You are comparing apples to pianos.
Since there is no evidence that this man broke the law and he has not been found guilty in a court of law, he is legally innocent until proven guilty (a novel concept, I know).
Unless you can provide one shred of evidence that this man is in violation of the law, ask yourself “Why am I foisting the blame on the victim who lost his dogs than on the government employees who slaughtered them?
It’s like blaming the victim of a mugging for being mugged or blaming the victim of rape for being rape and insisting that the victim must have done *something* for the criminal(s) to commit aforesaid crime against them.
The problem lies with the individual (or group) that believes it is acceptable to mug, rape or, in this case, shoot dogs for the sake of killing dogs.
“It’s like blaming the victim of a mugging for being mugged or blaming the victim of rape for being rape and insisting that the victim must have done *something* for the criminal(s) to commit aforesaid crime against them.”
No. The victims in this case are the dogs. I don’t blame them one whit.