[Brookhaven]

No, that’s your assumption. He said he ordered the dog to stop and when it didn’t... he shot it to death.

---

Aren’t you making the assumption here? You are assuming the officer did not think the dog was attacking?

In fact, neither of us know what the officer was thinking at that exact moment. But what is the more logical assumption:

(1) The officer thought the dog was attacking him, so he shot the dog in self defense.

(2) The officer did not think the dog was attacking him, so he shot the dog for fun.

[hoosierham]

3). The officer is a WUSS,and too quick to use his gun.

4).The department is itself a bunch of cowards because the authorities refused to release the officer's name.

If a "civilian" shoots an attacking or charging police canine do you think the citizen's name will be withheld?

You do realize shooting a police canine is treated the same as shooting a human officer in some juridistions?Which is a travesty in itself,as well as a double standard.

I support good,decent peace officers;but I absolutely DESPISE the jack-booted,scum that have become part of Law Enforcement!

[carton253]

The dog was a golden retriever!!!!!

Obviously you have never heard of the breed before, because you would understand just how assinine it is that anyone would be so afraid of a golden that they would have to shoot it.