like an excellent idea. I’ve been saying for some time that a course like this should be mandatory in the academy. It wouldn’t certify every officer to be animal control, but it would at least explain the basics.

  60. #60 |  matt | 

    To balance your puppycide I hereby present a link for your viewing pleasure.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSywiwgC4Dk&feature=player_embedded

Leave a Reply