• agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I stand by my opinion that making a dog become a cop is inhumane to the dog. The dog deserves better if you’re gonna make them have a job, like smelling old people for cancer, or helping people with vision impairments. You know, useful things.

        • TheWiseAlaundo@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m just gonna play devil’s advocate here.

          Before the invention of the police, communities took it upon themselves to enforce the law. Oftentimes, militia members would directly write to governors asking for arms, and would also be present in their communities during public events where an armed presence might be necessary. Arrests for members of the community would happen by way of court order first, and then a posse would be formed as a means to enact that court order. Nowhere in the US constitution does the word “police” appear because the idea hadn’t even been conceived at the time of foundation.

          Comparatively, today’s police have far more authority to enact violence and effect arrests than even the courts. Could a court today order a dog to maul a surrendering man? Probably not. But when the police do it, apparently, that’s just the cost of doing business.

          I think the lie is that we need the police and not the other way around.

          • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            We need a complete overhaul of society and an educated population to help reduce the incentive to commit crime in the first place, then use the wonders of the high technology we have to make investigating crimes easier for everybody so we can go back to taking control of our own streets again.

            It’d take a lot of work to do it, but it’s better than submitting to actual fucking fascism and tyranny because we convince ourselves we’re not capable and need others to do the job of protecting each other for us.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dude, their existence prevents the meaningful enforcement of the law. Literally anyone else could do a better job than some thug caste which only pretends to enforce law but doesn’t.

          • elouboub@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You haven’t answered the question. Who should enforce the law? I’m not sure if you have a problem with the concept of police or with the implementation thereof.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              And here’s bootlicker #2 up in here sealioning just like the other guy, and my response is the same.

              You’d think if they actually were asking in good faith, they’d scroll down to talk to the guy who actually does answer the question at length, but they don’t, so it’s obvious they’re not actually interested.

              • elouboub@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Bro, I’m asking you for your thoughts on an alternative and you just rage on about some perceived slight to your intelligence or what not.

                If you don’t have an alternative, then say so. Stop beating around the bush pretending to hoard some plan you do not possess. It wasn’t a difficult fucking question you nutjob.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    That day, Rose joined a long list of Black Americans attacked by police dogs, a history well documented by journalists, academics and filmmakers.

    For some, the scenes harken back to the Civil Rights Movement, when authorities often turned dogs and firehoses on peaceful Black protesters marching for equality.

    The FBI opened an investigation into the police department in Woodson Terrace, Missouri, in 2021 after cellphone video showed three officers allowing a dog to repeatedly bite a Black man.

    They were introduced in Southern U.S. states to capture — and sometimes kill — enslaved Black people who escaped, said Madalyn Wasilczuk, a University of South Carolina professor and author of a law journal article titled, “ The Racialized Violence of Police Canine Force.”

    “But when you look at a video of what happens, you see a dog doing what it does with a chew toy, which is it grabs on, it tries to hold on, its head whips back and forth and its teeth are sunk into that body part as deeply as they can.”

    Associated Press writers Rhonda Shafner and Aaron Morrison in New York, Mike Schneider in Orlando, Florida, and Samantha Hendrickson in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.


    The original article contains 1,246 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 84%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • xam54321@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why did this article even talk about dogs being used against the civil right protestors in the 1960s?