Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jennings Resident Says Dog Was Shot For No Reason; Sheriff Says Deputy Felt Threatened
Greenfield Reporter ^ | January 17, 2014

Posted on 01/18/2014 11:04:19 AM PST by nickcarraway

A Jennings resident claims one of his pit bulldogs was shot to death for no reason by a Jefferson Davis Parish Sheriff's Deputy.

Jeff Davis Sheriff Ivy Woods told KPLc that the shooting happened Thursday as a deputy was on a call in the area where Jacob Authement lives. The deputy was responding to a complaint from neighbors about four-wheelers being driven in the area.

(Excerpt) Read more at greenfieldreporter.com ...


TOPICS: Local News; Pets/Animals; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: abuseofpower; dogs; donutwatch; police
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-121 next last

1 posted on 01/18/2014 11:04:19 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Lapdog no...Doberman pinscher ot pot bull, yeah...


2 posted on 01/18/2014 11:06:08 AM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

i wish citizens could deal with problems this way simply because they feel “threatened”. cops are enjoying their license to kill.


3 posted on 01/18/2014 11:13:11 AM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Most dogs will protect their territory, and bark at someone they don’t know. So now it’s standard procedure to shoot the dog. Or the old man with a TV remote.


4 posted on 01/18/2014 11:14:45 AM PST by I want the USA back (Media: completely irresponsible traitors. Complicit in the destruction of our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

With pit bulls, the only way you know if they are going to attack you or not, when they run up to you wagging their tail, is whether they sink their teeth deep into your leg and start thrashing like a shark to use their body weight to help rip away chunks of muscle (with or without your femoral) so I am slowly beginning to understand why a police officer might shoot a pit bull that is not secured and approached him. Now if that pit stayed in place and didn’t approach - then probably unjustified unless the man was using the dog as a weapon (preparing to flee using the dog as a weapon to keep the officer in place.) I’d need to know more but I believe it is likely that this shooting was legit. That’s my way of saying you shouldn’t have to “prove” a pit is going to attack you by letting it grab your flesh and unfortunately, pits are bred not to warn you that they are about to attack you.


5 posted on 01/18/2014 11:14:55 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001
Dobes are very family oriented and HAVE to be around their people. They are also very protective. Mine thinks he is a lapdog.

Shoot him, and and receive the same fate.

6 posted on 01/18/2014 11:15:00 AM PST by Repeat Offender (What good are conservative principles if we don't stand by them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The discharge of an officer’s firearm is supposed to meet a very specific standard, that of an officer facing a threat of deadly force.

It does not have a standard of ‘the officer felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt threatened.’ Even police dogs, when deployed against suspects, are considered ‘less than deadly force.’ These dogs are specifically trained to attack, defend themselves, and detain a suspect. They are trained how to bite, and how to hold on. If they are not considered deadly force, how in any form or fashion can any officer claim justification for shooting any dog?


7 posted on 01/18/2014 11:17:50 AM PST by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

So pit bulls should be shot on sight?

Congratulations, you just won the dumbest post of the month award.


8 posted on 01/18/2014 11:18:00 AM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kingu

Police officer should have to show actual bite marks. Otherwise, they should be fired for this kind of thing.


9 posted on 01/18/2014 11:18:56 AM PST by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

“FELT” threatened????

I was a mailman for 10 years and felt more threatened by the degenerate slugs (human) than the stray dogs.

Should I have been authorized to shoot them???

These cops who do this are simply out of control and need to kill something. If they’re trained policemen and don’t know how to handle a DOGGIE, they’re in the wrong profession.
Dogs do not carry concealed guns or knives or bombs or infected drug needles.


10 posted on 01/18/2014 11:20:49 AM PST by joethedrummer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingu
It does not have a standard of ‘the officer felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt threatened.’ Even police dogs, when deployed against suspects, are considered ‘less than deadly force.’ These dogs are specifically trained to attack, defend themselves, and detain a suspect. They are trained how to bite, and how to hold on. If they are not considered deadly force, how in any form or fashion can any officer claim justification for shooting any dog?

Different rules for different people.

11 posted on 01/18/2014 11:22:21 AM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

You can’t read? Go ahead and misinterpret my posts while calling me names - it’s the pit bull owner way.


12 posted on 01/18/2014 11:27:04 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Since when do we, as a people, accept things like that?

One standard should apply to all Americans, no matter if they are officers or private citizens. If I randomly walk up to someone’s house and their dog comes out to greet me, and I shot it, I'd have my firearm confiscated and likely placed in custody, and at the very least, will likely face a lawsuit from an angry homeowner.

Officers can do all of this with complete impunity, as all safeguards that are supposed to exist, including oversight, training standards and rules for use of deadly force go out the window when dealing with dogs.

I guess the only answer at this point is to work towards getting federal civil rights charges filed against officers who open fire on family dogs. Surely there is some US Attorney who is dog friendly, and realizes that the unchecked assassination of family dogs will eventually result in an officer being taken down by a private citizen ‘protecting his family’ from the unlawful use of deadly force.

13 posted on 01/18/2014 11:27:09 AM PST by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

I have had dogs bark at me and approach me in a threatening manner. I was never once bitten.


14 posted on 01/18/2014 11:27:43 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kingu

The discharge of an officer’s firearm is supposed to meet a very specific standard, that of an officer facing a threat of deadly force.

It does not have a standard of ‘the officer felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt threatened.’ Even police dogs, when deployed against suspects, are considered ‘less than deadly force.’ These dogs are specifically trained to attack, defend themselves, and detain a suspect. They are trained how to bite, and how to hold on. If they are not considered deadly force, how in any form or fashion can any officer claim justification for shooting any dog?
___________________________________________________

POlice dogs don’t have the kill rate that pits have. Police dogs are trained to detain whereas pits go into a blood frenzy and refuse to release when ordered to, when beaten, when doused in water or hit with sticks. There is a huge difference. Pits don’t have the social agreement that other dogs have to act in a domesticated manner. An unsecured rottie running up to someone is also quite a threat because while pits kill more people than all other breeds combined, rotties are the second most likely to kill a human.


15 posted on 01/18/2014 11:30:24 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Police officer should have to show actual bite marks. Otherwise, they should be fired for this kind of thing.
_______________________________________

Normal dogs bite and release (repeat as they deem necessary). Pits strip chunks of flesh off and they don’t stop once they get started. They latch onto limbs and thrash like a shark. The most recent account of a pit bull killing an owner was due to the fact that the dog severed the femoral artery. So let a pit bite first may cost a limb or your life because shock sets in fast.


16 posted on 01/18/2014 11:32:47 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

“Sheriff says deputy felt threatened” The dog threw popcorn on him. :-)


17 posted on 01/18/2014 11:38:34 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
Normal dogs bite and release

It's actually not as easy to get bitten by a dog as you seem to think.

18 posted on 01/18/2014 11:42:15 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

‘Fraid of dogs, Barney?


19 posted on 01/18/2014 11:43:27 AM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

This is classic pit bull attack (video link below). This is when I started thinking it may be justified to harm a pit bull running up to you. The videos I’ve watched often show a dog running up with their tail wagging, and then the tail wags faster while they rip and tear. So with this video, if someone shot the running pit bull, waging it’s tail, pit lovers would be saying “He just wanted to play. He LOVES children!” By the time the dog is ripping the child apart - too late.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOmW4BBdi1s


20 posted on 01/18/2014 11:47:43 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote; null and void; Vendome

Bred to not warn you they are about to attack. Made that one up, did you?

I’m not a supporter of pit bulls, but even I know that many are quite friendly.

bootlicker ping!


21 posted on 01/18/2014 11:47:56 AM PST by Shimmer1 (don 't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I have only been bitten once after decades around dogs and that was when I was about six years old and stepped on the dog’s tail. Bite release = Get OFF my TAIL! This is domestic dog behavior WHEN they bite. Pits go hunting. I’ve read so many accounts of the pit bull breed or crossbreed maiming and killing people because the dogs “got out.”


22 posted on 01/18/2014 11:49:41 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Shimmer1

Yes, because not warning of attack is a strategic advantage. I first read about this when reading of an animal behavior specialist investigating a pit bull that had mauled someone. As he approached the fence where the pit bull was penned, the dog bounced forward, bowed and wagged it’s tail - the way dogs invite you to play. Bow and wag, bow and wag, playful little bounds. The behaviorist drew close enough to the fence and was gesturing friendliness when the dog launched at the fence trying to get to his face while snarling and trying to rip the fencing apart to get to him. And the behaviorist said “That would work. In a pit fighting scenario it’s the sneak attack.” He went on to say that the problem with pits is that they lie. Other dogs signal their intent - even a dog trying to steal snacks tends to give itself away by its behavior. But pits lie and the ones used to fight tended to die quick (leaving fewer offspring) than the ones who lied well and reproduced for more years. Oh I know that not every pit lies - but it is impossible to tell them apart until someone is maimed or dies.


23 posted on 01/18/2014 11:58:31 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

corrections to clarify text:

Yes, because not warning of attack is a strategic advantage. I first read about this when reading of an animal behavior specialist investigating a pit bull that had mauled someone. As he approached the fence where the pit bull was penned, the dog bounced forward, bowed and wagged it’s tail - the way dogs invite you to play. Bow and wag, bow and wag, playful little bounds. The behaviorist drew close enough to the fence and was gesturing friendliness when the dog launched at the fence trying to get to his face while snarling and trying to rip the fencing apart to get to him. And the behaviorist said “That would work. In a pit fighting scenario it’s the sneak attack.” He went on to say that the problem with pits is that they lie. Other dogs signal their intent - even a dog trying to steal snacks tends to give itself away by its behavior. But pits lie and the ones used to fight and revealed their intentions tended to die quick (leaving fewer offspring) than the ones who lied well (sneak attack) and reproduced for more years. Oh I know that not every pit lies - but it is impossible to tell them apart until someone is maimed or dies.


24 posted on 01/18/2014 12:00:22 PM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

ping


25 posted on 01/18/2014 12:06:30 PM PST by Perdogg (Ted Cruz-Rand Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

was that pit bull one that had been “trained to fight”?

If so, then it is not indicative of all pits


26 posted on 01/18/2014 12:12:30 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kingu
Since when do we, as a people, accept things like that?

I don't know.
I strongly suspect that it is the result of indoctrination to blindly accept the authority claimed by someone in a position of authority as pushed by our public schooling system. — The acceptance of the War on Drugs (WOD) illustrates this perfectly.

The federal government claims the authority by way regulating the intrastate commerce which comes from its regulation of interstate commerce… it even accepts that non-commerce can be regulated by the interstate commerce clause — this completely ignores that the similar federal prohibition on alcohol required a Constitutional amendment. Oddly enough, though they claim the authority via the interstate commerce clause there is no notice that the full clause cites the power as the same regarding foreign nations: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.

This means that the power to regulate interstate commerce is the same power as to regulate commerce with foreign countries. This in turn means that the actions the federal government does to enforce their intrastate commerce ought to be regarded on the same level as if they tried to do it in a foreign country: this would be an act of war, and it's enforcement would be the waging thereof. — The constitution defines this as a crime: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Therefore, to support the WOD is to support treason against the States. — I have never encountered a coherent defense against this argument because to do so is to defend the indefensible.


(The above mentality is also illustrated in things like the particulars of Fast & Furious, as well as the [lack of] consequence to those responsible for it.)

27 posted on 01/18/2014 12:31:22 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother; Titan Magroyne; Badeye; SandRat; arbooz; potlatch; afraidfortherepublic; ...
WOOOF!

Computer Hope

The Doggie Ping list is for FReepers who would like to be notified of threads relating to all things canid. If you would like to join the Doggie Ping Pack (or be unleashed from it), FReemail me.

28 posted on 01/18/2014 12:34:25 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Qui me amat, amat et canem meum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

The police state is here even if they legalized ALL drugs.

This isn’t happening because of the sweaty night dreams of WOD, we are growing a tyranny in this country.


29 posted on 01/18/2014 12:35:38 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Good grief. Calm down. You’re scaring the horses.


30 posted on 01/18/2014 12:39:35 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

You said the following, some of which are just idiotic and some of which are just untrue:

1) Pits will run up to you with their tails wagging and attack completely unprovoked;
2) Officers are justified in shooting pits simply for approaching them regardless of temperament;
3) Officers are justified in shooting pits simply because it can’t be proven that they won’t attack; (!!?) and
4) Pits are bred to attack without warning.

I have two questions - first, how is any of that misinterpreted, and second, how are you not a moron?


31 posted on 01/18/2014 12:45:47 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
This isn’t happening because of the sweaty night dreams of WOD, we are growing a tyranny in this country.

I didn't say that the War on Drugs was the cause, I said that its acceptance is illustrative of the problem.
Or do you disagree with the line of reasoning: that the acceptance of injustice "because they're in authority"1 is not a/the problem?
Do you disagree that this blind acceptance of authority is taught in our schools?
Do you disagree that the self-justification of usurped powers2, even to the literal point of treason3, is not a problem?


1Respect my authority!
2 — The exigent circumstances exception to the absolute requirement of the 4TH amendment, for example.
3 — The equipping of drug cartels in Fast & Furious, the legal protections given them by the DEA and FBI, etc.

32 posted on 01/18/2014 12:47:27 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
"With pit bulls, the only way you know if they are going to attack you or not, when they run up to you wagging their tail, is whether they sink their teeth deep into your leg and start thrashing like a shark to use their body weight to help rip away chunks of muscle (with or without your femoral)"

Great analysis and so very true.

33 posted on 01/18/2014 1:37:41 PM PST by oldenuff2no ("For which she should be charged with and face a jury. Not summarily executed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Not enough info to call this one.

The dog has a right to it’d territory

The officer has a right to hid life.

The officer has a duty to retreat if practicable

If not .....


34 posted on 01/18/2014 1:42:20 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Coming from people who think denying a 12 year old pot is tyranny, I don’t take them seriously


35 posted on 01/18/2014 1:52:48 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Coming from people who think denying a 12 year old pot is tyranny, I don’t take them seriously

Who mentioned a 12 year old?
My argument was based purely on the proper authority in the matter, the Constitution.

If my reasoning is wrong, I welcome you pointing out the flaws.

36 posted on 01/18/2014 2:00:48 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: joethedrummer

My God man, how did you EVER do your job without shooting some vicious, out of control, natural born killing land sharks?? BTW my brother, a street cop of 23 yrs, has dealt with dozens of dogs(including ‘pits’) he wasn’t sure of. Has not shot one yet. Secret——pepper spray.


37 posted on 01/18/2014 2:00:55 PM PST by yadent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kingu
“Even police dogs, when deployed against suspects, are considered ‘less than deadly force.”,P.

So is mace and pepper spray but try using them on a cop and see how many times he shoots you. Your analogy does not hold up when rational thought is applied. As a long time dog handler I have used a dog (less than deadly force) to distract and detain someone so I can deploy deadly force.

Cops have a right to go home every night whole and undamaged. All cops do not make good decisions in every situation, that is true. Another absolute truth is that they are not going to just do nothing and let their ability to defend themselves be compromised when responding to a a violent or unknown situation.

Last night just down the road from us there was an attack by two loose pit bulls on a calf. The livestock owner saw the attack, attempted to stop it but was unable to, went back into their house to retrieve a firearm but the pit bulls left before they could get back out to where the calf was. This all happened in about one minute. I would post the pictures but they are very graphic and gruesome but the are on face book. The pit bulls ripped off both ears, half of the calf's face and nose and large chunks of mussel from it's body. The calf had to be destroyed because of this pit bull attack.

As soon as they find the pit bulls who savagely attacked this calf they will be detained by animal control and put down unless the owner can convince a judge to decide otherwise. The owners of these dogs will be held libel for the cost of the calf and will face very expensive fines. I will predict here and now, and for the hundredth time, that this will happen again. There will be more attacks on animals and people by pit bulls at a rate that greatly exceeds that of any other dog breed. Anyone want to bet???

38 posted on 01/18/2014 2:02:25 PM PST by oldenuff2no ("For which she should be charged with and face a jury. Not summarily executed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Well, that was a different thread.

You are correct, no where in the Constitution does it say you can not keep children in the basement for sex, therefore there should be no federal law against it.

Isn’t that the libertarian argument?

I wonder which will be the first state libertarians and leftists will legalize pedophilia in?


39 posted on 01/18/2014 2:05:41 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
You are correct, no where in the Constitution does it say you can not keep children in the basement for sex, therefore there should be no federal law against it.
Isn’t that the libertarian argument?

Isn't it also the Constitutionalist's argument?

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
and James Madison's?
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
— James Madison, The Federalist No. 45

Why do you insist on taking my claim "X is not legitimately a federal matter, not supported by the Constitution" to mean "no law respecting X should exist"?
The two are vastly different statements.

40 posted on 01/18/2014 2:22:03 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

We are being inundated by paramilitary cops.

We need:

1) Residency requirements - if you won’t LIVE in a community, you can’t police it!

2) An END to the police unions. Cops are civil servants. They have civil service protection. That is adequate.

3) An end to 20 and out.

4) Civilian Review boards

5) Civilian Public Safety Directors with no connection to law enforcement in place of police “chiefs”.

6) Civilian observers at all police “academy” classes.

7) An end to providing law enforcement personnel with heavy military hardware - if that is necessary - call in professionals who know how to use it - the National Guard

8) An end to “swat” teams unless a violent crime is involved.


41 posted on 01/18/2014 2:24:39 PM PST by ZULU (Magua is sitting in the Oval Office. Ted Cruz/Phil Robertson in 2016.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Libertopians want all perversions to be legal. That is my statement. I have seen nothing to suggest otherwise.


42 posted on 01/18/2014 2:30:44 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Libertopians want all perversions to be legal. That is my statement. I have seen nothing to suggest otherwise.

Hm; the people I know with a "libertarian streak" seem to come off more as a government should not dictate the living of life sorts.
Virtually the polar opposite of the statist, or collectivist; in which case I have no problem with them.

There are some "anti-libertarians" who seem to think that any agreement with any "libertarian policy/idea" is equivalent with the wholesale adoption of the Libertarian Party platform and promotion of the homosexual agenda. What's interesting in those cases is the almost bi-polar approach to law: if it agrees with my sense of morality it's good/ok, if it doesn't then no. (Which is a damn stupid stance when you're talking about the powers allowed the State — in the case of marriage, allowing the [federal] government the power to declare it only between a man and woman means ceding to them the power to [at a later date] change it to include homosexuals; so even a "win" is a loss.)

43 posted on 01/18/2014 2:42:55 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
We approve of your post.


44 posted on 01/18/2014 3:29:09 PM PST by Salamander (Sleeping don't come very easy in a strait white vest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

AWWWWW!!!!!


45 posted on 01/18/2014 3:32:37 PM PST by RandallFlagg (IRS = Internal Revenge Service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

I approve of your pics :)


46 posted on 01/18/2014 3:33:26 PM PST by Anton.Rutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Shimmer1; Repeat Offender

“But pits lie”

I’m amazed to find such inanity posited here in this theoretical place of high intellect.

No animal is capable of “lying”.

That is purely a human characteristic.

I’ll remember this thread the next time somebody accuses *me* of anthropomorphizing a dog.

What of Dobes?

A barking Dobe is no big deal.

It’s the one who stops barking that you have to worry about.

So, following the “logic” of this shooting, every Dobe who is *not* barking should be shot on sight.

/facepalm


47 posted on 01/18/2014 3:39:16 PM PST by Salamander (Sleeping don't come very easy in a strait white vest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“animal behavior specialist”

ROFLMAO!

So apparently there are dog “shrink” quacks, too.

I have never read such a patently ludicrous thing in my life.


48 posted on 01/18/2014 3:41:47 PM PST by Salamander (Sleeping don't come very easy in a strait white vest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
POlice dogs don’t have the kill rate that pits have.

Since you're an authority, what is the "kill rate" of a pit? That's a study I would like to read for myself.

49 posted on 01/18/2014 3:42:23 PM PST by Anton.Rutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: trisham

LOL


50 posted on 01/18/2014 3:42:39 PM PST by Salamander (Sleeping don't come very easy in a strait white vest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-121 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson