Considering that’s one fatality per 100,000 dog attacks, and less than 1/20th of the number of people killed by police, it seems it’s pretty much a non-factor.
Right, so if I’m attacked by a dog, I should offer no resistance that would any way harm the animal, because it’s statistically unlikely that it will be able to kill me.
About the same number as I would consider police shootings of nonviolent people.
Prairie View, Texas, the site of Sandra Bland’s arrest, is in the news again. Another tasing of an unarmed person who hadn’t committed any crime. City councilman this time. http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/texas-police-use-taser-on-city-councilman/
When a clinician diagnoses me as such. “Refusing to allow a dangerous animal to kill you” is not yet considered to be grounds for a finding of insanity, so far as I am aware.
Disingenuous asshole much? Get off my fucking planet already.
As I said just above, other physical means of self-defense are possible without discharging a firearm in a situation likely to (and in the case above, very definitely did) injure innocent children and bystanders.
DEATH should not be the first response to every situation.
If I am in danger and I am in possession of the means by which to permanently eliminate that danger, then I am in no way required to not use it simply because I also am in possession of a means which might eliminate that danger at a greater risk to myself if it fails to do so. The US was not obligated to not nuke Japan because a ground invasion might have been successful.
Your phrasing implies that there was a previous “tasing of an unarmed person who hadn’t committed any crime”, which, if you’re referring to the Bland affair, is a blatant falsehood.
It’s also a blatant falsehood in reference to this affair, in which the “victim” is interfering in a police investigation which he is not a party to and where he believes that being an elected official means he’s above the law.
Right, because it’s either shoot to kill or quietly wait for death.
Might be a while for that miniature Poodle. Better bring a book.
Well, I admit my phrasing was a little sloppy there, but I was referring to the many, many times in America where an unarmed person who hadn’t committed any crime was tased. I do concede that Sandra Bland did not switch on that turn signal.
And asking questions of the police is still not a crime. Yet.
Well, as has been pointed out, some cops are bullies and assholes who like to fuck with people while on the job (and off-duty);* it’s probably why they are cops in the first place.* So they basically can get away with it. Video is changing that.
So, dogs kill less people than cops. 42? Cops probably do that in a couple of weeks. But this is acceptable because almost everyone shot by a cop did something to deserve it.
Ironically this is Smapti’s actual advice for dealing with the police.
It’s not that cop’s lives don’t matter, it’s that what you write seems to indicate that to you, only cop’s lives matter.
Did you even click your own link? Of the 4.7 million dog bites, less than 30 were fatal. Moreover, the cowardly cop wasn’t even bitten – he was probably just barked at. (Which BTW with many dogs, is a signal you’re NOT getting bit!)
So, the chance of grievous injury was akin to the chance of winning a lottery and … cowardly cop fires his weapon, grievously injuring a young girl.
And Smapti defends the cowardly cop. :smack:
Upthread you were implictly asked whether FedEx delivery men should carry guns in case a dog barks at them. Did you ever answer that question?
20 of those were children. Some were elderly adults. Some were disabled adults.
Let’s assume that we don’t let children, the elderly, or disabled adults be police officers.
After reading about the killings, only one adult (a 59-year-old woman) was killed by a single dog. All others were killed after being attached by multiple dogs.
That should be: “only two non-retirement age adults (a 59-year-old woman and a 40-year-old man) were killed by a single dog. All others were killed after being attached by multiple dogs.”
So if they’re still attached, does that mean they had to bury the dogs with the humans?
Well, I know** I** wouldn’t want to be attached to no dog. That sounds like Dr. Moreau stuff.
So we’re now down to a more accurate 0.000005% chance of death as a justification for unquestionable, immediate deadly **Smapti **force - less than 1/1.000.000.
For reference, and I just fucking checked, this is strictly lower than the chance of getting struck by lightning (which is generally-speaking 1/700.000 for the US, although obviously this varies by local climate). SHOOT THE MURDEROUS SKIES !
Were it possible to shoot lightning, I would have no objection to anyone doing so.
Feel free to hashtag #LightningLivesMatter at your convenience.
Actual lives matter, but apparently not to you.