Your comment does not alter what I wrote. In practice the utilities, Post Office, or UPS guys can walk away from a menace, the law officer may decide otherwise. His job description allows him more latitude than the others in pursuing his duties.
The police officer feels emboldened to act because of the shield and gun, and the perception that government trumps private in all cases, because the government has unlimited resources at their disposal when private does not.
Also, if you see past this one story to the larger trend of police on pet dog shootings (not stray dogs), you will see that it is not the dobermans, pit bulls, and rotweillers that are being shot, but the labradors, collies, huskies, and corgies.
What has happened is that the phrase "fear for their lives" has become "fear for their safety." "Safety" now includes scratches and bites, none of which are lethal.
It's an attitude problem, backed by a bureaucracy inculcated to circle the wagons in all cases.
-PJ
If "fear for their safety" applies to police officers, why wouldn't it also apply to meter readers and letter carriers, too?
Should we arm them as well, if "safety" is the test?
Why should only police officers be allowed to be "safe" in everyday situations, not just when in imminent danger?
And walking onto someone's property while investigating a copper theft that already occurred is not an imminent danger.
-PJ