Choking dog officer receives death threats, page 10
Pages: <<  7    8    9    10    11  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 27-8-2008 @ 09:34 AM by LLoyd45
If you guys cannot see where these two people were acting irresponsibly after ten pages of postings, you probably never will. I don't care if it's Lassie or Rin Tin tin choking in the backseat of the vehicle, it doesn't justify risking human lives to save them. If it's really necessary that someone explain to you why a person's life trumps that of an animal, then you need to rearrange your priorities and seek some spiritual and psychological counseling.

Pets are wonderful to own, and may afford a great deal of comfort to lonely individuals with no social outlets to speak of, but in the final analysis, they're still only animals. I'm not saying they're not entitled to good care, but there's a limit.

The officer acted appropriately in my opinion, and it was the city officials, and the community at large that overreacted. If I were him I'd find another job, and stop wasting my time trying to protect morons.

Rather than thanking him for trying to keep the roads safe for them and their families, they instead criticize and threaten him. I guess it's true what they say.. "No good deed goes unpunished." His words may have been harsh, but they're understandable given the erratic behavior of the dog's owners. The dog was already dead going by the tape, so I'm not sure what the emergency was.

Maybe if they had been more responsible they could have tried to save their pet themselves. It's not that hard to figure out what to do when someone is choking. Try to clear the airway obstruction, not drive thirty miles to a vet clinic.

You can disagree all you like with me, but that's how I feel..


reply posted on 27-8-2008 @ 02:45 PM by chise61
reply to post by Sonya610


I think the reason that children get bit in the face so often is because they have a tendency to put their face in a dog's face, which is why my aunt's dog bit me in the face i was on the stairs next to her petting her, but had my face in front of her's talking to her. My aunt had warned me to get away from her face like that, but i didn't believe she would bite me. I have the same problem with my grandaughter (she's 7) no matter how much i tell her that a dog sees that as a challange she just can't comprehend it and always want's to be hanging on them and in their faces. My son and i are constantly telling her about being on the dogs to much, but it's hard for children to understand they may get bit which is why it's so important for the adults in the household to make sure that the children are always supervised with any animals.


I know another big problem is that some people don't seem to understand that a dog will never see a small child as an alpha and therefore that child is always at a risk of being bit.

You're right a household with small children is not a proper household for a doberman and a lot of other breeds.


I've also heard about pits being very protective of the children in the family. My dog that recently had to be put down was a big 80 + lb male Shepard/ Pit mix, we had him since he was 5 weeks old, some idiot sold him way before he was old enough to be taken away from his mother and then the lady decided she didn't want him anymore so she brought him into the pet store where my oldest son worked and we took him in. Anyway he was the SWEETEST dog you'd ever see, never in his life even so much as growled at a child, but he was so protective over my grandchildren if my son raised his voice to the kids he would jump in front of the kids and yell at my son.


If people would take the time to really learn about dogs,pick the approppriate breed for their family, understand that ANY animal is capable of biting, and actually supervise their children around the dogs there would be far less attacks on children. It makes me sick the amount of children and dogs that suffer needlessly simply because the adults that bring these dogs into their house don't have a clue about how to live with them.



reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 05:09 PM by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


The officer was actually doing the man a favor, he could have arrested the man for wreckless driving.


Spoken like a true police apologist. Maybe he should have arrested the guy as a suspected terrorist while he was at it.

Wreckless driving is wreckless driving. Speeding is speeding. But of course "he might have killed someone" right? So maybe the next time you get caught speeding, the charge should be attempted murder?


EDIT to add: And by the way, that's coming from someone who hates dogs.

[edit on 8/31/0808 by jackinthebox]


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 05:35 PM by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


The officer was actually doing the man a favor, he could have arrested the man for wreckless driving.


Spoken like a true police apologist. Maybe he should have arrested the guy as a suspected terrorist while he was at it.

Wreckless driving is wreckless driving. Speeding is speeding. But of course "he might have killed someone" right? So maybe the next time you get caught speeding, the charge should be attempted murder?


EDIT to add: And by the way, that's coming from someone who hates dogs.

Excuse me??

What I stated is FACT. Going 25 m.p.h. over the posted speed limit is wreckless driving.

Do you have a problem with facts sir?

I also like how you edited out the main part, (bolded), of my post:

"Many people forget that their rights end where another person's rights begin."

Meaning, the other people on the highway have a right to not have their safety jeopardized by some dude driving at 95 mph without lights and sirens.

You point out where what I said is factually incorrect.



reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 06:09 PM by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


What I stated is FACT. Going 25 m.p.h. over the posted speed limit is wreckless driving.


Is this a fact in that jurisdiction? And wasn't it only 20 over in this case? The only state I found that considers speeding alone to be wreckless driving is Virginia.

EDIT to respond to:


"Many people forget that their rights end where another person's rights begin."


This much I could agree with to a large extent. And if anyone had been injured, or otherwise deprived of their "rights" as a result, then I would argue in their favor. If they had run someone over racing their dog to the hospital, and speed had been a factor, then they should be punished accordingly.

But what if they had hit someone and they weren't speeding at all? But instead were merely distracted by the fear of losing their dog?



[edit on 8/31/0808 by jackinthebox]


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 06:33 PM by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


What I stated is FACT. Going 25 m.p.h. over the posted speed limit is wreckless driving.


Is this a fact in that jurisdiction? And wasn't it only 20 over in this case? The only state I found that considers speeding alone to be wreckless driving is Virginia.

1. The speed limit on I-35 is 65 mph, the person was doing 95.

2. "§ 545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE. (a) A person
commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in wilful or
wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.
(b) An offense under this section is a misdemeanor
punishable by:
(1) a fine not to exceed $200;
(2) confinement in county jail for not more than 30
days; or
(3) both the fine and the confinement.
(c) Notwithstanding Section 542.001, this section applies
to:
(1) a private access way or parking area provided for a
client or patron by a business, other than a private residential
property or the property of a garage or parking lot for which a
charge is made for the storing or parking of motor vehicles; and
(2) a highway or other public place.
(d) Notwithstanding Section 542.004, this section applies
to a person, a team, or motor vehicles and other equipment engaged
in work on a highway surface.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995."

Reckless Driving TX

Now, generally 25 mph over the posted speed limit is reckless driving, or in adverse conditions it can be lower than 25 over. Heavy rain, ice, snow etc.

Now, let's say that isn't the law for arguments sake. What that person did was still endangering the lives possibly of other HUMANS on the road to save his dog. The other people using I-35 that day had the right to get from point A to B without some person driving 95 mph without lights and a siren on their car.

I love animals, dogs especially, but it's very careless to endanger the lives of people in my car and other drivers to go that fast on a highway. The man deserved to be pulled over.

In fact, the officer would have been derelict in his duties to make that stretch of highway safe had he not pulled the man over. I love dogs dude, but what he did was very careless and in complete disregard for other people on the highway.


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 06:41 PM by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


Okay, I'll meet you halfway there, and say that I do see your point.

I don't know that stretch of road, but I would venture a guess that going that fast on a lonely Texas highway in the middle of the night is not what most people would consider to be "wreckless" with a wanton disregard for human life. HOWEVER, I do see why the officer would pull the people over. Actually giving them a ticket though? And in such a manner as to have "wanton disregard" for these people's feelings?

EDIT to add: And by the way, there are highways around here that I would consider it "wreckless" to drive on even if you do follow the rules.


[edit on 8/31/0808 by jackinthebox]


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 06:49 PM by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


Okay, I'll meet you halfway there, and say that I do see your point.

I don't know that stretch of road, but I would venture a guess that going that fast on a lonely Texas highway in the middle of the night is not what most people would consider to be "wreckless" with a wanton disregard for human life. HOWEVER, I do see why the officer would pull the people over. Actually giving them a ticket though? And in such a manner as to have "wanton disregard" for these people's feelings?
I mean, it is a sad story indeed, no one wants to lose their family pet. But there are two sides to all stories, the police officer was doing his job too. People can't go that fast on highways without lights and sirens, it's not safe whatsoever. Even if it were a secluded highway a person on a perpendicular road might pull out on front of his not realizing the motorist was going that fast. See what I mean?

of course it's tragic, but in all honesty, the officer was doing his job. The man can't go that fast, it endangers others.


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 06:51 PM by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


Well, technically it's not the speed that kills, it's the sudden stop.


reply posted on 31-8-2008 @ 07:05 PM by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jackinthebox


Hahaha!!! You get a star for appealing to my desire for precision!


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 04:23 PM by jackinthebox
reply to post by NOTurTypical


In the overall scheme of things, I wish the police didn't pull people over for speeding. Give it a few years and the people would start relying on their own common sense, instead of being "fearful" of a ticket.

Take safety inspections for example. Here in NY we have to pay to have our vehicle inspected every year, and be subjected to road blocks supposedly to check that we have done that. If we haven't, you'll wind up paying a fine at the very least, and probably get your car searched. The stickers are bright color-coded by year, so that they can be spotted from a distance too. All this in the name of "safety."

Meanwhile, out in Colorado, they don't even have safety inspections at all. Is this because Colorado doesn't value life? No, it's because they do value freedom and the responsibilies that go along with it.

Then again back here in NY, you see how stupid the inspections are anyway. Shops giving a pass to cars with bald tires, brakes that go out a month after they were inspected, etc.

EDIT to add: When I am driving, the last person I expect to be looking out for my safety is a cop. I know full well that there are plenty of people out there who don't give a poop about paying a speeding ticket in the first place. So it only punishes the poor. Then of course there are all the dangers that the police themselves cause. Not a day goes by that I don't see at least one cruiser travelling at very high speeds, without running code.



[edit on 9/1/0808 by jackinthebox]
Pages: <<  7    8    9    10    11  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 6 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 7 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 18 days ago with 67 member flags
Renowned Geophysicist Says Strange Sky Sounds Are Real
  Posted 1 days ago with 56 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 6 days ago with 49 member flags