🔥 | Latest

Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒 the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs. Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language. “For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip. For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert. But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)” ^^^!!!
Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO
uncleromeo:

feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes:


emotionsclashagainstemotions:


thatpettyblackgirl:

Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒

the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs.


Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language.
“For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip.
For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert.
But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)”


^^^!!!

uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives o...

Animals, Bad, and Energy: zpo 96u noorsuekdeeysiddeymmm ut IOT-NHD KTV 8 No sheep were sheared to make this yarn, so rest all warm and snuggly in their own wooly jumpers tonight. spectralarchers: thegreenwolf: lipsredasroses: beachgirlnikita: glyndarling: witchella: laylibear: bettagal: sabelmouse: This fake yarn is supposedly better for sheep. Aimed at people who don’t know where wool comes from, it’s 100% plastic. Yes, plastic. So any garment you wash will release microfibres into the sea. It’ll never decompose. You’re supposed to believe that sheep shearing is violent and cruel. There are imbeciles out there that work in an unprofessional manner while shearing, but that’s not the case overall. Sheep don’t suffer from having their fleece removed. Left on, the fleece can become a home for fly eggs and the subsequent maggots which can eat the sheep. Chemical treatments are available to prevent that happening. It’s much better for the sheep, the land and the farmer to avoid chemical use. Don’t be fooled. Wool is a sustainable material, one we should make more and better use of. Miscrofibers hurt our fish friends. 😓 Hey kiddos as someone who grew up in the sheep capitol of the world, shearing sheep isn’t a bad thing and can be helpful for our fluffy friends!! Please be concious of your decisions!!! Also plastic yarn is cheap and difficult to work with. Please remember to peel your sheeps. Some sheep can be peeled! The process is called rooing. Domestic sheep do not shed their wool. They need to be sheered. If left unsheered, the wool they produce can become to heavy and kill them. Trust me, no sheep wasn’t to have so much wool it crushes them to death. Peel a sheep. Save a life. (Or lots of lives, if you consider the sea life choking on microplastics.) Any version of a “vegan” animal-material (silk, wool, leather, fur, etc.) is made from 100% plastic. They may call it all sorts of fancy things but it is plastic - plastic is made from petrol, which also fuels the whole oil- and petrol industry. You want to be dependent on green energy only? Then almost everything you buy in your local HM, New Yorker or other cheaper retail store isn’t helping. It’s all plastic. Which, as stated above, releases microfibres into the water EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. They’re washed. These microfibres degrade at an extremely long rate, whereas natural products decompose at a much faster rate. Polyester is made from the same thing they put in antifreeze for your car (Ethylene glycol). Sheering sheep doesn’t hurt them. Cow leather comes from cattle that is used in the meat industry. I understand if you do not want to use silk or fur because of the way it is produced (even though some furs are actually also byproducts of hunting, like Greenlandic sealskin, which is sold as a byproduct of Kalaalit hunting traditions and as a byproduct), but using polyester, acrylic or even viscose (the energy and CO2 print of creating viscose is GINORMOUS) instead is as harmful, if not, to the general ‘health’ of the planet. You made have saved a sheep, but you’ve just poisoned a whole bunch of fish and other water dwelling animals and microorganisms instead. If wooly products still bother you, buy 100% cotton, flax, hemp, bamboo, coconut fibre, wool (sheep, merino, alpaca, bison, angora, camel, any kind of animal you can brush/sheer, yes, even your golden retriever hairs should be able to be made into yarn if you find a spinning wheel and a spinster willing to try), sisal, etc. products instead. They’re nice and breathable too!
Animals, Bad, and Energy: zpo 96u
 noorsuekdeeysiddeymmm
 ut
 IOT-NHD KTV
 8
 No sheep were
 sheared to make
 this yarn, so rest
 all warm and
 snuggly in their
 own wooly
 jumpers tonight.
spectralarchers:

thegreenwolf:

lipsredasroses:

beachgirlnikita:


glyndarling:

witchella:

laylibear:


bettagal:

sabelmouse:

This fake yarn is supposedly better for sheep.
Aimed at people who don’t know where wool comes from, it’s 100% plastic. Yes, plastic.
So any garment you wash will release microfibres into the sea. It’ll never decompose.
You’re supposed to believe that sheep shearing is violent and cruel. There are imbeciles out there that work in an unprofessional manner while shearing, but that’s not the case overall.
Sheep don’t suffer from having their fleece removed.
Left on, the fleece can become a home for fly eggs and the subsequent maggots which can eat the sheep. Chemical treatments are available to prevent that happening. It’s much better for the sheep, the land and the farmer to avoid chemical use.
Don’t be fooled. Wool is a sustainable material, one we should make more and better use of.


 Miscrofibers hurt our fish friends. 😓


Hey kiddos as someone who grew up in the sheep capitol of the world, shearing sheep isn’t a bad thing and can be helpful for our fluffy friends!! Please be concious of your decisions!!!


Also plastic yarn is cheap and difficult to work with.

Please remember to peel your sheeps.

Some sheep can be peeled! The process is called rooing.


Domestic sheep do not shed their wool. They need to be sheered. If left unsheered, the wool they produce can become to heavy and kill them. Trust me, no sheep wasn’t to have so much wool it crushes them to death. 

Peel a sheep. Save a life. (Or lots of lives, if you consider the sea life choking on microplastics.)

Any version of a “vegan” animal-material (silk, wool, leather, fur, etc.) is made from 100% plastic. 
They may call it all sorts of fancy things but it is plastic - plastic is made from petrol, which also fuels the whole oil- and petrol industry. You want to be dependent on green energy only? Then almost everything you buy in your local HM, New Yorker or other cheaper retail store isn’t helping. It’s all plastic. Which, as stated above, releases microfibres into the water EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. They’re washed. These microfibres degrade at an extremely long rate, whereas natural products decompose at a much faster rate. 
Polyester is made from the same thing they put in antifreeze for your car (Ethylene glycol).
Sheering sheep doesn’t hurt them. Cow leather comes from cattle that is used in the meat industry. I understand if you do not want to use silk or fur because of the way it is produced (even though some furs are actually also byproducts of hunting, like Greenlandic sealskin, which is sold as a byproduct of Kalaalit hunting traditions and as a byproduct), but using polyester, acrylic or even viscose (the energy and CO2 print of creating viscose is GINORMOUS) instead is as harmful, if not, to the general ‘health’ of the planet. You made have saved a sheep, but you’ve just poisoned a whole bunch of fish and other water dwelling animals and microorganisms instead. 
If wooly products still bother you, buy 100% cotton, flax, hemp, bamboo, coconut fibre, wool (sheep, merino, alpaca, bison, angora, camel, any kind of animal you can brush/sheer, yes, even your golden retriever hairs should be able to be made into yarn if you find a spinning wheel and a spinster willing to try), sisal, etc. products instead. They’re nice and breathable too!

spectralarchers: thegreenwolf: lipsredasroses: beachgirlnikita: glyndarling: witchella: laylibear: bettagal: sabelmouse: This fak...