That kid should have sat down and had a rational discussion with the religious fanatics that bombed his home and then stole the land.

I hope he throws grenades next.

I dunno if its true, but someone on reddit was saying the elephant was going to be killed anyways for having killed its trainer or a spectator or somethin... Edison still seems like a dick imo, but he may not have just killed a random zoo/carnival elephant.

Thank god this is on the news!!!!!!

You hit me so i hit you back and then you hit me back harder... should I hit him back? Fuck it, I'll hit him back.

Freedom is for losers anyways.

A group of armed and armored men who shoot at innocent people, ya know, to protect you.

>> ^Seric:

I neither found the video entertaining or your arguments sufficiently valid.
Downvote.


I don't find your argument to be sufficiently valid.

I don't know why you guys are freaking out over this, Pride was around for 11 years. To say their rules are sadistic is coming from ignorance of the nature of their fights. Imo, the more you limit the fighters the more repetitive and narrow the fights become.

From the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_Fighting_Championships#Match_conduct

Differences from the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts

Some states' athletic commissions require mixed martial arts events to modify rules to match the Mixed Martial Arts Unified Rules of Combat, as introduced by the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board, and adopted by the Nevada State Athletic Commission in order to receive state sanctioning.[19][20]

Pride's rules differed from the Unified Rules of Combat in the following ways:

* Pride allows kicking and kneeing the head of a downed opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules, which only allows kicks and knees to the head of a standing opponent.
* Pride allows a fighter to stomp the head of a downed opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.
* Pride allows a fighter to spike (piledriver) an opponent onto the canvas on his head or neck. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.
* Pride does not allow elbow strikes to the head of an opponent. The Unified rules allows elbows provided they are not striking directly down with the point of the elbow.
* Pride's matches include a ten minute first round, with two minute rest periods. The Unified rules allow rounds no longer than five minutes, with rest periods not exceeding one minute.
* Pride's matches are not judged on the ten point must system, rather judges score the whole fight. The Unified rules call for all matches to be judged using the ten point must system.

At the announcement on March 27, 2007 that the Fertittas are purchasing Pride, it was stated that all future Pride events (after Pride 34) would be held under Unified Rules, eliminating 10 minute opening rounds, ground knees, stomps and more, though there were no more Pride events held to use these rules.[21]

Its just gonna get worse. Keep obeying people with cereal box badges...

Police, the tools of the suits.

This guy did a better job than the police! He actually protected property and stopped a thief! The police just beat their shields and snatch peaceful protesters while letting property damage happen in front of them.

fu fu fu fu fuck the police.

You guys are fucking tools.

It doesn't come off as nitpickish and I thank you for your rational response. But if you click on the video and go to the first youtube video part 1 of 2, I don't see how the dog was being life threatening, which would be the requirement to use lethal force I imagine, and I didn't read in my above link how the dog was a threat other than growling at passerby's.

With my limited knowledge of policing and law I come to the conclusion that animal control should be called if there was a an uncontrollable animal/threatening to the community and I don't see any justification under any circumstances this video or any previous event would show that this animal needed to be shot while being restrained on a pole and while it was posing no immediate threat.

I had a different title when I first posted this video and it seemed to me more biased so i changed it, but if you conclude that that is still the case feel free to tell me to change it. I actually ended up just copy/pasting the title from reddit as mine seemed too emotional at first so I ended up changing it.


>> ^AnimalsForCrackers:

>> ^ToKeyMonsTeR:
I say a lot of bad things about police. I am a police hater even when many people say the opposite, but this... I don't know how this can be justified in anyone's eyes.

You're not thinking hard enough then. Going straight into knee-jerk reactionary mode, especially without having any modicum of background information on this incident makes this post seem like a rather opaque, overeager attempt to demonize the police based on some preexisting desire to support a conclusion you've already arrived at (in this case); your history on this matter doesn't help though either.
Trust me, I'm no fan of crooked cops (or anyone who abuses power or oppresses the powerless). What they did could be actually wrong, but you've provided no support for it. The video description is factual at best and disingenuous at worst. The rational, responsible thing to do would be to not make any judgment calls at all in situations where it's not particularly evident until more information surfaces. At least that's how I go about these things.
I hope this doesn't come off as overly nitpickish.

http://www.hannibal.net/news/x1600620381/LaGrange-dog-owner-vows-to-fight-for-law-changes