Chris | InformationLiberation
When officer Jeffrey Bolger of the Baltimore City police came upon animal control agents who had restrained a 7-year-old shar-pei which had gotten loose, the officer took it upon himself to pull out a knife and violently slit the animal's throat, all while it was fully restrained and under control with its neck in a dog pole. The cop's actions were so vicious not even the police are defending his actions. Instead, Baltimore police Deputy Commissioner Jerry Rodriguez said, "We have no words to describe this. To say that we are appalled at this allegation is an understatement...This is outrageous and unacceptable breach of our protocol."
Bolger has been charged with felony animal cruelty and was suspended without pay. Meanwhile, his fellow officers on the scene are also being investigated for not reporting the incident to higher-ups.
(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));
Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Video Shows Cop Assaulted Fox News Anchor, Lied About Arrest
- A SWAT Team Blew A Hole In My 2-Year-Old Son
- Woman Says DHS Forced Her to Strip Naked at Gunpoint During Terrifying Dawn Raid
- "Public Authority," Drone Murders, and the Death of the Rule of Law
- The Utter Uselessness of Police: Two Recent Examples from Idaho
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- Federal Court: Cops Cannot Push Drug Dog Into Open Car Door
- Cop Shot In Face Ambushing Resident In No-Knock Raid
"We have no words to describe this. To say that we are appalled at this allegation is an understatement...This is outrageous and unacceptable breach of our protocol."
What the hell ever, pigs are pigs. There is no such thing as a good pig. It's not a badge, it's a bulls eye.
Wake up America -
Before these people are admitted to the Law Enforcement Academy they are given Psychological tests and interviews. That means that they know they are hiring unrestrained violent psychopaths as policemen. The police see us the same way serial killers view their victims, as prey. The Bankster government hires people like this by design. The police must be viewed as a force of occupation. This seems reasonably humane to me. The dog would die almost instantly and feel very little pain.
It's at least as humane as most methods used for butchering livestock; in fact, live throat slitting (yes, while restrained) used to be the preferred method for butchering cattle. (Today, I understand it is air gun to the head.)
Nickel's 2-bits...
You must be a psychopath. He wasn't killing the dog for food. He did it because he doesn't value any life, human or animal (humans are animals too, by the way.)
You are either very sick, or very stupid...or both.
Why was this cop carrying a knife? And why did he use that weapon? Sounds like he wanted to inflict pain. Get that sadist psycho off the streets. Throw him off the police force and then throw him into prison. No, I was fishing for an actual thought about this world we live in.
- Colorado just dropped the case in which Joseph Hoskins shot Randy Cook, because, "a man's home is his castle." But that's humane.
- Brent Douglas Cole, a Bundy supporter, shot a police officer and a BLM ranger because he's a "sovereign citizen" who has a right to camp anywhere he wants, even on property he doesn't own, and anytime he wants, dammit! But that's humane.
- A man in Arizona was executed using drugs that aren't legal for animal euthanasia, because (for animals) they're inhumane. But executing a person with them? That's humane.
- Theodore Wafer goes on trial this month for shooting a black woman on his front porch, as she sought help after being involved in an accident. By some miscarriage, the state insists he stand trial, but I bet the jury agrees what he did was humane. After all, Zimmerman's jury agreed his shooting was humane.
- Millions of cattle are butchered every year. They get shoved into a restraint so they can't move and someone uses a captive-bolt gun to pound their brains into mush. But that's humane, because after all we're just hungry.
- Right here in this site, we have an article on an El Paso officer Flores who executed a restrained man on a hospital loading dock, and the grand jury just said that's fine. Humane, I guess.
- Canada still clubs seals to death with bats. That's humane.
- Trapping is still legal. But it's humane.
- Hunting is still legal. But obviously it's humane, again because we are hungry.
- Need I go on?...
Of course, someone SANE might say all of these are all INHUMANE, but there are TONS of other people to argue EARNESTLY that each of these are just peachy keen! (I bet some people right here in this site would argue that the Cole shooting was humane.) No problem here. Move along people.
So now we're discussing the execution of a restrained dog by slitting his throat. I'm taking this opportunity to argue EARNESTLY that there is nothing wrong with that method; that it is not INHUMANE. No problem here. Move along people.
We are a NATION of psychopaths, let alone me. Only in a nation of psychopaths would any of the above be tolerated...while we argue earnestly over the throat-slitting of a restrained dog.
I'm pretty sure that their police union will have all the words not only to describe this, but to reward the officer for this. send some allpo , to your favorite. @Nickel's 2-bits, the government's aim is to make the human experience as uncomfortable as possible. From birth, we are drugged, educated (programmed), and molded, into an ideal that is entirely inhuman. If you were to slit the throat of any animal in front of young child, you'd likely see an expression of horror on the child's face - that's a "human" reaction. That suggests that we are still quite human, and, that as we grow older, we allow ourselves to be shaped into psychopaths.
Finite v Infinite...
An "actual thought".... "Legal," and "illegal," are make-believe. Other than, their having a finite form when written, they cannot exist unless people believe in the ideals that give them meaning, and, they can comprehend the language that they belong to.
@" This is
outrageous and unacceptable breach of our protocol."
What he mean here is the cop should have used his gun , thats all....
@L.S. I can't necessarily disagree with any of that.
But I find it pathetic that we're reduced to using a "cop slices dog's throat" story to prove cops are brutal and government is oppressive.
I mean, take a serious, realistic look at this story. At best, it warranted a page 22 local newspaper story. Isn't it pathetic this is the best evidence the site can present of police/government abuse?
These stories didn't make this site:
- Michael Vick's arrest for holding cruel dog fights.
- Larry Wallace, who set his dog afire.
- Timothy Okogbaa, who beat his dog to death.
- Leonardo Dumenigo and Yainiel Proenza, arrested for killing possibly hundreds of thousands of animals by cutting throats and other methods in an illegal butchering operation.
These didn't make the site because they don't matter...on anything but a local basis. The only way they could have made the site is if someone decided to argue that, say, the last two people were "oppressed by the government" because they were just trying to run a butchering business and make money in the "free market" and the government has no right to interfere. (Can't you imagine that argument being made here?)
When I was a kid, we killed animals for butchering by cutting their throats. Someone above alluded that would be fine, because that's butchering and we have to eat.
So here we are with a pathetic article with a marginal, barely cruel act in my estimation, that the author is pathetically trying to turn into a pathetic proof that cops and government are evil.
I repeat: Pathetic.
Even the stories of officers shooting dogs, presented as proof of police/government evil are hardly worthy of mention. This is just...pathetic.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the DMCA and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
View the original article here
