The discharge of an officer’s firearm is supposed to meet a very specific standard, that of an officer facing a threat of deadly force.
It does not have a standard of ‘the officer felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt threatened.’ Even police dogs, when deployed against suspects, are considered ‘less than deadly force.’ These dogs are specifically trained to attack, defend themselves, and detain a suspect. They are trained how to bite, and how to hold on. If they are not considered deadly force, how in any form or fashion can any officer claim justification for shooting any dog?
___________________________________________________
POlice dogs don’t have the kill rate that pits have. Police dogs are trained to detain whereas pits go into a blood frenzy and refuse to release when ordered to, when beaten, when doused in water or hit with sticks. There is a huge difference. Pits don’t have the social agreement that other dogs have to act in a domesticated manner. An unsecured rottie running up to someone is also quite a threat because while pits kill more people than all other breeds combined, rotties are the second most likely to kill a human.
Since you're an authority, what is the "kill rate" of a pit? That's a study I would like to read for myself.