An animal cruelty video is not cute. Imagine this at a human level. You are at home, and someone walks into your living room and takes your 47" LCD TV off the table, turns it on and starts shoving it in your face, pushing you around with, what would you do?

Yes, you are patronizing; it oozes out of your posts. No, you don't know what you're talking about.

The correct answer is that there is not enough data to prove one way or another. Even the organization in the link you provided admit the severe limitations of their technique, which primarily relies on media reports. Your obvious pro-cop bias (nothing wrong with that, but at least admit it) leads you to think that the very scant data supports your point.

Even your back-of-the-envelope calculation show your bias. And do you really think that 54 cases of brutality in a year is so insignificant? Probably because you think you or your loved ones will never be on the wrong end of a stick. 54 is quite alot for one city. Hell, one is too many, to be frank. Setting a low bar for our officers is not helping them.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
I never patronized you, longde. I don't know why you're so defensive Second, I thought that when you said, "and they happen quite often in my community, not rarely," that you knew what you were talking about. Obviously, since you would "have to do homework" on the issue--instead of being able to state the cases you know--you don't know what you talking about.
Here, let me show you I know what I am talking about. Let's say that "quite often" in a large community (A large city) is once per day or a little less. Now, the site I use is definitely biased against cops with the language they use... However, that goes in my favor--since even biased sites seemingly cannot show systemic police brutality.
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=2218
The calculations here are only 3 months of reported cases, so we should multiply it by at least 4 to make it as close to year's worth as possible.
Note, for simplicity, I use the information under the header "Law Enforcement Agencies Employing 1000+ Officers".
Note, let's also say that the reported cases are not inclusive of all cases--so let's add 50% more (In your favor.)
Last note, only about 30% of these cases are "force related," I.e taser, brutality, animal cruelty, etc.
So, the highest noted city, Atlanta Georgia, has 38 cases for three months. Multiply by 4, 152... let's add that .5 for non-reported, and that's 228... But wait, let's subtract a few that are perhaps bullshit. (I remember around my area a guy was abused in a wheelchair. The offending officer got a felony, lost his pension, and other charges that he deserved. Right after that though, a guy literally threw himself from a wheelchair without being touched, and another reached up and tried to pull another officer on top of him, all so they could get that big payout of a lawsuit...ass-hats should look for cameras.) So let's take out 20%, even though it's probably higher because you can sue the state easier than Wal-Mart... So about 182 at most...
Since only about 30% of those cases are abuse-related, that means police beat citizens in Atlanta Ga about 54 times in a year!!!! OMG!!! That's so rampant!
Now, my math sucks, so I could be off a lot, or a little, who knows. But the point is, people tend to exaggerate shit when they have emotions predisposed against a group. I know bad police exist, and that they should be punished, I know this because I am not blinded by either admiration or hate.
>> ^longde:
To the contrary, instead of patronizing me with a homework assignment, how about providing proof of your original assertion about the rarity of such violence. In fact, your original response to me has many unproven statements.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:

I never patronized you, longde. I don't know why you're so defensive Second, I thought that when you said, "and they happen quite often in my community, not rarely," that you knew what you were talking about. Obviously, since you would "have to do homework" on the issue--instead of being able to state the cases you know--you don't know what you talking about.

Here, let me show you I know what I am talking about. Let's say that "quite often" in a large community (A large city) is once per day or a little less. Now, the site I use is definitely biased against cops with the language they use... However, that goes in my favor--since even biased sites seemingly cannot show systemic police brutality.

http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=2218

The calculations here are only 3 months of reported cases, so we should multiply it by at least 4 to make it as close to year's worth as possible.

***Note, for simplicity, I use the information under the header "Law Enforcement Agencies Employing 1000+ Officers".

***Note, let's also say that the reported cases are not inclusive of all cases--so let's add 50% more (In your favor.)

Last note, only about 30% of these cases are "force related," I.e taser, brutality, animal cruelty, etc.

So, the highest noted city, Atlanta Georgia, has 38 cases for three months. Multiply by 4, 152... let's add that .5 for non-reported, and that's 228... But wait, let's subtract a few that are perhaps bullshit. (I remember around my area a guy was abused in a wheelchair. The offending officer got a felony, lost his pension, and other charges that he deserved. Right after that though, a guy literally threw himself from a wheelchair without being touched, and another reached up and tried to pull another officer on top of him, all so they could get that big payout of a lawsuit...ass-hats should look for cameras.) So let's take out 20%, even though it's probably higher because you can sue the state easier than Wal-Mart... So about 182 at most...

Since only about 30% of those cases are abuse-related, that means police beat citizens in Atlanta Ga about 54 times in a year!!!! OMG!!! That's so rampant!

Now, my math sucks, so I could be off a lot, or a little, who knows. But the point is, people tend to exaggerate shit when they have emotions predisposed against a group. I know bad police exist, and that they should be punished, I know this because I am not blinded by either admiration or hate.



>> ^longde:

To the contrary, instead of patronizing me with a homework assignment, how about providing proof of your original assertion about the rarity of such violence. In fact, your original response to me has many unproven statements.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Soccer, Football, Owl, Asshole' to 'Soccer, Football, Owl, Asshole, murder, animal cruelty, idiot, fail, diaf' - edited by gwiz665

Putting that dog through that dance is tantamount to animal cruelty.

Yeeeeah... 'cause this otter looks like it is suffering BIG TIME. <sarcasm>

Way to jump to hysterical conclusions.


>> ^speedyfastcat:

What the hell is a baby otter doing outside of water? Even if it's being fostered for some reason (mother abandoned baby, mother died, etc.), this baby needs to be in a water environment. This isn't cute at all; it's animal cruelty. Can't believe Gimundo would post something as tasteless and ignorant as this. Shame!

>> ^speedyfastcat:

What the hell is a baby otter doing outside of water? Even if it's being fostered for some reason (mother abandoned baby, mother died, etc.), this baby needs to be in a water environment. This isn't cute at all; it's animal cruelty. Can't believe Gimundo would post something as tasteless and ignorant as this. Shame!


Ooookie.. I am sure there is a very good reason this baby otter is with humans. And I am sure it has access to water. However, according to WikiPedia: 'Otters are very active, chasing prey in the water or searching the beds of rivers, lakes or the seas. Most species live beside water, entering it mainly to hunt or travel, otherwise spending much of their time on land to avoid their fur becoming waterlogged.

Otters are playful animals and appear to engage in various behaviors for sheer enjoyment. Different species vary in their social structure, with some being largely solitary, while others live in groups – in a few species these groups may be fairly large. '

What the hell is a baby otter doing outside of water? Even if it's being fostered for some reason (mother abandoned baby, mother died, etc.), this baby needs to be in a water environment. This isn't cute at all; it's animal cruelty. Can't believe Gimundo would post something as tasteless and ignorant as this. Shame!

>> ^ponceleon:

Hitler was a vegetarian, big time animal lover and enacted anti-animal-cruelty laws in Germany which I believe are still in effect and probably quite PETAesque.
Those PETA people... they are WORSE THAN HITLER!


Thank you for ending the discussion before it even began.

Hitler was a vegetarian, big time animal lover and enacted anti-animal-cruelty laws in Germany which I believe are still in effect and probably quite PETAesque.

Those PETA people... they are WORSE THAN HITLER!

I normally insta-downvote animal cruelty, but I didnt downvote this because it serves as a reminder of what a cnut edison was. Admittedly I had seen this before in some documentary film (Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.) and was disgusted.

Everything I've heard about edison since only makes him more of a slimeball, and Tesla more of a genius. Apparently he did this to show how dangerous AC and Teslas ideas were. He didnt give a crap about the elephants criminal record this was about money.

Somebody probably said all that already but I'm too tired to go back and check

>> ^robbersdog49:

Why are people voting for such a distasteful video? I have been shown this before so I'm assuming this is just the film of the elephant dying in agony.
Why would anyone want to watch this? What kind of sick freaks are you?

How can anyone who has ONLY seen this video cry "animal cruelty"? And one thing I think everyone is forgetting, as sad as it may seem and as pointless as it may seem, it's a fucking dog. It's not like they shot a baby or punched some 17 year old girl in the face. It's a fucking dog.

>> ^CrushBug:

There is a Firefox joke in there somewhere, but I can't seem to get there without venturing into the animal cruelty.


Should have gone for Star Fox, not Firefox, it almost did a barrel roll at 24 seconds.

There is a Firefox joke in there somewhere, but I can't seem to get there without venturing into the animal cruelty.

downvote for waking up my housemates NOT to mention I downvoted the non-dubstepped version of this video for it's subversive animal cruelty qualites THAT combined with fucking awful dubstep "music" ARGHHH I wish I had 2 downvotes for this video