Choking dog officer receives death threats, page 2

reply to post by burdman30ott6

---

.......


...ya know what?.....

...yeah, it's not worth the bad taste it would leave on my posting habits.


On topic.

I would have driven pretty fast to get my dog to a vet. (less enthusiastically for my cat, but, my daughter loves the cat, so I would make a sincere effort) If a cop tried pulling me over, I would dial 9-11 on my cellie and told the dispatcher what my deal was. I would agree to slow down to 10 above the limit, but, I would make no qualms about being arrested at the vets. But I would. Not. Stop.
Sallie Derra, my dog, looks at us as her pack. We ARE her family no matter WHAT Mr. Emotionless up there above me thinks. Dogs carry a pack mentality, as all dogs do, and my dogs pack is my wife (Alpha Female), my daughter (pack sister) and myself, the Alpha Male. We communicate with, nurture each other with, wrassle with and exist with EMOTION.
The dog has emotions, as do my wife, kid and myself. (Maybe the cat too. )

I don't think the cop needs to be threatened. I think he caught some crap from his superiors for being insensitive and handling it badly, but, threatening to harm him? That's a bit over the top. But, his actions speak very, VERY loudly about the training police are receiving that lean towards a more militaristic nature. They are trained to "Turn it on" to maintain control over any situation. There's little room for immediate compassion when the cop is "Turned on". It's not part of the "On". They are trained and conditioned to analyze and assess any threats that may present itself. It's a process.
Sucks it has to be there. At least with a call to 9-11, the cop chasing me has an idea what I'm up to and my motive is not to evade arrest.
There ain't no Andy Taylor Sheriffin' no more, Ope.

My $.02
Cuhail

Originally posted by danj3ris
reply to post by burdman30ott6

---

burdman30ott6, the fact that you scientifically know that highways aren't built for safe travel at 95 MPH means very little here, and your insensitivity towards the driver in this case is sickening.

They had a reason for speeding as fast as they were. They had a reason for placing human life in jeopardy. Whether or not it was a good reason is an argument you cannot win. There is a large portion of the human population that sees a family pet as being part of the family, and as part of the family its life is worth putting above others.

Then there's a large portion of the human population that needs to get some perspective in their life. They had a reason for placing human life in jeopardy, a reason which some might see as a good reason but which the law does not... so it's supposed to be OK? Uh, alright we'll dance to that tune for awhile then. I'm sure the guy who crashes into a family doing 95 because he's running late for work and is afraid he'll lose his job if he's late again has what, at least to him and probably others, seems like a very good reason to speed. How about the person who's speeding because they just let themselves get a little carried away with the old lead foot? Seems like they'd probably argue that momentary lapse of attention was an OK reason to be speeding. How about the guy who's heading home for a nooner, tell me most red blooded American males wouldn't consider that a good reason to be speeding!

My point is, none of that matters... they are all excuses for why someone is breaking the law and jeopardizing other people's lives recklessly and without regard to anyone else's safety. We call those people selfish, and if they're actions display a complete disregard towards the safety of innocent bystanders and other motorists, then their attitude borderlines on sociopathic. In fact, I'd make the argument that anyone who believes it is a justifiable risk for a person to break the law in this fashion (and in some states, 25 MPH over the speed limit will lose you your license and get you possible jail time.), risking others' lives to save a dog, is mentally deficient and antisocial.

I'll say one thing, however, had I expected this thread to go anywhere and had I anticipated that there would actually be anyone off in the ether far enough to try and defend going 95 MPH to save a dog, I'd have refrained from sharing my opinion on dogs that do body double work for Speedy Gonzalez & Stuart Little. That was poor foresight on my part as it seems I've lost the argument with the small dog contingent not based on whether my argument is logical, but based on a half-hearted commentary against dogs that can be punted across the room by Verne Troyer. For that I apologize to myself for my poor judgement. What can I say? Some folks hate the president, some folks hate cops, I have issues with small, yapping, pinching dogs.

reply to post by silo13

---

If my kids were crossing the street at midnight on the freeway, I'd first wonder what they were doing.

reply to post by silo13

---

"bleeding heart crudolla over animals and start thinking with their heads"

Bad bad attitude, but I guess it's a backyard butcher's attitude, so at least there is consistency. I retract previous remarks about grace and integrity from another thread.

I'm damn sure I would have been doing 95 too, and I would have made sure that every one saw and heard me...high beams, hazards, horns....the works....I wouldn't care how many tickets I got if it was my dog's life in the balance.

Cait

reply to post by burdman30ott6

---

I don't buy that. I've driven 95 on numerous highways in my younger, crazier days. It's definitely fast, but it's not so fast that it can't be controlled.

If the couple was going 80, you wouldn't bat an eye. If they were going 85, you might say it was justified. That extra 10 MPH may be a lot in a school zone, but it's negligible on an open highway.

If it is so unsafe, burdman, why do I regularly see cops pass me going in excess of 85 or 90 MPH without their lights on?

Cops travel that fast so they can catch up to people going 80 and give them a ticket. Are you saying that cops can go 90MPH on a highway to give a ticket (with no lights on) but a family trying to save a dog is being so irresponsible that it makes you log into a board and spew hatred?

[edit on 23-8-2008 by Sublime620]

reply to post by burdman30ott6

---

Your losing the original argument, all those 'excuses' for speeding don't involve the life of a friend, you may consider that stupid, but from what I've seen from your posting, I doubt you have many friends at all. Yes, they are friends, the guy late for work? well work could be his friend I suppose, but it isn't dying is it? you see, your trying to lose valid arguments, in the torrents of your own BS, just as you have an inability to consider things from other people perspective, it doesn't matter if you don't agree or feel this way about animals, point is, they do.

I agree with what you have said about possibly causing an accident, but the way you said it was disgusting and shows the emotionl range of a teaspoon. I really don't like police, I can only speak from my own experience, but majority I have ran into have been power hungry a*!holes, who realised that after school, the power base they'd built up through bullying was about to crumble, so they got a job that gives power, authority and hardly any accountability.

BUT, lets just say that he wasn't, when he pulled them over and discovered it was a dead dog (I agree that he may have been slightly apprehensive about someone shouting she'd dead!), surely he could've shown compassion and 'blue lighted' her to the vet? even if he had given her a ticket there, he could've helped whilst doing his job, but instead, he didn't see it as important to save the dog, that is why people are angry, although death threats are a bit much.

EMM

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by silo13

---

If my kids were crossing the street at midnight on the freeway, I'd first wonder what they were doing.

Spot on, this was on an empty (ish) motorway at midnight, it was still illegal, but everyone claiming that they were stupid for driving that fast, have you even considered that they were only doing 95 because there was know one around? because there was no danger? if it was a built up area, who says they weren't doing the speed limit, maybe they thought to speed on the freeway so they would'nt have to speed through streets packed with cars? sound pretty responsible to me in a sense.

EMM

p.s I dont know about America, but our speed limits are 70 on our motorways in Engalnd and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone doing 70, mostly 80-120's, on average about 100 I'd say.

Why we love dogs and hate that officer:

Dog guards abandoned baby

Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 5 days ago with 83 member flags

Google announces privacy settings change across products; users can\'t opt out
  Posted 17 days ago with 78 member flags

BREAKING: Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran\'s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC
  Posted 2 days ago with 73 member flags

Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags

Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 17 days ago with 67 member flags

FDA\'s New Claim: "Your Body Is a Drug—and We Have the Authority to Regulate It"
  Posted 9 days ago with 53 member flags

Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 5 days ago with 49 member flags

Bill Gates Backs Climate Scientists Lobbying For Large-Scale Geoengineering
  Posted 5 days ago with 41 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: