No. A QUESTION does NOT make an ASSumption. You ASSume I didn't know what I was doing. Now go prove me 'wrong'.....no wait, I didn't make a statement to prove or disprove, I caused discussion and show the glow of master baiters.
What about the QUESTION do you disagree with again?
—Because I didn't do that. I assumed that he would have a bodycam and extrapolated with the caveat that if he wasn't wearing one, that too, would be suspect—
You said you assumed, but haven’t bothered to do the research. That’s an assumption. My point is, it’s not really a discussion when you’re simply entertaining a “what if” scenario when you could simply do the research to answer your question. You could have then opened the post with - hey, the k9, according to (insert source) had a body cam - do y’all think we’ll get to see the footage—
That’s the discussion question that you should have posted.
The assumption was based off the same assumption YOU made when assuming its online.....the fact that it's supposed to be worn. Right?
Yes, we're all entertaining 'what if' scenarios. Aren't we? Questions lead to answers.
Why blame the question for your own lack of research? I don't OWE you the answer.
Do I? Really?
That the point you should have realized and I'll post what I want thanks.
I notice you didn't notice anything about the subject until my post hit.
Why don't you go clear it all up for everyone? You figure it's online by now?
You know why he wouldn't have one on? Clearing it up by attacking the question?
No, I didn’t make that assumption. From a prior comment that I made: — The department might have made the ruling that body cams on k9s are 1) unnecessary because they are with their handler at all times or 2) unreliable because of impediments caused by dog’s body or 3) causes an unnecessary risk to k9, ie may be makes it easier for the dog to be grabbed onto.—
Should I now cut and paste the statement you make asserting it would be online and I should find it?
MIGHT HAVE made a ruling? Don't you know that records exist, and you should go find out IF such a ruling exists before ASSuming it MIGHT before posting response?
This door swings both ways.
No. A QUESTION does NOT make an ASSumption. You ASSume I didn't know what I was doing. Now go prove me 'wrong'.....no wait, I didn't make a statement to prove or disprove, I caused discussion and show the glow of master baiters.
What about the QUESTION do you disagree with again?
—Because I didn't do that. I assumed that he would have a bodycam and extrapolated with the caveat that if he wasn't wearing one, that too, would be suspect—
You said you assumed, but haven’t bothered to do the research. That’s an assumption. My point is, it’s not really a discussion when you’re simply entertaining a “what if” scenario when you could simply do the research to answer your question. You could have then opened the post with - hey, the k9, according to (insert source) had a body cam - do y’all think we’ll get to see the footage—
That’s the discussion question that you should have posted.
The assumption was based off the same assumption YOU made when assuming its online.....the fact that it's supposed to be worn. Right?
Yes, we're all entertaining 'what if' scenarios. Aren't we? Questions lead to answers. Why blame the question for your own lack of research? I don't OWE you the answer. Do I? Really?
That the point you should have realized and I'll post what I want thanks.
I notice you didn't notice anything about the subject until my post hit.
Why don't you go clear it all up for everyone? You figure it's online by now?
You know why he wouldn't have one on? Clearing it up by attacking the question?
Who does that?
No, I didn’t make that assumption. From a prior comment that I made: — The department might have made the ruling that body cams on k9s are 1) unnecessary because they are with their handler at all times or 2) unreliable because of impediments caused by dog’s body or 3) causes an unnecessary risk to k9, ie may be makes it easier for the dog to be grabbed onto.—
Should I now cut and paste the statement you make asserting it would be online and I should find it?
MIGHT HAVE made a ruling? Don't you know that records exist, and you should go find out IF such a ruling exists before ASSuming it MIGHT before posting response? This door swings both ways.
I didn't ask if the K9 had a bodycam did I?
Focus