Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salt Lake Tribune)   Police find missing 3 year old sleeping in his own basement after searching the neighborhood door to door search and only shooting one dog   (sltrib.com) divider line 235
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

7338 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2014 at 3:22 PM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



235 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-25 08:22:55 PM  

Liliac_Hill: but I didn't hear anyone say it went off repeatedly after that.


It went off repeatedly after that.
 
2014-06-25 08:22:56 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Well I just googled the phrase "only the police should have guns" and this was the first result:


                                                                                                                                          NO GUNS!by Sarah, age 10"I think all guns should be banned. The only exception is for police officers. I have 3 uncles who are police officers, and they have guns just to protect us. It definitely makes us safer IF it is in a police officer's hands."

Prominent people indeed.


You should google "false equivalence fallacy".
 
2014-06-25 08:24:10 PM  

Giltric: insertsnarkyusername: Giltric: insertsnarkyusername: Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Heh. Didn't like my response?

Feinstein wanting to ban "assault weapons" is neither here nor there in what we are discussing.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/10/obama-suggests-us-needs-ban-on-sem ia utomatic-automatic-weapons/

Is a ban on semi autos too nuanced?

A trashy conservative websites cherry picks Obama quotes and then fills in the blanks to create the impression that Obama wants to seize your guns? Has that ever happened before?

No usually they refer to his campaign website and his votes and quotes as a senator where he wanted to ban guns....pistols and semi autos IIRC.

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

Next thing you will tell me is Obama has not responsible for his subordinates actions....unlike Christie....right?


He's never been pro gun and not shy about it. But you are grasping at straws here.
 
2014-06-25 08:32:37 PM  

CowardlyLion: Salt Lake man wants police officer who killed his dog fired

Waaaaah. STFU and train your next dog not to attack the police.

/it's a dog--grow the fark up
//white people are the farking worst


At least we have the IQ to understand the articles that we read, you vapid POS.
 
2014-06-25 08:47:33 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?


Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.
 
2014-06-25 08:49:58 PM  
<a id="cu91604654" href="http://CowardlyLion " target="_blank" cowardlylion"="" users="" www.fark.com="" data-cke-saved-href="<a href=">CowardlyLion
Salt Lake man wants police officer who killed his dog fired
Waaaaah. STFU and train your next dog not to attack the police.
/it's a dog--grow the fark up
//white people are the farking worst


I like this idea.  People in the US are already learning that police can be an explosive id device if not handled carefully.  Why not do this for dogs too?  Have them tased or fed nasty tasting food by a person in various officer uniforms until they are afraid to approach
 
2014-06-25 08:55:25 PM  
Maybe the dog had a gun. Article didn't say. Bet none of you thought of that.
 
2014-06-25 09:07:03 PM  

Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.


That's better but it's still not what I was arguing against. But thank you for providing actual evidence.
 
2014-06-25 09:07:52 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: nyseattitude: "There are extenuating circumstances," said Wilking. "A child is missing, and if you're a parent, you would want us to look everywhere for your child. We wouldn't want to leave any stone unturned."

That give you the right to void everyone's rights and break the law.

The guy should press charges for murder, breaking and entering, trespassing, illegal search, conduct unbecoming of an officer, excessive force, civil rights infractions and everything else a lawyer can come up with.

How is he going to press charges? Call the police? Best he can do is sue them.


In Utah, that sadly appears to be correct.

In many states, a citizen can go to a magistrate and swear out a warrant.  Utah seems to have no such procedure, and appears to require all charges to go through a prosecutor.

Where I am, I can go straight to a judge, present my case, and if the judge believes me, have a warrant issued.  If that happens, the cop will be arrested.  The cop would likely be immediately released after booking, and the prosecutor may dismiss the charges, but it at least forces them to look at it, and the cop gets a black mark on his record for having been arrested.
 
2014-06-25 09:07:55 PM  

Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.


And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.
 
2014-06-25 09:08:50 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

That's better but it's still not what I was arguing against. But thank you for providing actual evidence.


What, exactly, are you arguing against?
 
2014-06-25 09:10:30 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.


Duh, it's almost like Reid and the DNC allowing her to go off after Newtown was self-defeating.
 
2014-06-25 09:19:38 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

That's better but it's still not what I was arguing against. But thank you for providing actual evidence.

What, exactly, are you arguing against?


A couple posters kept insisting that "prominent people in politics want to ban and seize all guns". It's a pet peeve of mine because I have a lot of family and old friends from heavily red areas that like to go on about that. Funny thing is that nobody can ever find any real evidence.

Frankly I think Feinstein is an idiot and her gun bans are basically political posturing that really don't do much when you look at them. A lot of us lefties are gun owners too and very keen to protect the second amendment.

/live in Washington state we like our pot legal, our gays married and our guns in good supply.


DarkVader: insertsnarkyusername: nyseattitude: "There are extenuating circumstances," said Wilking. "A child is missing, and if you're a parent, you would want us to look everywhere for your child. We wouldn't want to leave any stone unturned."

That give you the right to void everyone's rights and break the law.

The guy should press charges for murder, breaking and entering, trespassing, illegal search, conduct unbecoming of an officer, excessive force, civil rights infractions and everything else a lawyer can come up with.

How is he going to press charges? Call the police? Best he can do is sue them.

In Utah, that sadly appears to be correct.

In many states, a citizen can go to a magistrate and swear out a warrant.  Utah seems to have no such procedure, and appears to require all charges to go through a prosecutor.

Where I am, I can go straight to a judge, present my case, and if the judge believes me, have a warrant issued.  If that happens, the cop will be arrested.  The cop would likely be immediately released after booking, and the prosecutor may dismiss the charges, but it at least forces them to look at it, and the cop gets a black mark on his record for having been arrested.


That's really interesting, I haven't ever lived in a state where that was possible. I kind of like it. Thanks.
 
2014-06-25 09:28:32 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: /live in Washington state we like our pot legal, our gays married and our guns in good supply.


Colorado here. Unfortunately, our Dems only support two of the three.

//Way more than just a pet peeve.
 
2014-06-25 09:47:38 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.


No that was for all guns.  She settled for the AWB when that was all she could get enough votes for, but she was trying to get enough votes to ban everything.
 
2014-06-25 09:51:07 PM  

Dragonflew: Motherfarking piece of shiat pig. I thought the headline was a joke, but I should have known it wasn't. A cop isn't satisfied at the end of the day unless he's killed someone's dog, is he?

it was not even a shepherd or a pit bull, the coward pig shot one of these:

[weimaranerdog.org image 850x837]


So you're saying it'd be fine to shoot one of these?

s3.amazonaws.com
 
2014-06-25 09:57:00 PM  
"There are extenuating circumstances," said Wilking. "A child is missing, and if you're a parent, you would want us to look everywhere for your child. We wouldn't want to leave any stone unturned."


How about starting with the home, where the kid was found; which would have prevented the surrounding homes' yards to be searched; which would've kept the cop from shooting the dog...

Don't get me wrong, it totally sucks & I'd be pissed at the police department about it too; but that family needs to have some responsibility in this situation as well...
 
2014-06-25 10:28:49 PM  

Callous: insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.

No that was for all guns.  She settled for the AWB when that was all she could get enough votes for, but she was trying to get enough votes to ban everything.


That was in response to a question about the assault weapon ban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffI-tWh37UY
 
2014-06-25 10:34:21 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.

No that was for all guns.  She settled for the AWB when that was all she could get enough votes for, but she was trying to get enough votes to ban everything.

That was in response to a question about the assault weapon ban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffI-tWh37UY


Why does that matter?

Banning firearms is banning firearms.

Your argument seems to be basically a drug war argument.

We don't want to ban ALL guns, just the fun ones. Like "assault weapons".
We don't want to ban ALL drugs, just the fun ones. Like weed and coke.
 
2014-06-25 10:42:38 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: Callous: insertsnarkyusername: LiteWerk: In case you are unaware, some very prominent people in the political world currently and in the past 20-30 years have gone on record as to wanting to banning all private ownership of guns.

Who?

Feinstein said on CBS-TV's, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.

And that wasn't all guns that was "assault weapons".
/bet she couldn't even pull close to 51 votes for that.

No that was for all guns.  She settled for the AWB when that was all she could get enough votes for, but she was trying to get enough votes to ban everything.

That was in response to a question about the assault weapon ban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffI-tWh37UY

Why does that matter?

Banning firearms is banning firearms.

Your argument seems to be basically a drug war argument.

We don't want to ban ALL guns, just the fun ones. Like "assault weapons".
We don't want to ban ALL drugs, just the fun ones. Like weed and coke.


I don't personally agree with an "assault weapons" ban. That's why I keep putting it in quotes, but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them. Sure I'll tell people that I think the idea is idiotic and doesn't actually fix any problems. But I was just commenting on overly vague fear mongering.

/semi-autos are too much fun to give up
 
2014-06-25 10:48:06 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them


Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.
 
2014-06-25 11:06:28 PM  

iheartscotch: CSB time!

We had some busybody from the HOA come by my parents house the other day; trying claiming their Boxer is really a Pitt Bull. Apparently, she got all indignant when my dad explained to her that he's not a Pitt. She also called the cops, I guess. Luckily for us; the responding officer recognized him as a boxer and told the busybody so.


If I walk our boxer, it's a pit bull.  If my wife walks it, it's an adorable puppy.  If my kid walks it, it's a barely-in-control pitbull waiting to rip eyeballs out of human skulls.

So the moral of this story is I should just let my wife walk our adorable puppy.
 
2014-06-25 11:07:29 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them

Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.


Fear is the way they have chosen to try and get support from the public.  They attach scary sounding labels to try and scare people into supporting their bans.  If they ever manage another "Assault Weapons" ban it won't end there, your bolt-action hunting rifle will become a "Sniper Rifle" and your trap and skeet gun will become a "Street Sweeper" just like inexpensive handguns became "Saturday Night Specials".  They just have to prepare the press releases and wait for someone to commit a high profile enough crime with one of them.

It didn't help that they couldn't even define what an "Assault Weapon" is other than creating a list of arbitrary features that had little to no impact on the function or performance of the rifle and saying "Oh look it's all black and scary!!".
 
2014-06-25 11:13:09 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them

Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.


 I can't agree with banning certain types of firearms is banning them all. We already regulate what civilians can and can't buy, besides slippery slope arguments are a slippery slope themselves.But I can agree with you that useless, basically symbolic legislation like that solves nothing. Unfortunately this is like getting Republicans to stop ranting about abortion. Both parties have to call for sanity from the inside before anything changes.
 
2014-06-25 11:14:13 PM  

Callous: Fear is the way they have chosen to try and get support from the public


Yeah, fear works both ways.
 
2014-06-25 11:16:55 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them

Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.

 I can't agree with banning certain types of firearms is banning them all. We already regulate what civilians can and can't buy, besides slippery slope arguments are a slippery slope themselves.But I can agree with you that useless, basically symbolic legislation like that solves nothing. Unfortunately this is like getting Republicans to stop ranting about abortion. Both parties have to call for sanity from the inside before anything changes.


The AWB is bad politics from the Dems. Period. It is picking a fight, not solving shiat.
 
2014-06-25 11:22:53 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them

Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.

 I can't agree with banning certain types of firearms is banning them all. We already regulate what civilians can and can't buy, besides slippery slope arguments are a slippery slope themselves.But I can agree with you that useless, basically symbolic legislation like that solves nothing. Unfortunately this is like getting Republicans to stop ranting about abortion. Both parties have to call for sanity from the inside before anything changes.

The AWB is bad politics from the Dems. Period. It is picking a fight, not solving shiat.


Agreed.

/I'll take a shot of bourbon to that.
 
2014-06-25 11:30:31 PM  

insertsnarkyusername: Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: Ow! That was my feelings!: insertsnarkyusername: but banning certain types of firearms is not banning all of them

Folks on the right don't see it that way.

I agree with them.

It won't stop there and everyone knows it. The support for an AWB on the left has killed off Federal gun control. Dems need to drop their obsession with "assault weapons" if they really want to advance gun "safety". It's a deal killer, even among non-Repubs.

 I can't agree with banning certain types of firearms is banning them all. We already regulate what civilians can and can't buy, besides slippery slope arguments are a slippery slope themselves.But I can agree with you that useless, basically symbolic legislation like that solves nothing. Unfortunately this is like getting Republicans to stop ranting about abortion. Both parties have to call for sanity from the inside before anything changes.

The AWB is bad politics from the Dems. Period. It is picking a fight, not solving shiat.

Agreed.

/I'll take a shot of bourbon to that.


Ah, uh.. damn... but I will tip one back...
beerabstract.com
 
2014-06-25 11:53:46 PM  
media.giphy.com
 
2014-06-26 12:31:51 AM  
dogs need to start standing their ground when faced with hostile pigs.
 
2014-06-26 12:50:53 PM  

Gyrfalcon:  It's not like he shot your child.


You have never owned a dog, have you?
 
2014-06-26 06:17:27 PM  

WaitForIt: You have never owned a dog, have you?


I've had dogs all my life, and I'd be major pissed if someone shot my dog.  But it's still *not* the same as a child.

If you love your dog as much as your child, I feel sorry for your child.  My guess is that the people who think they are comparable have never had children.
 
2014-06-26 06:50:33 PM  

nyseattitude: "There are extenuating circumstances," said Wilking. "A child is missing, and if you're a parent, you would want us to look everywhere for your child. We wouldn't want to leave any stone unturned."

That give you the right to void everyone's rights and break the law.

The guy should press charges for murder, breaking and entering, trespassing, illegal search, conduct unbecoming of an officer, excessive force, civil rights infractions and everything else a lawyer can come up with.


That. I hope he gets all the money as well as his fond wish, though I'm not holding my breath. Some little parasitic waste of space that should be institutionalized anyway is not more important than a man's property rights, nor the right of his dog to live. Can we really trust the kind of retard that trespasses and mercilessly guns down a dog before going on his way, then sits there and tries to justify it, as an officer of the law?
 
2014-06-26 08:06:48 PM  
Words is the cop shot the dog through the fence and did not enter Kendalls backyard.

A fence between the cop and the dog does not equal a life threatening situation for the cop.
 
2014-06-26 08:19:48 PM  

Giltric: Words is the cop shot the dog through the fence and did not enter Kendalls backyard.

A fence between the cop and the dog does not equal a life threatening situation for the cop.


Word from any sort of credible source? Because if that is true, there is no way this doesn't warrant criminal charges.

Well, there would be one way - if the cop could see the child in the yard and the dog was a threat to the child. But since the kid was in his own house, that one ain't going to hold water.
 
Displayed 35 of 235 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report