[dragnet2]

Really? Two officers - one has the dog running in his/her direction - the other officer reacts to protect the first!

Tell me Mr. Dad, if the officer the dog was allegedly moving towards and threatening, why did that officer not shoot the dog?

Why would the officer who was not threatened be the one to shoot the dog in the back of the head?

You are taking a position based upon your opinions and speculations

Wait a minute Mr. Dad...You're the one who speculated and stated, "Two officers - one has the dog running in his/her direction - the other officer reacts to protect the first!"

Where did you get this?

The article never said a word about this.

In fact, unlike your comments, my comments were based strictly on what the article stated.

[GeronL]

The second officer would be aiming and firing in the general direction of the other officer?

[SoldierDad]

Of course, you MUST be correct. At no time would two officers take up a defensive position when feeling threatened, either by a human or animal. It is simply NOT possible that two officers, when being confronted, or feeling threatened, would EVER separate.

Where do I come up with my position? 1) Military training. 2) Years of knowing and spending time with people in Law Enforcement.

You, on the other hand, took up a position against these two officers based upon your already biased opinion against Law Enforcement. That wasn't information presented in the article, but particular to you.