Bad Karma

[brian64]

Damn...Karma's a bitch.

When you're warned repeatedly that they'll sic the dog on you, it's really stupid to fight with the cop...especially if the dog's name is Karma.

 

[Sig]

How about a dog named "Werewolf"?

 

[burleybreath]

The guy and the dog have something in common: they're both out of control. Wonder if he's a pipe smoker?

 

[brian64]

How about a dog named "Werewolf"?
View attachment 319995

Holy crap...I wouldn't want to have an encounter with that thing.

 

[didimauw]

Holy crap...I wouldn't want to have an encounter with that thing.

The dog or the lady?

Id choose the dog every time.

 

[anotherbob]

I love how I can't really see the most critical things in that video. Yeah that guy right off the bat had some strongly aggressive douche energy. Not one hundred percent sure they needed to use the dog like that, also not that sorry feeling for the guy either though.

 

[brian64]

The dog or the lady?

Id choose the dog every time.

I knew that reply was coming as soon as I posted that comment.

 

[brian64]

Not one hundred percent sure they needed to use the dog like that

I agree...I'm not entirely sure it was necessary either. Problem is, you can't really see exactly what's happening when the apparent little scuffle occurs.

But as I said, it's pretty stupid to keep resisting and acting belligerent when you've already been warned about the dog.

 

[georged]

Judges and DA's are insane enough to let people go these days regardless of the crime or the certainty of guilt (the insane restaurant employee who fired three shots through the drive-through window at a customer and his wife and kid because of a dispute over curly fries got a year of probation, for example. Caught on video from several angles. But the legal desk-sitters thought she was having a bad day and didn't need more stress in her life, so downgraded attempted murder to some laughable misdemeanor.)

Cops on the street, though? The guys who actually have to deal with immediate decisions and immediate consequences? They are NOT going to back down when pushed. And K9 involvement never has a happy outcome for the bad guys. nom nom

 

[brian64]

(the insane restaurant employee who fired three shots through the drive-through window at a customer and his wife and kid because of a dispute over curly fries got a year of probation, for example. Caught on video from several angles. But the legal desk-sitters thought she was having a bad day and didn't need more stress in her life, so downgraded attempted murder to some laughable misdemeanor.)

Unbelievable. I saw the report and video of that a while back. I didn't know she actually got off with probation. What a crock.

There have been studies done comparing men's and women's sentencing for the same crimes. Women invariably get off with significantly lighter sentences.

 

[Sig]

I agree...I'm not entirely sure it was necessary either. Problem is, you can't really see exactly what's happening when the apparent little scuffle occurs.

But as I said, it's pretty stupid to keep resisting and acting belligerent when you've already been warned about the dog.

If you look at the FBI statistics on the uses of police dogs, you may find the cops WAY overuse their dogs. Many handlers want very badly for their dogs to get some "tooth on" training.
The stats for drug sniffing dogs is even more ridiculous.
85% of the time dogs "in the field" get it wrong.
In controlled tests the dogs are right 95% of the time.
But when searching a car on the side of the road, very poor performance.

 

[georged]

If you look at the FBI statistics on the uses of police dogs, you may find the cops WAY overuse their dogs. Many handlers want very badly for their dogs to get some "tooth on" training.

Hm...

What, exactly, constitutes "overuse"?

And who came up with the definition?

And who decides---in hindsight, Monday morning quarterback style---if it applies?

Ah... the politics-driven FBI guys sitting at a desk.




Ask the on-the-ground cops who must chase crackheads down dark alleys, or wrestle with carloads of meth-fueled bros from the Ozarks on the shoulder of an Interstate highway, or who were previously knifed in the gut by a woman that they TRIED to be nice to but were tricked, as a regular thing, though, and you'll get a very different answer.

Furry torpedoes are a wonderful option.

Don't want to get bit? Do what you're told and you won't.

It's not rocket science.

 

[brian64]

If you look at the FBI statistics on the uses of police dogs, you may find the cops WAY overuse their dogs. Many handlers want very badly for their dogs to get some "tooth on" training.
The stats for drug sniffing dogs is even more ridiculous.
85% of the time dogs "in the field" get it wrong.
In controlled tests the dogs are right 95% of the time.
But when searching a car on the side of the road, very poor performance.

Hm...

What, exactly, constitutes "overuse"?

And who came up with the definition?

And who decides---in hindsight, Monday morning quarterback style---if it applies?

Ah... the politics-driven FBI guys sitting at a desk.




Ask the on-the-ground cops who must chase crackheads down dark alleys, or wrestle with carloads of meth-fueled bros from the Ozarks on the shoulder of an Interstate highway, or who were previously knifed in the gut by a woman that they TRIED to be nice to but were tricked, as a regular thing, though, and you'll get a very different answer.

Furry torpedoes are a wonderful option.

Don't want to get bit? Do what you're told and you won't.

It's not rocket science.

I don't think this is an either/or issue...it's both.

I believe what George is describing is accurate, but I also know there have been, and will continue to be many clear instances of unnecessary use of force by police.

Same thing with prosecutions and sentencing issues. At the same time that many are getting off easy or not being prosecuted, there are also many instances of unfair or rigged trials, sketchy evidence and abusive sentencing.

The whole system is screwed up...and it causes abuses it both directions.

 

[georged]

I don't think this is an either/or issue...it's both.

I believe what George is describing is accurate, but I also know there have been, and will continue to be many clear instances of unnecessary use of force by police.

Same thing with prosecutions and sentencing issues. At the same time that many are getting off easy or not being prosecuted, there are also many instances of unfair or rigged trials, sketchy evidence and abusive sentencing.

The whole system is screwed up...and it causes abuses it both directions.

100% true ^^^

But also extremely misleading, in that people come away from the "both sides have bad apples" conclusion thinking both sides are equally bad in percentage terms.

Which is 100% false.

On the Bad Guy side, the shithead count is 100% by definition.

On the Good Guy side, the shithead count is as small as psych evals, polygraphs, fitness tests, and knowledge tests can make it.

Sensationalism and news headlines do the rest.

 

[brian64]

100% true ^^^

But also extremely misleading, in that people come away from the "both sides have bad apples" conclusion thinking both sides are equally bad in percentage terms.

Which is 100% false.

On the Bad Guy side, the shithead count is 100% by definition.

On the Good Guy side, the shithead count is as small as psych evals, polygraphs, fitness tests, and knowledge tests can make it.

Sensationalism and news headlines do the rest.

I agree insofar as the "bad apples" issue is concerned.

But where I differ is I believe there is well documented systemic corruption and abuse that is NOT about race (which is an intentional attempt to mislead, distract and divide) but is primarily an inevitable consequence of the "war on drugs" which gave rise to tactics such as no-knock raids and asset forfeiture...and has bred corruption throughout the system, and a general militarization of the police.

It's no different than everything that happened during alcohol prohibition. I'm very much a libertarian when it comes to this issue. The so-called war on drugs has actually been a war on privacy, a war on cash, a war on due process, etc.

 

[georged]

I agree insofar as the "bad apples" issue is concerned.

But where I differ is I believe there is well documented systemic corruption and abuse that is NOT about race (which is an intentional attempt to mislead, distract and divide) but is primarily an inevitable consequence of the "war on drugs" which gave rise to tactics such as no-knock raids and asset forfeiture...and has bred corruption throughout the system, and a general militarization of the police.

It's no different than everything that happened during alcohol prohibition. I'm very much a libertarian when it comes to this issue. The so-called war on drugs has actually been a war on privacy, a war on cash, a war on due process, etc.

The things you list fall into two categories: 1) Cartels introducing all the termites they can into the structure of the legal system(s) that oppose them; and 2) legitimate (in intent) responses TO what the cartels are doing, "arms race" style. (i.e. if one side follows rules and the other follows no rules at all, the latter will always win.)

 

[VDL_Piper]

Who's a good boy.......

 

[dingdong]

The dog or the lady?

Id choose the dog every time.

I can get the car thanks

 

[georged]

Who's a good boy.......

Indeed.

Unlike herding dogs that are put down when they get too old to do the job, retired police dogs stay in the possession of their trainer/handler as a family pet for the rest of their days. And good ones they are, too.

 

[dingdong]

If you look at the FBI statistics on the uses of police dogs, you may find the cops WAY overuse their dogs. Many handlers want very badly for their dogs to get some "tooth on" training.
The stats for drug sniffing dogs is even more ridiculous.
85% of the time dogs "in the field" get it wrong.
In controlled tests the dogs are right 95% of the time.
But when searching a car on the side of the road, very poor performance.

for sniffing, nothing beats Bloodhound or Beagles..obviously less offensive to the public/crowd. need to adjust the situation when using a Rottweiler or an Alsation or a Melanois as sniffing dog (unless its your partner in patrol). large breed (attack) dogs are a lot to control and they respond decisively (which is good in certain situation).