“First, let’s get this point of fact straight. In no comment that I’ve made could one make the “assumption” that I am “cheering” on the LEO.”
You twisted what I actually wrote. Kindly reread it.
Second, there has been NO evidence brought forward that would prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the LEO fired at the dog with the student in direct line of fire.
For a dog to pin a person, the person is, of necessity, directly beneath or behind the dog. Since the dog was shot in the back of its head, it follows that if the dog was pinning a student, as claimed, the student’s life was in literal jeopardy.
And the rest of your post makes leaps of logic to the point of argumentum absurdum.
If this dog was behaving aggressively, why did so few of the students who were at the scene depart to enter the building?
I don't think I twisted anything, frankly. For a dog to pin a person, the person is, of necessity, directly beneath or behind the dog. Since the dog was shot in the back of its head, it follows that if the dog was pinning a student, as claimed, the student’s life was in literal jeopardy.
Again you make a statement with no evidence to back up your claim. As you, yourself, commented earlier, there is a possibility that the person who used the word, "Pinned" may have misused the word. Also, I can envision a scenario in which a person could be "pinned" by a large dog, and the officer (or other person) could shoot the dog in the back of the head without endangering the person being "pinned". Since neither of us were there, and we have no video evidence, there is no way to make the claim that the LEO placed anyone in imminent danger of being shot while shooting the dog.
With respect to your claim that the rest of my earlier post making leaps of logic, well, pot = black + kettle = black.
As for why students at the scene were not making a beeline for "safety"? How much time do you suppose the entire episode took? Minutes? Seconds? Less than a second? You made suggestions that I'm being unreasonable in my comments, while all the while throwing logic out the window yourself.
You seem to have entered into this thread with the intent of blaming the officer regardless of what reality might actually be. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But, that's all you're holding - an opinion.