Seriously? You’re joking right? Who thinks like that? You couldn’t find your own little girl? :rolleyes:
4.7 million people are attacked by dogs in this country every year.
I suppose the officer should just ask the animal to explain its motivation in charging him, then? I mean, I knew we were already expecting cops to be fearless, telepathic, and precognizant, but I didn’t know we’d added “dog whisperer” to the list of job requirements.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I guess it’s possible that this particular cop was racist against canids and woke up every day hoping he would get a chance to shoot a dog.
Pepper spray isn’t usually located on an officer’s belt in a location where it can conveniently be quick-drawn. In the time it takes to withdraw and fire, the dog is already on you.
No, this seems like a pretty cut-and-dry case of the police actually making the wrong call.
Then what use is it? I belive you are mistaken.
Hell, if that was true the postman wouldn’t even carry pepper spray.
My kids are grown but I would tell them to assume that every cop is a raving maniac murderer unless proven otherwise and that you never give them a reason to shoot you even if they’re being total assholes.
Yes it is. Here’s a bog standard duty belt. Where else would their spray be ? In a lockbox in the cruiser’s trunk ? They need that shit on hand for the exact same reason they need quick access to their handcuffs, baton, flashlight and, yes, gun : to be able to pull them out as rapidly as possible when the need arises, i.e. when “charged” by a big goofy dog.
And how many get their femoral artery cut in the process ?
Because, you know, NO ONE EVER has had the ability to react with a kick or a hand to prevent a dog from jumping at them, right?
And no, of course a POLICE OFFICER shouldn’t be expected to do that, right? They have GUNS. Their first and only response should be to KILL. Every. Damned. Time. Right?
You seem to be stuck in this action movie mentality where the “good guy” is only allowed to use force proportional to what the “bad guy” is using, and he’s only allowed to escalate if the bad guy does so first. Considering that you seem to expect police officers to be action movie heroes who laugh in the face of death, no-sell injuries that would leave mortal men begging for mercy, and show absolutely no concern for their own safety or well-being, I suppose that’s par for the course.
In the real world, if something is a threat to your life or well-being, you are fully entitled to use all available resources at your disposal to neutralize that threat, and you are in no way obligated to make it a fair fight.
Just go ahead and get that #DogLivesMatter hashtag going viral already. And just be honest and throw in #CopsLivesDont while you’re at it.
Oh sure. Cops never have to risk so much as a paper cut. Better to just shoot everything that moves until it stops moving. After all, there is no living creature more important than a cop.
And that is actually quite true, in the mind of a cop.
I know it’s hard for you to believe, but cops are, in fact, human beings. They have the same feelings and emotions that you have, and all they want to do is do their job and go home and get paid so they can support themselves and their families, just like you.
It’s true that the job they do inherently means putting themselves at greater risk of bodily harm than most occupations do. They accept that. That’s part of the job. Your insistence that they shouldn’t take any action whatsoever to prevent that harm coming to them, and that they should respond to any hostile action by curling up into a ball and waiting for death, is beyond the pale.
Nobody is saying that. The postman feels exactly the same as a cop about not getting bit by a fucking dog.
But he uses pepper spray. Because just shooting every dog that attacks (on the dogs own turf) is an idiotic way to act.
I question that they are at greater risk of bodily harm than most. If they get to fill the air with lead every time they sense danger, they’re actually quite safe. You seem to be excluding the middle ground between doing nothing and awaiting death and emptying your gun at everything that make you the least bit frightened. If your first and only reaction to a dog is to shoot, you’re a coward and a fool.
You assume they possess a right to self-defense that you do not.
You are incorrect.
It’s better to be a live fool than a dead genius.
Excuse me, but exactly how many of those 4.7 million alleged dog attacks resulted in deaths?
And I’d say it’s better to be a slightly injured Human than be a sociopath that routinely kills others out of “fear”.
Maybe Smapti is right. Maybe cops should shoot little girls when attacked by dogs.
42 last year.
How many dog-induced fatalities would you consider to be an “acceptable” number?
Ah, yes, good. We are narrowing the quantification of the margin of risk justifying deadly force. We now know that a 0.00008% risk of deadly injury* is enough to warrant blowing anybody away in the general vicinity.
Smapti, when are you going to suddenly realize that you’re clinically insane ?
- it’s probably much lower in actuality, as I expect the specifics of these 42 fatalities involved either small children/infants, very old people and isolated people bleeding out without attention or help ; which obviously don’t apply here.