Title: For Police: Postal Worker Accidentally Makes Video on How Not To Shoot Dogs Source:
Activist Post URL Source:http://www.activistpost.com/2015/01 ... ostal-worker-accidentally.html Published:Jan 28, 2015 Author:Amanda Warren Post Date:2015-02-02 09:45:51 by Deckard Keywords:None Views:26361 Comments:66
An Australian motovlogger shoots dogs - with a DriftHD 1080P camera. His other armament? Treats.
This postal worker comes across friendly dogs, but also plenty of vicious dogs who will bite him if they get a chance. And sometimes, those dogs get loose. He nonchalantly points to a dog who bit him in the past. He wants people to know that "posties" love dogs. What would he think of our American police state that trains officers to shoot any kind of breed? Without prompting.
Unfortunately, witnesses often report the dog's friendly demeanor, but officers will falsify reports or say "there was a look in his eye." They offer absurd, irrational responses. They intrude on someone's property and then claim the dog was "aggressing" them, when it barks or approaches. They cry "Pitbull!" when it's not, nor is that a cause for execution. Let's not forget that killing animals for no cause is a hallmark of psychopaths.
But regular, rational people cannot fathom this, so they might go along with blaming the owners. They might claim there is a lack of proper training, that officers should be encouraged to use non-lethal methods. They already can but they don't. "If they hesitate it could be their own lives," people have said. To date, no officers have been killed by dogs. But one recently coaxed a friendly dog over to him in order to kill it. People need to know that none of these things account for police killing tiny breeds, chained or tied dogs, cats, kittens, squirrels, baby deer, docile cows, or a parakeet - and of course, innocent people. Nor does it account for using live, injured animals for target practice.
Mind acrobatics must be performed to justify the widespread killing of domestic companions when you consider that there has not been a movement on the part of postal workers and all forms of delivery people to be allowed to shoot animals that they come into personal contact with on a daily basis. Nor would society be too keen on arming them for indiscriminate blasting or cutting - not even for fear's sake.
One guy wants to show you how to get the job done. Please also see The Free Thought Project's report on the topic, where I saw this video first.
officers will falsify reports or say "there was a look in his eye." They offer absurd, irrational responses. They intrude on someone's property and then claim the dog was "aggressing" them, when it barks or approaches. They cry "Pitbull!" when it's not, nor is that a cause for execution. Let's not forget that killing animals for no cause is a hallmark of psychopaths.
Not just psychopaths. I've read before that dogs are shot at much higher rates by physically inadequate male cops and female cops in general. And that the media does everything it can to keep this fact from the public.
Being a cop is a job for a large physically capable man of even emotional disposition. No matter what the feminists and queer studies academics say.
Actually, we do know what police forces do favor in hiring now.
Combat vets. They exclude people with IQs over 100. Also anyone with much education. They exclude people with a strong personal moral code like Christianity that might override commands given by superiors, as in being ordered to beat an irascible old guy in a wheelchair in Texas (an actual case a fine Christian officer was dismissed over).
So those will be your core force. Toss in a bunch of affirmative action hires including gays and women who rarely top the physical fitness and aptitude lists. And you have a modern militarized police force that tasers old people and shoots dogs.
A lot of it comes from these private police training groups. They have spread a lot of poisonous ideas and attitudes to police across the country.
SUBJECT: Studies, Case Law, Quotes, Standards and Trends in Support of a
College Education for Police Officers
1. Purpose. Provide
information regarding the need to require college education for police
applicants.
2. Discussion. Some 68 years ago Chief August Vollmer,
the Dean of American Policing, called for mandatory college education for
police officers. As society has become more complex, basic police
qualifications have not maintained the same pace. If police officers are to be
considered a profession in their own right, then a college education, the
hallmark of a profession, must be mandated to better serve society. Departments
requiring college degrees for officers have increased - not decreased -
minority hiring. Establishing an associate’s degree requirement is a good start
towards ultimately achieving the recommendation of several national commissions
and the Federal Courts of a bachelor’s degree standard.
3. Facts.
a. Minorities.
The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP) has recommended higher education for police officers as
a means of reducing police abuse of power against minorities. (NAACP/Harvard
Study)
The former Director of The National Institute of Justice, Jeremy
Travis, found that the level of education for African-American police officers
was similar to that of white officers.
In 1978 Patrick Murphy, then
Director of Public Safety in Washington, DC, found that African-American police
officers had more education than their white counterparts. This is true for
most of the nation.
In Baltimore, over twenty years ago, when a four-year
degree entrance position (called a police agent) was established, the number of
applicants from the African-American community actually increased. This also
has been true for many departments when establishing a four-year degree
requirement.
b. Performance.
A recent large-scale study of California
police officers found that, “Officers with fewer college units tended to have
significantly more complaints than officers with a higher number of units.”
(Wilson, Journal of California Law Enforcement, V33, N4, 1999)
In the so-
called “Rampart Division Scandal” of the Los Angeles Police Department
(murdering suspects, planting evidence, perjury, etc.) only one of the many
involved officers was a college graduate, in spite of a high percentage of
college graduate officers overall in the Department. (Unpublished study by
Dennis Porter, Los Angeles, 1999)
The Blue Ribbon Commission in Chicago
recommended that officers have bachelor’s degrees as a move to reduce
corruption. (Report of the Commission on Integrity, Report to Mayor Daly, 1997)
A Rand study determined that college grads had only an 8% civilian
complaint rate compared to a 24% rate for non-college grads.
Of the NYCPD
officers arrested for corrupt acts from 1993 to 1997, 86% would not have been
hired had an associate’s degree been required. (Gerald W. Lynch, President of
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, USA Today, August 6, 1997) Another study
found that in a midwestern city, officers without a college education accounted
for 42% of the total founded complaints while only accounting for 29% of the
total officer population. (American Journal of Police, V11, N2, 1992)
In
Dade County, Florida research found that a police officer with a four-year
degree had a 73% chance of superior performance, 65% if he or she possessed a
two-year degree and a 50 % chance if he or she had a high school diploma.
(Journal of Police Science and Administration, V5, N1, March 1977)
A study
of 118 nonsupervisory patrol officers from Lincoln, Nebraska found that higher
education was associated with less dogmatic beliefs (more open-mindedness) and
better patrol performance. (Journal of Police Science and Administration, V6,
N3, September 1978)
c. Standards/Trends.
At least fifty percent
of Rhode Island’s cities and towns now require police applicants to have at
least 60 college credits. (RISP website)
Tulsa, Oklahoma; Charleston, South
Carolina; Smithfield, Rhode Island and over 30 other local departments require
a four-year degree for entering officers. They are maintaining or increasing
their numbers of minority officers.
State Police Agencies that require four-
year degrees include New Jersey, Illinois and the North Dakota Highway Patrol.
The International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and
Training (IADLEST) and The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) have passed
resolutions in favor of the four-year degree requirement.
Of the 678,000
police officers in the country, over 153,000 (22.6%) possess four-year degrees
and the number had been growing by 2% per year. A study by Craig Campbell
indicates the number is now declining because LEAP educated officers (a tuition
reimbursement program in the 1970’s) are retiring and are being replaced with
new officers without college.
The number of police departments requiring
some college for entering officers increased by over 100% from 1990 to 1997,
from 14% to 32%. Between 1990 and 2000 the number of departments requiring
associate’s degrees increased by 100% and the number of departments requiring
bachelor’s degrees also increased 100%. (Local Police Departments 1997, 2000
U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics)
Minnesota requires all police applicants
to possess a two-year degree.
In Davis v. Dallas, a 1984 federal court
case, college education was judged to be a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification
(BFOQ).