Police fetch high-powered rifle to kill family dog at child's birthday party


Police thinking is now always, always, us vs. them. everybody is packing a gun, all dogs are vicious, you can’t ask a dog owner to control/leash/lock up the dog (they’ll probably order it to attack as soon as you enter the premises!), any movement (even if in response to your own request) is a “lunge” for a weapon.


Interestingly, research is showing the opposite: people who get an apology are less likely to pursue legal options because they feel “heard” and respected.


And I see you’ve covered my point already, and done a better job of it!


The problem is, that’s how women do it. Men (in the U.S.) are raised to never apologize like that. The greater crime is acting like a woman…we can’t have that, especially in our law enforcement. Better to shoot first, and never sympathize.


Shit. If you’re a human being lying on your back with your hands way up in the air, you can still get shot.

Serial killers tend to start with animals, I guess it’s no different with cops.


I was going to include a bit about that male/female difference (apparently it obtains also in the UK) but didn’t see the relevance here.

But now I do, and I’m sorry (you feel that way).


“The first rule of modern U.S. police training is that you are a soldier in enemy territory.



Quite right too. Threatening to pull the sky down on the cops like that.


Eh, not all men? I was taught to take responsibility for my mistakes (own them), and apologize for them. I’ve seen that attitude both in business issues and on other forums, and the general consensus is that it takes a bigger man to admit when they are wrong.

They never admit when they are wrong because lawsuits and criminal charges.

Though I just read an article about medical doctors making mistakes and admitting they were wrong and it resulted they were LESS likely to get sued.

And here is your example. The video I saw the guy said he asked the cop why, and he said he didn’t know. That and he hit his leg tells me it may have been unintentional. But they won’t ever admit that. But still, inexcusable.

Also, can we hold people accountable for false calls to the cops? I think they did for that guy who called in about a dude with a gun in walmart, when it was an airsoft gun off the shelf.

“I respect what the police do"

Let’s stop saying we respect the police until they change their way of doing business. The fuck.

People who say that aren’t fully informed and they’re mimicking other people’s behavior because they think that’s what a good citizen does.

And why does the press continue to be complicit by enabling?

The police officer used a high-powered rifle he retrieved from his police vehicle to put the dog down.

How about: The police officer used a high-powered rifle he retrieved from his police vehicle to shoot and kill the dog.

ETA: my rephrasing is a little misleading because it looks like the officer initially shot the dog with a pistol then went to the car and came back with the rifle to finish the dog off. I’d say the phrase “putting down” is not totally wrong for that case. The officer may have seen finishing the dog off as a responsible or even kind act. Except: why was the officer deciding whether an already-shot-and-disabled dog was killed? Did he ask the owner? And, of course, he shouldn’t have shot anything in the first place.


We need to disarm the police. And not just the guns, I mean literally chop off their arms because they can’t be trusted not to murder innocent people and animals with whatever tool is available to them.


You’re right, that’s appalling. “That phrase, it does not mean what you think”


I am surprised that more people don’t kill police in situations like these. “They pulled out a gun and threatened my family” is a pretty basic case of defense. “The guy in the blue suit grabbed me with one hand, and put his other on a pistol, so I feared for my life”. Case closed!


Even in that scenario, the local PD would see to it that your life was taken away, whether literally or through a looooong prison sentence.

The police are a protected class and for good reason. It’s just that some officers take gross advantage of their protected status.


I was also raised this way. However, I will say that we are vastly in the minority in this regard. The current American male zeitgeist is that apologizing is a sign of weakness, and to never own up to their mistakes, because that is also a sign of weakness, and that, while it may be a sign of being a “bigger man” to own up to their mistakes, the “biggest man” never makes mistakes. At all. Or at the very least, never admits to having made a mistake. Because that’s a sign of weakness. And so forth.


This sounds like the difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity.


That’s presuming that they have the good will of the community. Is it the PD against one person? Or one family? Or a whole neighborhood? Each of those scenarios could play out differently. And in any case, the PD don’t issue prison sentences.

Talk about creating your own problems! There is never a good reason for a classist society. A big factor in why officers act this way is because they intimidate the populace into letting them, and offering no effective resistance.


Is this really a male trait, or a human trait?

I think most people to a degree try to dodge getting in trouble. They make excuses, it isn’t their fault, they had circumstances, etc. Others just insist they were never wrong. There are a variety of tactics.


Like doctors who make mistakes and would like to apologize, policemen are put in an impossible situation: any admission of wrongdoing, guilt, culpability,remourse-has a legal dimension that reflects on the larger institution. They are legally enjoined from expressing their conscience.


Pretty much. Toxic masculinity is completely externalized, being dependent on actions and outside perceptions. That makes it incredibly easy to threaten. Look at any of the Red Pill and MRA sites–they’re so insecure in their masculinity that they need constant reinforcement that their actions are actually masculine by the judgement of their peers who are every bit as insecure as themselves.