Sadistic child-hating cop shoots five kittens in front of children

EMNofSeattle said:

A law enforcement marketplace is about the worst damn idea there is, if you think accountability is bad now, wait until a profit driven corporation is running it.

Click to expand...

The only difference between what you just described and actual, real-world police departments is that the corporations are more frequently held liable for their misdeeds.

If you believe that police departments are not profit-driven, then it is you who lives in a "fantasy land where purple unicorns and peaceful dinosaurs reign supreme".

marshaul said:

The only difference between what you just described and actual, real-world police departments is that the corporations are more frequently held liable for their misdeeds.

If you believe that police departments are not profit-driven, then it is you who lives in a "fantasy land where purple unicorns and peaceful dinosaurs reign supreme".

Click to expand...

there is almost no way a police department as currently structured can make a profit... well maybe in extremely rural areas with little crime.

tell me how much it costs to run a homicide investigation, with detective overtime, gas for duty vehicles, forensics tests, sheltering witnesses, etc etc etc. or rape investigations, and how many of those does a big city operate in a year? there's no way you can write enough traffic tickets to cover that.

the point of citations is to punish people for unsafely operating a vehicle, not to make profit for the citing agency. Seattle police for instance has a total budget of 268 million dollars a year. you won't be making enough profit in any way for that to be possible.

EMNofSeattle said:

there is almost no way a police department as currently structured can make a profit... well maybe in extremely rural areas with little crime.

tell me how much it costs to run a homicide investigation, with detective overtime, gas for duty vehicles, forensics tests, sheltering witnesses, etc etc etc. or rape investigations, and how many of those does a big city operate in a year? there's no way you can write enough traffic tickets to cover that.

the point of citations is to punish people for unsafely operating a vehicle, not to make profit for the citing agency. Seattle police for instance has a total budget of 268 million dollars a year. you won't be making enough profit in any way for that to be possible.

Click to expand...

Some one doesn't understand the word "profit" only that it is supposed to be bad because progressives have taught him so.

WalkingWolf said:

You are doing something right now, you are making your voice heard. Though it is not heard loud enough, which is not your fault. The officer endangered the public, had it been a LAC they would have been facing charges. Even speaking out on our site is doing something, hopefully those officers lurking on here will see that the public does not see this as acceptable behavior.

Someone with lack of common sense has no business wearing a badge and gun, even if he is only the dog catcher...

Click to expand...

+1

I dislike it when people accuse others of whining or bitching and insinuate that isn't doing something about it. Freedom of speech was included in the bill of rights because it is a very very powerful tool.

sudden valley gunner said:

Some one doesn't understand the word "profit" only that it is supposed to be bad because progressives have taught him so.

Click to expand...

extreme profit at the peril and expense of other people is bad.

We've already fought this battle in this country, the days of pouring toxic chemicals in the rivers and sending coal miners into the mines with no safety equipment and paying them company scrip are over. the extreme libertarians are the ones with no understanding, you have a nice racket set up, if companies mistreat people even if they could've profitably not done so it's actually the governments fault! how can you lose if you apply logic like that?

I have no beef with people making a profit, profit is great. no one has a problem with that. using a position of power to abuse people and subject them to horrifying conditions while hiding behind the blanket of capitalism is what's wrong...

but this is a debate for another thread.....

so if you want to start yet another social lounge thread on the topic and debate this again there I'll be happy to do so...

EMNofSeattle said:

extreme profit at the peril and expense of other people is bad...

Click to expand...

What is extreme? Who gets to decide?

Short of obtaining them by fraud or unlawful force or causing physical harm to innocents, all profits are neither good nor bad. They are a strong motivator to meet the needs of others.

Short of obtaining profits by fraud or unlawful force or causing physical harm to innocents, we should not care about the "peril and expense of others." It is up to those doing business with an entity to ensure that they are not worse off because of having done that business. Caveat emptor. If you don't believe this, you don't really believe in Liberty. You believe in controlling people to protect them or others from their own stupidity. That ain't Liberty.

EMNofSeattle said:

there is almost no way a police department as currently structured can make a profit... well maybe in extremely rural areas with little crime.

tell me how much it costs to run a homicide investigation, with detective overtime, gas for duty vehicles, forensics tests, sheltering witnesses, etc etc etc. or rape investigations, and how many of those does a big city operate in a year? there's no way you can write enough traffic tickets to cover that.

the point of citations is to punish people for unsafely operating a vehicle, not to make profit for the citing agency. Seattle police for instance has a total budget of 268 million dollars a year. you won't be making enough profit in any way for that to be possible.

Click to expand...

Ever noticed how some "non-profit" corporations are managed very much like for-profit companies? Due to the incentive structures in place, there is very little difference between a "non-profit" and a for-profit company. Both are managed by professional individuals whose salary may grow with success. The company's status as "non-profit" or "for-profit" reflects only whether there are owners who make a return from profits, and has essentially nothing to do with the management structure or incentives in place.

Similarly, whether there are owners who make a profit simply for holding title or stock, or a community who ostensibly owns the department, the actual decisions are made by professionals who take home a tidy sum.

You act as though these expenses mean the officers all hold other jobs and literally donate time and money to ensure the police stay on the beat. In doing so you completely ignore the large quantities of subsidies police receive from federal and state taxes (income, property, and other).

By your argument, there's no way prisons could ever be run by for-profit companies, because they have to rely on tax dollars to pay for all their expenses.

EMNofSeattle said:

We've already fought this battle in this country, the days of pouring toxic chemicals in the rivers and sending coal miners into the mines with no safety equipment and paying them company scrip are over.

Click to expand...

There is nothing libertarian about allowing this.

What you describe is the product of a corporatocracy which still exists today, one largely established by "conservatives" (leftists played the useful idiot here, too).

It's a perversion of the free market and properly robust tort law, something most libertarians could explain in their sleep.

It's hilarious the way those in power want to shunt all the blame to the one group who can't possibly be to blame – libertarians never having had enough power to accomplish something like this.

Maverick9 said:

Though I might like your general view on some of this, no. The method of dealing with feral animals can legally include euthanization. Thus, he did nothing 'illegal', so no action could be taken. I don't think his superiors liked it, possibly because they are more concerned about their rep in the media than the 'wrongness' of is action, morally.

Click to expand...

The outrage here centers around traumatizing children. Giving an animal a quick, relatively painless death may not be cruel, but a hired thug of the state killing members of a species that many people, especially children, have an affinity for, in front of children, is reprehensible.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

Traumatizing young children get over it.

Children have been expose to the killing of animals for years. It was all part of life. What traumatizes them is the un realistic believe that nothing ever dies.

The millions and millons of country/farm kids are not traumatized when they kill their pet, cow, pig ,lamb for food or do away with over stocked animals.

The parents of these children should have explained the facts of life and death to them.

What much of wimps moaning and complaining about some feral cats that were causing a health problems with their fleas.

Click to expand...

As a firearms instructor, you wouldn't happen to do business with one or more LEAs, would you?

EMNofSeattle said:

Lets think a situation involving a city animal control officer, with city equipment, how much you wanna bet the shelters in that area that he could try to take them to are public or private with a taxpayer contract?

Ill let you ponder this one for awhile, it may take all the thinking power you have...

Click to expand...

It no doubt taxes (pun not intended) your cognitive capacity to comprehend that I have no control over the relative proportions of private to public entities in a given area. There are plenty of private shelters, and there would no doubt be more if there were no taxes.

EMNofSeattle said:

I don't want to hear this phony righteous indignation about animal cruelty.

Click to expand...

You and others here seem to love strawmen. My complaint about this case has always been about the harm to the children.

The topic of dislike of cats came up, and as someone who likes cats, I decided to rub it in that people who hated cats (largely for utterly retarded religious reasons pertaining to allegedly being affiliated with Satan which no doubt is still a common reason to this day) suffered greatly for acting against cats, but that was completely tangential to my main point.

I don't care much for cats, I am a dog person. BUT cats are very beneficial to rodent control, even feral cats. They do not tend to attack children as dogs do. And believe fleas exist whether there are cats, dogs, or rabbits, or none of them. The cats were just the hosts.

I would be just as upset if he was killing a nest of non venomous snakes with a handgun. It was a irresponsible unsafe act, he should be fired.

minarchist said:

You and others here seem to love strawmen. My complaint about this case has always been about the harm to the children.

I decided to rub it in that people who hated cats (largely for utterly retarded religious reasons pertaining to allegedly being affiliated with Satan which no doubt is still a common reason to this day) suffered greatly for acting against cats, but that was completely tangential to my main point.

Click to expand...

what religion thinks cats are affiliated with satan ? are you making stuff up again ?

marshaul said:

There is nothing libertarian about allowing this.

What you describe is the product of a corporatocracy which still exists today, one largely established by "conservatives" (leftists played the useful idiot here, too).

It's a perversion of the free market and properly robust tort law, something most libertarians could explain in their sleep.

It's hilarious the way those in power want to shunt all the blame to the one group who can't possibly be to blame – libertarians never having had enough power to accomplish something like this.

Click to expand...

Indeed, corporations are a creation of the state. Limited liability allows business entities to ride roughshod over others, who never consented to being unable to sue for personal assets (the $hithead crony capitalists in government gave away that right for them).

minarchist said:

Indeed, corporations are a creation of the state. Limited liability allows business entities to ride roughshod over others, who never consented to being unable to sue for personal assets (the $hithead crony capitalists in government gave away that right for them).

Click to expand...

you know not what you speak.

Ca Patriot said:

you know not what you speak.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be better to point out his errors and provide support for the contention that he is in error?

eye95 said:

Wouldn't it be better to point out his errors and provide support for the contention that he is in error?

Click to expand...

You know not to whom you speak.

the story is misleading from the beginning. It wasn't a "cop" but rather an animal control officer that was called for feral cats in question. Shooting them in front of the kids wasnt the best or a well thought out plan though. it's not like some cop was chunking random kittens from a skeet thrower and blasting with his 870 shotty.

Kopis said:

the story is misleading from the beginning. It wasn't a "cop" but rather an animal control officer that was called for feral cats in question. ...

Click to expand...

Police officer Barry Accorti, a North Ridgeville, Ohio humane officer...

Click to expand...

From the article, it sounds like he was both.