feels. I appreciate you taking the time to view the content I uploaded If you want to, send a friend request my way. I accept them all!. and kill y, roii. gig , feels I appreciate you taking the time to view content uploaded If want send a friend request my way accept them all! and kill y roii gig
Upload
Login or register

feels

Click to block a category:GamingPoliticsNewsComicsAnimeOther
 
feels. I appreciate you taking the time to view the content I uploaded If you want to, send a friend request my way. I accept them all!. and kill y, roii. gig ,

I appreciate you taking the time to view the content I uploaded
If you want to, send a friend request my way. I accept them all!

and kill y, roii. gig ,
18th, 2014 during a neighborhood saiyin' :" iii
demisting child. (Later found '
mist was shot twice after ? r. , i' viii' i
officers "in an aggressive rri' i" ' fall' lailii' ii, '
always been told by law tee, , i, ieft? Jei'., iff, j' i).
dog is the best defense against .. '
don? see badges, only strange? §‘::? % t
citizen's... dan have theirselfs* % { ',
defending their and 'viii' " ' ii' ii' i. jii, L t
viii, in iii' tel! ti" iii,
...
+258
Views: 11607 Submitted: 07/19/2014
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (117)
[ 117 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#2 - spookyghostparty
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(07/19/2014) [-]
User avatar #3 to #2 - potaetosak
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/19/2014) [-]
I watched this way back guy has an annoying voice www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCNNiRfQiTg
User avatar #7 to #2 - thecharliesheen
Reply +42 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Utah fag, and I can confirm this.
Officer Brett Olsen entered a fenced backyard in a search for a missing child (who was later found sleeping in the basement of his own home) and was growled at by a territorial dog. He then proceeded to shoot the dog, miss, and shoot again, killing the dog. All this happened without a warrant or probable cause that the child might have been suspected to be in the back yard. (Worst of all, the child was found 30 minutes BEFORE this happened, but the officer had not been properly alerted.)
#80 to #7 - anon id: 06d0ba8e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Then why is this faggot not in jail?
#11 to #7 - alanflindt
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#34 to #11 - tjocksnorris
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
ofcourse he have, they can do exactly whatever they want
#25 to #11 - anon id: 6fe427c0
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Yes, the piece of **** didn't receive any punishment and was praised by his Chief.
User avatar #54 to #25 - lubeworm
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
That's not even true you dumb *********, internal investigation under suspension is not doing nothing, and yes, he's suspended with pay because that is the standard when conducting a non-felony investigation, the decision may even penalize the pay while suspended, sorry this isn't the wild west where they could just raise hands and shoot him.

Speaking of, you assholes pissing and moaning and turning this into a gun thing, you want wild west style justice, think about yourselves for a moment

And the SLC police chief did not PRAISE him, you ignorant boar, "This is seasoned officer who has tremendous experience, who has been under fire and performed very well." This reffering to the officers involvement in taking down the Trolley square gunman in 2007.

Don't just vomit your stupid out, please
User avatar #36 - effthree
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Pissed Off Man Confronts Police After They Shot His Dog
User avatar #76 to #36 - lotengo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Gid gut, how can he stay so calm.
if i got a call my dog was shot i probably start crying and screaming so much i cant ev drive a car.
User avatar #38 to #36 - effthree
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
And Dog Shot By Cop - Update
User avatar #5 - sharlibri
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I live in Utah. This has been all over the news lately. I think that the police officers were way out of line shooting the dog. I have dogs to protect my family that I care about and I would be furious if the police came onto my property and shot my dogs.
#47 - mastersaturday
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
That's what you get for living in Utah.
#49 to #47 - utah
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#26 - anon id: 587735be
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Someone has to be this guy, might as well start here. The fact of the matter is the law is there for a reason. Chances are you're right, the dog did not need to be shot. But in the end the government is required to take that of a human life above that of an animal life. I understand that shooting a family pet is wrong, but in a situation with a missing child calling in animal control to get the pet could take too long. Take in the small chance that the dog was aggressive and fighting the cop and the small chance that the child hadn't been safely at home. You can say as much as you want that you wouldn't shoot the dog, but is the health of a human less than that of a pet?
#31 to #26 - anon id: 6fe427c0
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
The cop had no reason to suspect that the child was in the same yard and Geist, the cop trespassed onto private property with no warrant, and killed a dog that was not close enough to attack him (I've seen pictures of the backyard and the dogs body) the officer could have left the yard and not shoot Geist. He chose to shoot him, he did not have to....
#61 to #31 - lubeworm
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I love that you can just say "The cop had no reason to suspect the child was in the same yard"

Oh wait, I didn't realize you were the great Hindsight Lad, my apologies, it's your job to state the obvious fact that, since the child was later discovered elsewhere, there was no need for the police to ever go looking for the kid anywhere

That's not the case, LOST CHILD, people turn **** upside down for a lost child, every second wasted, every location skipped is more chance of harm coming to the child and less chance of finding them

Yes it's sad that the dog is dead, woulda been a lot sadder if a little kid was found dead the next day, I wasn't in the officer's head so I can't say what he was thinking or feeling, the whole thing is ******
#75 to #61 - anon id: d65e7e6a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
no, no, no. the only thing that indicated that the child might be on the property was the fact that it was in the general area. saying that the officer was trading the dog's life for the kids life is an inaccurate portrayal of the choices he faced. had the officer known the kids was in there, that would be the trade off. but he's killing the dog for the minute possibility that the kid is on the property. that's simply not good enough without more reason to suspect the kid is on that particular property. by your logic officers could shoot the whole goddamn neighborhood's dogs.
User avatar #98 to #75 - lubeworm
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Um, no, please calm your mantits, I do not want anyone's dogs to get shot, all I wanted to do was point out that hyperbole like "NO REASON" is inappropriate, there was "reason" whether or not I agree with it.

Just because I don't think people should wag their ignorance in the air doesn't mean I disagree with any core sentiment.

I hate animals being hurt, more often and irrationally so it bothers me more than people being hurt, I spent a half hour Wednesday trying to catch a moth in my apartment without hurting it. Point being, you don't know me, I don't know you, I can tell you however that your nescience is showing
#29 to #26 - peebze
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Considering how corrupt the world is, in my eyes, yes. Some may say pets come and go, its their way, and that they are... I guess you could be cruel and say disposable.

In the above situation, which I've seen multiple times, there were quite a few options than shooting the dog. Did they even try to contact the owner to retrieve the dog? No. They just shot it without giving second thoughts to it. I understand that on legal point of view, he could be considered "in the right", but in a moral sense, he was deep in the wrong.
#59 to #29 - anon id: 093c2504
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
If you honestly believe the life of someone's child is less important than the life of a dog you're an unspeakable cunt and I can't even comprehend what an asshole you must be.
#68 to #59 - peebze
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
And if you honestly believe the police were in the right here to shoot a dog in cold blood without a real reason to, with a plethora of other actions that could of been taken to avoid this, then you are a bigoted bastard.

I mean, the child was asleep in his own home, if the parents knew anything of how to take care of a child they would of known. The situation was completely avoidable.
#9 - kulamia
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
This is VERY disconcerting for me for many reasons:
1) all the ways it normally is;
-police illegally entering property
-no legal action is/will be taken against police/department
-that dog was merely protecting it's family
-that dog was likely a beloved family member
2) If a cop walked onto my property and shot my dog, what would I do?
-If I witnessed a cop approaching my yard and climbing over my fence would I approach them?
-Would I threaten them and would doing so only help them make BS charges against me after shooting my dog?
-if I was there with a gun and the cop pulled out his to shoot my dog would I shoot(injure) the cop?

WAY too many possibilities, my head hurts just thinking of the possibilities, most of them ending with me in jail. This is exactly why the cops should have been fired right away and fined(for the dog AND for illegal invasion).
User avatar #46 to #9 - lubeworm
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I love how different this story would have been if the kid HAD been hiding in the guy's yard, even if the dog hadn't been aggressive, more people would be defending the hero who "did what he had to do to ensure the safety of the child."

Kulamia, you obviously haven't even read the whole story anyway, the guy WASN'T HOME when this happened
#115 to #46 - kulamia
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/21/2014) [-]
You're right, I was unaware he wasn't home.

But the ideas still haunt me. What if this happened to me and I WAS home? If this happened to me and I was not then I could rest in the tiny bit of solace that "I couldn't do anything".
#17 to #9 - hakuna
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I think it would be a normal reaction to pull out your own gun and say that he needed to drop his in order to save your own beloved dog. It will get you in a **** load of trouble, but it would be the only thing you could do to save your dog..
User avatar #39 to #9 - mymommasallama
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
>"would i shoot(injure) the cop?"
i know you are thinking out of love for your dog, but you gotta put that in perspective man.
you may be saving your dog, but the headline will read "man shoots officer in search for missing girl" even if you dont have a gun "man assaults officer in search for missing girl" doesnt sound much better. not to mention if you shoot at the officer, and get lucky enough to not be shot yourself, you will most likely get prison time.

although let me be clear. im not saying i think the cop was in the right whatsoever. in fact after reading that the girl had been found 30 minutes before he shot the dog really made me rage. he has a freakin radio AND a cell phone, someone could have let him know.
TL;DR- losing your dog may suck really really bad, but going to prison for shooting at a cop is much worse.
#114 to #39 - kulamia
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/21/2014) [-]
Well it is partly my beloved friend being killed, with me(his protector) standing there doing nothing...

Also partly how we humans have laws that say those who are supposed to keep the public protected(police) are REQUIRED to have permission to enter OR an unbiased justice of the peace say that to maintain security and safety they must go on my property without my permission.

He disobeyed our laws with no regard to anything that has meaning to me, and then is threatening my friend/as close to a family member as you can get, Believe it or not I for one would be more willing to shoot(injure hopefully) the cop than most people.

Still, I see your point.
#51 - gunsxtreme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Pretty much the same thing happened to my dog when i lived in Arkansas.... Except they weren't cops, our neighbors kids decided they wanted to climb over our fence into our backyard and the same thing happened, they shot the dog and claimed that it attacked them so they got away with it.
Pretty much the same thing happened to my dog when i lived in Arkansas.... Except they weren't cops, our neighbors kids decided they wanted to climb over our fence into our backyard and the same thing happened, they shot the dog and claimed that it attacked them so they got away with it.
User avatar #91 to #51 - vatra
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Next time they come climbing over the fence, shoot them and claim they attacked you on your property.
User avatar #94 to #91 - gunsxtreme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Well we don't live there anymore, but if someone ever does again ill be sure to do just that.
User avatar #95 to #94 - vatra
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I don't know where you moved to, but all the states around Arkansas, the mid west, have laws about protection of life and property. Meaning if someone is trespassing, you have the right to shoot them. It is at your discretion though, you can still get in trouble if say they are young and unarmed.
User avatar #30 - testaburger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Weeeeeeeeeeell
Suppose the kid was there, and the dog was attacking the cops.
What're they supposed to do? Just wait around?

It sucks and all, but I understand why it's legal for them to do it.
User avatar #37 to #30 - junkiejunkmcjunk
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Tazers are a thing in the U.S right?
User avatar #70 to #37 - lubeworm
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Yes but tasers are designed for use on humans, it has been deemed inhumane to use tasers in the repelling or capture of animals, though I'm not sure about CEWs like cattle prods, I know those are illegal to use on humans, doubt we'd ever see those become police issue
User avatar #73 to #70 - lotengo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Geez fellow cop that dog looks kinda scary, should we taser him?
No thats cruel, just kill it.
User avatar #101 to #73 - lubeworm
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Exactly, there's always been a huge turmoil about non and less than lethal deterrents, with both people and animals, humane destruction over possible suffering. Check out the "less than lethal" stuff prohibited in war by the GC, mostly because of "nondetectable or variable elements." Too bad tranquilizer darts don't work like in the cartoons
User avatar #40 to #37 - testaburger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I'm not an american

Sure, but are they good at permanently incapacitating something? It's not just "we need to stop that dog for two seconds so we can sneak by"
#65 to #40 - anon id: 7f5d217a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
>tazer
>two seconds
Ever been shocked by a tazer? If you have and it only stopped you for two seconds, then you probably need a sling to walk with your massive balls, If you have not been shocked by a tazer however, Then let me tell you, it does not incapacitate someone or something for 2 seconds.
#55 to #30 - leftbehind
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Sucks and all....SUCKS AND ALL!?!?!? I don't know about you but if any ****** (cops or not) would try to even hit my dog I would break his goddamn legs with a baseball bat right after I made him eat his own teeth!

"We didn't know better" is not a good enough excuse for breaking in someone's house and then kill an innocent animal.
User avatar #79 to #55 - testaburger
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Sure you would, Edgy McEdgepants
#96 to #79 - leftbehind
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
#60 to #30 - anon id: d47e3726
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I think people are more pissed off at the fact a police officer decided it was totally okay to just walk onto someone elses property without asking permission and without a warrant of any kind thus resulting in shooting the dog who saw an intruder, and acted like it should when it sees an intruder
User avatar #67 to #60 - lubeworm
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Do you even know the story? Asking permission? Guy wasn't home, warrant for entering property in search of missing child, warrants are to contribute validity of evidence in building a case, a warrant is not required in the rescue of a missing child, should a child be recovered in a private residence, the officers will secure the child, secure the scene and wait for a warrant to recover evidence, but in the spirit of testaburger's original comment, with your logic the officer should have just sat on the curb?
"Why didn't you get our kid out of there?"
"I didn't have a warrant ma'am"
#81 to #67 - anon id: d65e7e6a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
you're creating a false choice between shooting the dog and doing nothing. police officers are trained to incapacitate both humans and animals in a nonlethal manner. the officer chose not to.
User avatar #99 to #81 - lubeworm
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I'm creating? We're working under a comment that initiates a supposition. I was addressing the warrant issue posed by anon and at no point did I bring up shooting the dog.

So, take your words out of my mouth and think before you post nitwit.
User avatar #69 to #30 - hitlersgayabortion
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
the issue is that if you want to search a place there are easy alternatives to shooting an aggressive dog. knocking on the front door and asking the owners to restrain their dog, for example. If the owners aren't home you could get animal control. hell, I'm sure the police get trained to restrain dogs short of killing them. Gray Weimaraner aren't a toy breed but they aren't exactly life threatening either. because this was a general search, there was no time pressure to search that particular house. there was no indication that this was the house the kid was in, other than that it was within walking distance of where the kid lived. which makes me wonder how the search was constitutional. even if it was, the officer clearly exercised poor judgment by getting into that situation. and he's probably going to get a slap on the wrist. I understand that cops have a tough job and have to make snap judgment calls everyday. it's a difficult job. but at some point we have to say that this individual should not be a police officer. the fact that you have to make tough calls does not entitle you to make whatever calls you want. there has to be a limit.
#15 - vinylshark
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
#12 - widar
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I have nothing against the US, but often when reading US news I am really glad I don't live there. High crime rates, incompetent but trigger-happy police.
User avatar #22 to #12 - makotoitou
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
Remember that the US is huge, so there's always something happening.
#24 to #22 - widar
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
I know, but all of Europe together is also huge and I don't hear as much ****** up **** about police brutality in pretty much all of western Europe put together (there is some, but overall it seems to be a lot less).
#28 to #12 - anon id: 95633ea7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
A woman sued R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in the US because her husband died from lung cancer with 36 years after smoking 3 packs a day (!) for 20 years straight. The jury voted for the woman and the company has to pay 23 Billion (yes ******* Billion, not Million) because the Jury was convinced that the company didn't make clear enough that nicotin addicts you and smoking kills.
The company will go into objection tho so it's not through yet.

www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28389273

Common sense, what is that?
User avatar #71 to #12 - mattdoggy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/20/2014) [-]
we only have dangerous criminals in a few places high black concentrations large amounts of poverty individuals Florida and outside of there it's usually just Walmart and apple pie. We have a higher number of crimes, but a smaller percentage than a lot of countries.