Oh, you laugh now, but it won't be so funny when that thing's crawling up the Space Needle and swatting down airplanes!

That makes you an unbelievable piece of shit IMO. A dog is an animal, not a 'tool'. A living, breathing, feeling animal that trusts you to take care of it. You don't put an animal that you accept control over and the obligation to care for in a position where they protect you at the expense of their own life, especially when you have many other options. The dog doesn't understand the danger you put them in, they expect they're holding the person, just like when they trained. They've been trained to think they aren't hurting the person, and that there's no chance they'll be hurt back. In fact, they're trained to think they get a treat/play time afterwards, not knifed.
I'm so disappointed in you. Don't get a dog.
The next time you see a person with a knife/machete, how about back off and wait for Swat...or try your tazer, or pepper spray, or bean bags, or your car, etc.... You have many other options besides just putting a dog in danger for no reason other than you're scared and uncaring.

EDIT: Your statement, and the fact that it's how most cops seem to think, is proof positive that these 'tools' are misused more often than not, and are treated unconscionably by those that are supposed to care for them. I think the ASPCA and other anti-animal abuse organizations should band together to work towards removing K-9 units from service as they are terrible for the dogs they use without a thought for the dogs welfare.
Dogs naturally act like furry, stupid/dumb/mentally challenged, sweet children, and should be treated as such.

How many times did you 'use' your gun? How many of those times would pepper spray have sufficed?
The instance I spoke of was a completely improper application of pepper spray (with cotton swabs directly to the eyeballs) was to handcuffed people sitting in front of a building (a building with other entrances, so not blocking any business or access I might add). It was all about asserting their power because someone didn't respect their authoratah.
The other recent incident was people handcuffed sitting on a bike path (with other pathways easily used to get around them)...once again, no need for violence other than frustration at not being 'obeyed'...absolutely none.
Thousands of people are treated violently by cops in their own home yearly who aren't making meth, didn't have any argument with anyone, but were simply in the wrong home when the cops either made a mistake or acted on bad information. What about them? That's why I say the cops need to be swatted at least once a year, so they remember what it's like and don't act like asshats.

But you yourself have said that everyone is suspect and considered armed and dangerous until proven otherwise...so who is this 'everyone else'?
Small town cops also can be much more difficult to get along with, as they develop the 'us VS them' mentality faster and to a greater severity, being more isolated. That's why they think it's OK to do things like swab pepper spray into the eyes of helpless, immobilized, peaceful protestors.
It sounds like a better idea would be for cops to have to walk in the shoes of a 'suspect' a few times a year...as in having SWAT or other police (not the force that particular cop is part of) called on them and have them and their families treated like the violent armed suspect they treat everyone else as...then perhaps you and they might see the error of your ways (once they've been visited on you and yours, I doubt you would support the violence and angry escalations).

@lantern53

When you have a country were it is acceptable for SWAT teams equipped with more weapons and body armor than an average soldier in your national military to kick down doors and throw flashbangs into people's homes on the "suspicion" that a small amount of drugs may be in the house, or to intimidate peaceful protestors by raising their weapons towards them, when it is acceptable for the NY city police department to conduct secret surveillance on anyone within three states who happens to be a Muslim in the name of counter-terrorism activities, when it is acceptable to taze people simply because they don't provide identification upon demand, when it is acceptable for the police to go to the wrong house to serve a warrant and shoot the dog that happens to live there then I think it is only natural that people are going to hate on the police. The police in the US (particularly the LAPD) have earned the hate they receive ten times over in my opinion for a lot of the reasons he states in this video.

Like he said, the problem is that you are telling a group of people that they are there to enforce the law. Which isn't a problem until it dawns on some of them that they occupy a position that allows them to actually act above the law and get away with it.

Every cop should have to have a camera attached to their uniform that is recording at all times while they are on duty and that video should be available for a civilian oversight committee to review. The committee should have the ability to punish or fire officers who overstep their authority or misbehave on the job. And the videos should be public record so we can see both the good cops and the bad.

SWAT/Police consoling a terrified child in a house they've ram raided? How old is that clip?

Nowadays, they bust into the wrong house, throw a flash bang into a toddlers crib, causing critical burns to the childs body, a hole in his chest and needed to be put into a medical induced coma. The aftermath of which the child wakes up screaming every night in terror and when the family ask for compensation for medical bills, they refuse

It needs to be way harder to do this. If you own a dog, SWAT isn't going to hesitate to shoot it. Yay, awesome prank internet!

lucky760's reasoning is sound.

Anyone that has researched and/or trained on weapon on weapon defense, in this case knife vs. firearm knows the Tueller's Drill. It has been a standard for over thirty years. Basically,

The Tueller Drill is a self-defense training exercise to prepare against a short-range knife attack when armed only with a holstered handgun.
Sergeant Dennis Tueller, of the Salt Lake City, Utah Police Department wondered how quickly an attacker with a knife could cover 21 feet (6.4 m), so he timed volunteers as they raced to stab the target. He determined that it could be done in 1.5 seconds. These results were first published as an article in SWAT magazine in 1983 and in a police training video by the same title, "How Close is Too Close?"[1]
A defender with a gun has a dilemma. If he shoots too early, he risks being charged with murder. If he waits until the attacker is definitely within striking range so there is no question about motives, he risks injury and even death. The Tueller experiments quantified a "danger zone" where an attacker presented a clear threat.[2]
The Tueller Drill combines both parts of the original time trials by Tueller. There are several ways it can be conducted:[3]
The "attacker and shooter are positioned back-to-back. At the signal, the attacker sprints away from the shooter, and the shooter unholsters his gun and shoots at the target 21 feet (6.4 m) in front of him. The attacker stops as soon as the shot is fired. The shooter is successful only if his shot is good and if the runner did not cover 21 feet (6.4 m).
A more stressful arrangement is to have the attacker begin 21 feet (6.4 m) behind the shooter and run towards the shooter. The shooter is successful only if he was able take a good shot before he is tapped on the back by the attacker.
If the shooter is armed with only a training replica gun, a full-contact drill may be done with the attacker running towards the shooter. In this variation, the shooter should practice side-stepping the attacker while he is drawing the gun.
Mythbusters covered the drill in the 2012 episode "Duel Dilemmas". At 20 feet the gun wielder was able to shoot the charging knife attacker just as he reached the shooter. At shorter distances the knife wielder was always able to stab prior to being shot. (Wikipedia)

That a firearm, particularly a handgun, will instantly incapacitate an individual is not a working concept and is fallacious. Variables such as adrenaline and drugs are attributable. Shot placement is trumps. Anything but a CNS. central nervous system, shot is not efficacious in safely stopping the threat. Not an easy or sure target sans movement, stress, etc.

Law enforcement put their lives and safety in harm's way every day. They are not there to die needlessly. An individual with suicide by cop or a LEO's death in mind is a serious threat to be dealt with with prejudice.

By the way, research knife wounds vs. handgun wounds. There is much data, ER, medical examiner, law enforcement. The deadly seriousness of knife wounds are well documented.

Tasers...I would not want to risk my life behind one or anyone about whom I care.

@lantern53

Having been an officer for a long time, long enough to really have seen the entire process of the "militarization" of the police force from its inception to its current state. I'd really like to know your opinion of it. Can you honestly say you feel its appropriate, even needed or justified? The very rare opportunities I've had in the past to ask police officers this question, i find they are very reluctant to give honest and straight answers. Paraphrasing, they tend to fall back on the, "we'd rather have it and not need it" line of thinking. If you do support it, do you truly feel you or the officer utilizing it have received appropriate training?

I remember driving by our local police station (small town Texas) on the way to school and seeing BOTH the giant armored vehicles parked prominently in front with the bold SWAT on the side. Its always been extremely hard for me to accept them or the fact that we as a town of 30k needed a SWAT team to begin with.

Assuming the 'negative outcome' scenario, also the nature of human consciousness (so simply and patently codified), what 'preparation' beyond one's will would prepare a human for a planet made hostile to humanity BY humanity?

Life itself is an injustice according to the parameters we are willing to accept as just or fair or equitable. So Emily here decides to film her abortion procedure for her own benefit, her own ego, a journalistic form of self-therapy perhaps? I would challenge any American white woman's spoken motivations for ending a pregnancy and find by peeling the layers of the onion away in about 10 minutes of Q&A that that little piece of meat growing inside of her needs to go because it's gonna be an inconvenience to her lifestyle, a challenge to her own limited consciousness of the nature of life and the universe.

Swat that little nuisance before it lands on my food, for crissakes.

@chingalara

Your logic is flawed and your words stink of poisonous vomit !

lets keep this fight going ! <--- as in that is all this turned into is one big pissy man boy match Edit - not even that, just one person in particular who was side tracking and making personal attacks in comments again, see how you can enjoy the double standard like everyone else choggie ? You' re here still after your little freak out in the sift talk, or the stuff you wrote above or the other day, you can enjoy it like everyone else, but you sure like to flip the coin and berate it at the same time, although we all have learned you lack logic and reasoning skills. But that is just my opinion,
I guess this is what comments this post are for hey ? pretty well the reason I am writing this now. write what you want time.

So to answer your only sensible question fuckinglittlethingoverthere - as you described it the first time I asked you what it meant. Baxter the bunny weights in at 2.76 pounds.. and just jumped on my lap. I have learned this is not for pets though, this is for treats. so I do not try and pet him because he just swats lightly very very quickly at my finger tips and actually kinda growls a little, which makes me laugh.

He is fully grown and if I were to cook him like a psycho would cook their pet, as you suggested he would be like eating a quarter of a small frying chicken ( NOte to self *do not put palm plant fronds near top of chair - rabbit climbs chair and eats palm leaf* )

Also I do not think video sift is what that orignal poster said it is.

Marching in lock-step to your demise, child. Your comments on this matter read like a dutiful slave to your own oblivion.

One of the things no one has even cared to mention about this event is that the federal government, enforcing a civil affair (non-payment of grazing fees) sent armed swat teams to enforce the matter. The citizens of the United States who chose to show up in support of Bundy (a dumb-ass for the shit he's said of late, that the media has completely used to distract the putties with racism being an opportunistic side-issue in this entire debacle), who did so with guns as well-were within their rights to do so, breaking no laws. For this, they are called all manner of names and labeled as agitants, crazies,etc., by people without a clue as to how they are being ass-fucked.

The media, an arm of the state's machine, focuses upon this and continually pumps their brand of newsspeak, loaded language (like newtboy here repeats and foments to his own audience of parrots), and in doing so guides the story in a direction that further ignores facts while blatantly promoting the further erosion of individual rights under the constitution in favor of bigger, stronger, more restrictive government.

We are going to see more and more of this in the coming decade, as well as more people who favor the cozy protection of government control over individual responsibilities and accountability.

FUCK YOU MR BAY.

FAWK YOU AND YOUR ATTEMPT AT THIS GENERATIONAL MASTERPEICE. FUCK .. I WISH TO SWAT THE SIDE OF YOUR HEAD. YOUR GOD DAMN HEAD NEEDS A SMACK.

THIS TRIPE IS AIMED AT DUMB ASS' LIKE MY SEVEN YEAR OLD NEPHEW, THEY DO NOT KNOW ANY DIFFERENT!

FOR oNe ThInG mY nEphew will be watching the classic.

That's hilarious seeing a bunch of tough SWAT officers running around trying to shoo a pug away.

I'm surprised they didn't just shoot it because they felt threatened.

Pretty typical, if the cops want to search your premises, they will. In this case, it was that wall and gate that caused suspicions. Then "anonymous informant" steppes in to the picture, you got all the ticks checked, go ahead in full swat gear, detain everyone, see if there something that you can justify the action.

The bad thing is, often they are right. Suspicious places often are suspicious. So it gets fed back in the system "this method works, we get only x% of wrongful blaa blaa". They do the same here, busting chili growers for marijuana... Then they try to justify it, play it down or simply threaten to keep quiet. Bad thing here is, if you obtain evidence during wrongful seizure or search, it's still valid. So the act of obtaining evidence is is illegal but evidence is not. This sounds right if the reprimand for breaking the law fro obtaining evidence is treated as a crime but it never is in any western society that i know of. Usually things go to internal investigation that results at most a non-paid leave, a paid leave, a verbal notice and most often, absolutely nothing.

It's "end justify the means" policy and we did our best to get rid of that by inventing all these complicated laws protecting us that are now turned on against us. W can do with uncomplicated laws too, the society would stay lawful, peaceful. The injustice that comes should be enough reason to not go back few centuries.