Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Minnesota > Minneapolis - St. Paul
 [Register]
Minneapolis - St. Paul Twin Cities
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-16-2016, 05:28 PM
 
55 posts, read 79,341 times
Reputation: 36

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenfield View Post
You want to talk about something that's clearly ridiculous?Nothing in the incident suggests that "human lives don't matter" or that more value is placed on dogs' lives than humans', but that's the ridiculous premise of this thread. Ridiculous.

You want another example of clearly ridiculous? The idea that you and the OP have a better understanding of the situation than the trained peace officers who were on the scene.
Pretty sure I didn't say I had a better understanding of the situation. I actually said I don't know what would have happened, but that it's possible had they not led with a k-9 or broke into his home that he would be alive, which is indisputable. Furthermore, none of this changes the fact that a man died and it's more than OK to feel sad about that, and that it would be advantageous as a society to think about and learn about better ways to handle mentally ill people.

Also pretty sure that you can call someone out for something you feel is ridiculous (say, the premise that human lives don't matter) without saying something ridiculous yourself (such as, you don't care about police officer's lives). Just because you feel something is ridiculous doesn't make you justified in saying something else ridiculous. It only serves to undermine your point and credibility, which it has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2016, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities
5,833 posts, read 7,681,567 times
Reputation: 8867
Quote:
Originally Posted by erin2882 View Post
Pretty sure I didn't say I had a better understanding of the situation. I actually said I don't know what would have happened, but that it's possible had they not led with a k-9 or broke into his home that he would be alive, which is indisputable. Furthermore, none of this changes the fact that a man died and it's more than OK to feel sad about that, and that it would be advantageous as a society to think about and learn about better ways to handle mentally ill people.

Also pretty sure that you can call someone out for something you feel is ridiculous (say, the premise that human lives don't matter) without saying something ridiculous yourself (such as, you don't care about police officer's lives). Just because you feel something is ridiculous doesn't make you justified in saying something else ridiculous. It only serves to undermine your point and credibility, which it has.
Too bad the guy died, agreed, but he was a danger to the lives of the officers so that's what happens.

Not sure why you think you get to call my comments ridiculous-- not to me directly, of course, but in that little passive/ aggressive "other poster" way-- but I don't get to call the premise of the thread ridiculous. I'm sure that it makes sense to you if not the rest of us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 10:12 AM
 
948 posts, read 916,022 times
Reputation: 1850
The only crime that man committed was lying about his name, and the officer who said he had the warrant also said that he probably doesn't even know it.

There is no evidence that this man was a danger to the officers, at least the police have not made such information available. Police have visited him 4 times in the past for noise disturbances. There were no previous reports of him being violent against them on those occasions, so why should they expect him to now?

Secondly, what kind of knife was he using? All we know is that it was a kitchen knife, and described as 8 to 10 inches long. That could be a butter knife for all we know.

Thirdly, the news media is now saying that he stabbed the dog in the head, but that's not what the police reported right after the incident. The initial police statements were that they shot him because he "made stabbing motions at the dog". Did he actually stab the dog, or did he scratch it while he swung his knife around to defend himself from it? If he had stabbed the dog, why did they say he "made stabbing motions" at it instead of saying that he stabbed it ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 10:40 AM
 
948 posts, read 916,022 times
Reputation: 1850
I stand my belief that the officers killed the man to protect a dog.

There was a case a few months ago when Americans were in an uproar because a bicyclist shot a dog to defend himself from attack, and people thought the bicyclist should be prosecuted (some people even suggested execution) for killing a "war hero". Don't people have the right to defend themselves from dogs when threatened? Many people seem to think they don't.

I think this is the same thing. The two officers who shot that man valued the life of the dog more highly than a human they don't know personally, and felt his life did not matter.

One of the officers who killed the man was the dog's human companion. He had another dog that was severely injured in the line of duty by a criminal. He successfully petitioned the government to change the law so that killing a police dog would be treated as a felony. It appears that he interpreted the new law as a license to kill anybody who he feels threatened another one of his dogs. It's entirely believable that he would rather kill a person than allow another one of his dogs to get injured in the line of duty.

The other officer has obviously worked with him before, because they were both involved in the other shooting I mentioned above. He may have thought of that dog as a friend of his also. However, this other officer was also involved in a lawsuit involving police brutality, which the city of Roseville just settled out of court last year ...


But the main issue here is, why do so many people automatically assume that he deserved to die, because the life of the dog is more important? I see people on the internet who automatically assume he was a horrible person, because he held a knife up to a dog. Why? Why do so many Americans think the lives of dogs are more precious than the lives of humans ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities
5,833 posts, read 7,681,567 times
Reputation: 8867
I didn't say the dog's life was more important. I said that he demonstrated he was a danger by having a knife. Stabbing the dog emphasized that. He should have surrendered to the police.

If you see people "on the Internet " saying that a dog's life is worth more than a human's, go take it up with them. No one in the forum said anything remotely close to that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2016, 06:40 PM
 
810 posts, read 847,953 times
Reputation: 541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenfield View Post
And there's always the alternative of not committing a crime in order to avoid the whole outstanding warrant issue.
yes there is that too. I was pissed at my self a few months back for breaking my record of never getting a speeding ticket. But the officer was very pleasant and I paid it without contesting and the police reduced it. If anything I showed my daughter how to be respectful. I was speeding and I was caught I was in the wrong. :-) I am much more careful now,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2016, 09:43 AM
 
948 posts, read 916,022 times
Reputation: 1850
In another dogs over humans story, a dying man and his family were asked to get off a plane because their little boy is allergic to dogs, and the dog's right to be on the plane took precedence over the child's.

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2016/0...llergy-attack/

Actually, I'm not surprised. About a year ago I was looking for information on how to fly with our dog, and was pleasantly surprised to find out it would be quite easy. In fact, she could even ride in the cabin with us! However, even though this was good news for us, I was surprised that pets are allowed in the cabins, on every single flight. If one single passenger has a nut allergy, nobody on the plane gets peanuts. Yet passengers can bring pets into the cabins, without any seating restrictions? I began to wonder what happens when somebody with a pet is seated near somebody with a pet allergy? Would we be asked to get off the plane if somebody was allergic to our dog?

It looks like the airlines make the human allergy sufferer leave, not the pet. I wonder how often this happens? Would we have even heard about it if the man wasn't dying from terminal cancer?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Minnesota > Minneapolis - St. Paul
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top