Yes. If you grab a person 1/2 or less your size by the neck, hurl them to the ground while flipping them over backwards, still arm baring them by the neck, then you toss them across the room and jump on them, throwing them as hard as possible across the room into the wall head first, severe injury and/or death are totally foreseeable consequences. (If you look, her head nearly hits the desk behind her, and does hit the ground HARD).
As I clearly said, I 100% believe they would absolutely have charged any person doing this to an officer with attempted murder, and turnabout's fair play. It would have been wholly unsurprising if her neck had broken from that treatment.

It is totally proper to expect that, if one officer can't remove a child (or adult, for that matter) without resorting to violence (and god damn it, a high school girl is a child, so that attempted excusing of the attack falls completely flat), they call a second officer. If 2 officers can't remove a child without injury, call 3. Much better idea, call mom.
Perhaps we've failed as a society when we put actual cops (who have a serious issue with self control and violence lately) rather than trained security guards (EDIT: who don't have immunity or a blue wall to protect them from their own bad action) in schools, or when we resort to the most violent way of dealing with every issue rather than having a little common sense and calling a calm and quiet child's parent.
The reason teacher's can't touch them is to prevent the kind of actions the cop took. It's a protection system for the school and the teacher, to prevent them from being closed/fired by a lawsuit. In fact, it's illegal for a private citizen to touch another person without permission, so why would you want them to take the chance of losing their career and the school?

The fact that both the school system and the police force agree with me give me hope....but not much. The fact that so many people want to either blame the victim or excuse the outrageous, clearly over the top actions of the cop erases that hope.

Sorry, you throw a punch, you pays your money, you takes your chances...

The surest way to minimise the chance of getting killed in a fight is to not pick fights (particularly on blind people who have friends lurking nearby that can fuck you up with a nice blindside /lol).

And Jinx, it's a sad state of affairs but sometimes violence is the answer. What, you think they should have asked the c#nt punching the blind kid to stop nicely? \= )

He's lucky he got away with getting knocked ass over tit once, I'm surprised no one put the boot in to the little turd.

Yikes. Think I'll take my chances with an old fashioned EMT that knows WTF they're doing. I can see the promise of the fast response time, but I'm afraid that misdiagnosis by the caller could lead to f'ups. Defibrillation of someone having a seizure rather than a heart attack, for example, probably isn't recommended.

No, a police dog is a dog. A tazer is a tool. (I could have made a terrible joke there, but will refrain)
I understand that humans being more 'valuable' than 'animals' (as if we aren't animals) is the normal way of thinking, but you make the knee jerk assumption/implication that they are the only options, either let a dog attack a dangerous armed person that WILL hurt/kill the dog or do it manually and be hurt yourself. There are MANY other options always available that don't involve releasing the unsuspecting dog into harms way. Most don't even involve deadly force. It would NEVER be proper to let the dog attack a known armed threatening person instead of using one's brain to deal with the danger in a safer manner, but that is what you've said you would do.
As a society, we have partially reversed the thinking that 'humans are more important than animals'. That is shown by the creation of many 'preserves' that stop people from farming/hunting on land to save animals, and that ends up killing some people (through starvation, malnutrition, etc). So while your statement is usually correct, people do usually consider humans more valuable than animals, as an absolutist statement it is wrong. That kind of thinking has put us in a position where the food chains are being broken because we only thought about humans (and not very thoroughly).

I'm sorry to hear about your cat, it's a terrible thing to have to help them go, but often the right thing for them. :-(

Your comments were "a dog is a tool" and "If I were tasked with taking a person with a machete into custody, I would be happy to have a dog take a chance over a person risking their life." Both show a complete lack of concern for the dog, or even thought for it as a living, thinking, feeling being. The latter also shows a propensity to put the unsuspecting dog in far greater danger rather than accept a manageable danger themselves. In your scenario, you could easily disarm 'Machette' with your Taser, firearm, car, other officers, etc. with minimal or no danger to the officers, only more time taken, but you say you would send in the dog to get sliced. I find that terrible and not the words of someone that truly cares for the animal.
EDIT: " I would be happy to have a dog take a chance over a person risking their life." really translates to 'I would be happy to have a dog risk their life over a person taking a chance.'...and I and others find that thinking uncaring and irresponsible towards the living, feeling being (your tool) who's care and welfare you took responsibility for.
You are quite correct, I could never be a cop. I don't have the mentality to constantly tell others what to do (and insist they follow my directions), or to deal with the drudgery of writing people tickets, paperwork, etc. I could not dehumanize people I think are criminals daily and treat them like the inhuman scum they 'are'. I would have too hard a time enforcing laws I disagreed with, and I would fear that dealing with people at their worst would make me think the worst of all people, and so cause me to treat them all like the awful criminals they are (in my mind), making me a douchebag with authoratah. I don't want to be that in any way.
I feel like being a cop is a truly hard job that screws with one's mind. Again, why I think therapy on the job should be mandatory.
Honest discussion is never a waste of time.

In police work, a dog is a tool. You can use any tool properly or improperly. If I were tasked with taking a person with a machete into custody, I would be happy to have a dog take a chance over a person risking their life.

The vast majority of people never have contact with police officers.

The vast majority of people who HAVE contact with police officers are treated civilly and go on with their lives.

The vast majority of people know that you don't give a bunch of shit to police officers. If you do, you take a chance on an outcome that won't make you happy.

The vast majority of people who are arrested on a weekly basis know that they will pay a small fine, or do a couple of days in jail, and take it as a cost of doing business.

A small number of police contacts end up with someone being treated for a bruise or cut, or a loose tooth, or pepper spray in the eyes.

A small number of police contacts end up dead and the vast majority of them instigated the violence.

You people expect cops to act perfectly, have the negotiating skills of Henry Kissinger, the compassion of Mother Theresa and the patience of Job, the martial skill of a UFC fighter, and the targeting skill of Annie Oakley, when what you should be doing is looking at your own behavior and seeing how that leads to your own fate.

The industrial age is part of 'economic liberty'.

People were free to make inventions that use coal, or use oil, and were free to market them either as products or services.

That differs from the earlier times/case where folks were obligated to participate only in activities sanctioned by their local lords. Often where they couldn't even travel freely.

Much of the math and chemistry we have comes from centuries worth of largely superfluous [essentially hobbyist at the time] higher education of the privileged classes. (eg. Boyle's/Charles' laws being a foundation of modern internal combustion engines, not used in said form for centuries after written down).

(Note : Which still continues to be the case, what we come up with in a purely theoretical form today, ends up being used in practical application much later. Although maybe it's speeding up. eg. Relativity is used in making GPS work, and that time delta isn't quote as large.)

Once the idea of economic liberty took hold, and people were free to come up with ideas that use the universes natural/physical properties to replace 'manpower', you had the industrial revolution.



The 'honor' part plays a good role too. You can witness this still being an issue today.
You can go to parts of eastern Europe, and talk with people about jobs and respectability.

There are plenty of places where a laborer is scum, and a businessman (eg. owner, who does not himself work, but has people working for him) is highly respected.
In these places, you don't see much work getting done, as a large portion of the typical western service sectors just doesn't exist.
For example, there are ~no house painters. Showing up with paint buckets and overalls would just get you strange stares and mumbles from people around you, and parents would be saying to their kids "See, this is what happens if you don't get good grades".
If you want your house painted, you gotta do it yourself. Few self respecting people are willing to do that job.
In contrast, ask people around the U.S. about who painted their house. Odds are, they hired for it.

The effects on small business are visible too. Lots of shops, the moment the owner can afford to not come in himself, that's exactly what they do.
And on top of that, they take every chance they can get to point out to folks that 'they don't work anymore - people work for them'.

It's a culture where the people responsible for productivity are looked down on, and it has a chilling effect on productivity.

-scheherazade

I <3 Super Troupers, Mamma Mia, Take a Chance on Me, and Dancing Queen!

When a person warned that the men should remove the video before they go to jail, Hall fired back.

"Nobody’s going to jail," he wrote. You have a 2,000 lb boulder that is teetering on a 2"[sic] dirt ledge and about ready to fall off on it’s [sic] own. 5 minutes before this video we watched a family with many small children walk right below the rock to take a family photo. We didn’t do anything until they were gone because we didn’t want anyone to get hurt. One gust of wind and that rock was falling whether someone was there or not. ...

"I’ll take my chances with the cops rather then my conscience after hearing a family was crushed to death by a rock I was prompted to move."

Swalberg said just because a rock looks loose, it doesn’t mean people should knock it over.

What i find a shame is that they can legally charge me $20,000 for 3 hrs in the hospital because i fell off my bike (which ill be in debt for forever probably), or 750 dollars a month they want to charge me at costco for one of the antidepressants I was taking (paid about 100 a month from Canada for the generic which they cant sell in the US). Also there is the $8500 my dentist wants to replace two of my front teeth which ill need in the next year or two. Personally ill take my chances with socialized medicine as I dont have the kind of money it takes to get better when i get sick or hurt. None of us should have to choose between medical attention/medication and the ability to eat or pay the bills. Thats just the way I see it. Thanks for letting me vent.

edit
Charging a patient $15 for a Tylenol is an absolute legal healthcare fraud(imo), but thats just good American business. http://www.rd.com/slideshows/wildly-overinflated-hospital-costs/#slideshow=slide1

and my apologies for going off topic @MrFisk

If Zimmerman has "100% legal rights to have shot Martin" then the state wouldn't be wasting their time prosecuting him.

I think Zimmerman will be found guilty. Zimmerman's defense waved the right to a pre-trial "stand your ground" hearing. If he won the pre-trial hearing, it would have granted him immunity to any further criminal or civil trials. Waving the right to that hearing could mean that they didn't think he stood a chance of wining, so they're taking their chances on a jury trial.

I find it funny that you tell others to "learn the fucking law if you speak about it!" when you don't seem to know the law yourself. Here is the law for your reading pleasure. Notice there are several exceptions which I'll highlight:

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Fatal infections, lymphoma, and other types of cancer, problems with blood, liver, and nervous system, as well as serious allergic reactions and new or worsening heart failure all probably didn't happen to just 1 really unlucky person in 100.

I know you're just throwing numbers out there, but that's also misleading. The truth is that regardless of test results, if you take the drug you have some unknown chance of suffering any or all of a long list of severe or even fatal side effects depending solely on your personal health and biology.

If you want to take that chance, go for it, especially if the risks are worth the potential reward to you.

To me, though, it's like swinging an axe to remove a mole from your forehead.

Yeah, but on Steam, you'll keep your games library going foward to a new PC or a new OS. Maybe the next Xbox (Xbox "Two" or whatever) will be backward compatible but I won't take that chance, based on their track record about BC...

It's just a bad deal. Too much control.

Although, they (MS) showed great games! Too bad.

For me, this generation will be PC-Steam first, then PS4 and maybe I'll buy a Xbox One if they change their policy.

Oh give over. It's not misleading if that's how the dog really behaved. She obviously hadn't gone past the point of no return. Nobody's saying that the work is over, just that dogs like her sometimes need someone to take a chance on them.

or buses. Yea I'll take my chances with a hot chick in a Lamborghini over public transit any day.