I wonder if one solution to help the law enforcers feel safer and still protect the family pets would be for police departments to issue stun-guns as standard equipment? If stun-guns are capable of incapacitating 200 lb. men, then they should certainly be effective against even the largest and heaviest of dogs.

Of course, a little remedial community sensitivity training for some police departments wouldn't hurt, either.

I've worked with dogs professionally and while I know that officers have no other choice at times and certainly do not want them to put either themselves or bystanders at risk, there is no reason they can't be doing more to prevent these shootings. Dogs don't lie, if they are aggressive, they show it. With a small amount of training it becomes very easy to recognize their body language and also to use your own body language to help calm them down. One could literally learn this in a weekend workshop. The fact that police departments aren't already required to this is actually quite scary to me. It demonstrates a lack of respect for life in general that the department would not do everything it could to help an officer to NOT use his weapon - any time an officer is required to shoot, at anything, the situation is automatically escalated to something more dangerous for everyone within that a bullets range. Any type of training that would decrease the probability of having to fire a gun, for whatever reason, would therefore make everyone, officer, pet, bystander, ect, safer. If one knows part of a job is going to require you to come into contact with pets, as a job requirement, you should have to demonstrate a knowledge of how to deal with pets. If the post office can figure this out, why can't cops. At the very least, even just as an interim measure, supplying officers with non lethal means of protecting themselves should also a viable option. We are a litigious society and some department is going to end up paying out a lot of money in a wrongful death suit if more isn't done to prevent these incidents from occurring.

Do keep in mind that many gang members and drug dealers use aggressive dogs to intimidate others. These dogs are not healthy, well-balanced dogs, but strictly used as weapons, largely because the penalties for using a 'loaded dog' are considerably milder than the penalties for using a loaded gun to commit a crime.
Does seem, though, that police officers ought to be more aware that the family pet is going to defend its people, especially when those people are scared and angry, which is exactly what the dog is supposed to do.
That awarness would be beneficial to both the police, and to any innocent bystanders or even to the potential suspects involved.

I have never met a cop that I would WANT protecting me.

I agree with JDK-JDK and finderj. I'm sorry, but risking that an officer breaks a hand or an arm due to the bite of a dog is simply not ok. They're people with a 10 year investment in education...you simply cannot risk that they get maimed or even remotely hurt on their job, even temporarily. Zero tolerance is the only way to go. Police men are not tin soldiers, they're people, and their wellbeing comes before the life of any pet of any member of society.

Presumably, if police are doing a drug raid, dogs found inside are likely to be bloodthirsty bastards kept there to keep police and rival gangs from chasing down the drugs. If it's an unfortunate family who uses a dog for protection, then that's a risk you take: you should be fully aware that if the dog bites an intruder with due reason to be there, it _will_ be put down - whether before or after it attacks, it doesn't matter.

If you want a dog for hunting or as a friend, keep it penned in and away from the front door. If you want to use it for protection, you take the risk that it might get hurt, but that's only fair, since there are cases every year of dogs biting small children and permanently giving them disfigurements, so you also impose a risk on the rest of us.

If you don't want this to happen, then redesign society to minimize the need for raids! Legalize the bloody drugs, prostitution, and gambling so gangs won't be economically viable, and ensure that those things are only available from controlled outlets, and not from thugs and abusers as is the case now.

That way, it will only be available to adults (not to kids!) and the entire point of the war on drugs will vanish (protecting kids from drugs is the reason, after all!).

Nothing excuses police breaking into a law abiding persons home and killing their dogs. How can we teach our kids to be responsible for their actions when we excuse the actions of adults in authority?

Maybe the dogs are trying to tell us something. Cops on our property are a threat to our safety. Personally, any cop who kills my dog can expect a bullet in his own head in return. I'll hunt him down if I have to. Sorry, I said "him". A cop who would shoot my dog is no longer qualified to be referred to be any pronoun but "it".

The war on some drugs is a war on peaceful people who hurt nobody. Drug use is not a crime. No victim, no crime. Every cop who has ever arrested anybody for sale or use of a drug should be tried for kidnapping, and, if found guilty by a jury of his peers, hanged by the neck until dead.

Some of the shootings look pretty stupid. The idea that a chihuahua or labrador poses any threat let, alone an actual threat is preposterous.

SWAT units are not military of even paramilitary and their use of force guidelines do not need to be very robust. During WWII the rules of engagement allowed the allies to shoot SS soldiers at any time even if they were sleeping and they did not have to give them a chance to surrender. All other German soldiers were given the chance to surrender (if that seemed imminent).

How difficult would it be for the police to simply say rotweilers, pit bulls an other aggressive AND dangerous dogs can be shot on sight. For other breeds it would be required that the officer was actually threatened and the dog was capable of injurying the officer. Its not that difficult to fix this problem.

I worked for my dad ( a veterinarian) when I was a kid and was only bitten once but was threatened many times. The idea of a dog that comes up to an officer's shin or knee even is unlikely to hurt somebody even if the dog is the meanest, nastiest m*****f***er to ever walk the earth

Cops have pretty bad reputations in many communities because they think carrying a gun allows them to do as they please. Some of tyhem are licensed thugs IMO. What would scare me the most would be my own reaction if someone came into my yard or house and shot one of my dogs. I'd go after the bastard with my bare hands!

And don't think I am exagerating. I have Corgis. They are not aggressive, but they will defend both themselves and me. I have 'rescued' a corgi that two rottweilers were playing tug of war with her [she survived]. I have jumped out of the shower and broken up a dog fight between a pit bill and oine of my Corgis, and I have charged Akitas and packs of dogs who were attacking mine.

I am an old lady, but if someone is going to do violence to me or mine, because they are stupid or poorly trained, I won't hesitate. It's not rational, but when the 'fight of flight' adrenaline kicks in - I fight.

My dogs would die protecting me - I would do the same for them. BTW, a Corgi weighs between 25 and 30 pounds, but are fearless. Any dog that will face down a 3000 pound bull, isn't going to back down from some guy they don't know who is threatening their person.

Shooting pets is inexcuseable!

No, no. I do not think an officer ought to risk being bitten while he is pursuing his duties.
I do think that an awareness of how to handle dogs in stressful situations might be beneficial to all involved, particularly if the persons involved are innocent.
I have friends who are police officers. In my part of the world, the majority of police officers are decent hard-wokring people trying to do an impossibly difficult job.
They are occassionally rude, abrupt, unkind, unsympathetic and angry.
So am I.
And they have much greater cause for occassional lapses in good manners.
I am not saying that there are no corrupt officers. I am saying that those are the exceptions to the rule. Police officers are human, and failable.
They are also doing the most dangerous, unpredictable, unappreciated job in this coiuntry.
They are underpaid, underappreciated, overworked and over-stressed.
If learning about dogs would make doing their jobs easier, they should have the chance to learn about dogs.

Equipping cops with tasers is NOT the solution. If they have a mentality already that says that killing a dog is collateral damage, do you think they'll have any qualms about tasering ANYONE (young, sick, mentally ill)?

See youtube for videos of a shopper being tased after being accused of using a stolen credit card (it was hers), and a driver after he passed a sobriety test. Also a story in Bay City, Michigan, of a drunk unarmed teenager being tased for standing up too quickly... it was fatal.

No thanks.

Violence brought into my home will be returned in kind. No exceptions.

I say let's train and arm all dogs and give them the scent of cops. Scumbags!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If cops can kill dogs that scare them when they are doing their job, why not mail carriers.

Mail carriers are hurt all the time by dogs, when they are delivering the mail.

If the owners know the dogs behave in a threatening manner toward "strangers" maybe they should be on a leash when outside.

Dogs roaming around, I find scary at times.

People are getting hurt by dogs all the time.

I like dogs.

I just don't think people should be allowed to use their dogs to frighten other people, which includes allowing their dogs to sniff a person when they are walking around.

Allowing anyone to make a split second decision with a gun will produce crappy results on quite a few occasions. Allowing anyone carte blanche to shoot a dog in any situatuion without using sound judgement is ridiculous.

Just as with any accidental or mistaken shootings, police officers should be held accountable for lousy decisions whether they shoot a person or an animal. Shooting a 12 lb dachshund because "it was barking" makes you a fool and puts the lives of law-abiding citizens at risk.

It also makes you a complete douchebag.

Some people appear not to have read the article they are commenting about - the incidents described involve dogs on their own premises, often in their own homes, not running loose on the streets, terrorizing innocent citizens and attacking police in the course of performing their duties. Other comments appear to come from the asylum, where folks with authority and anger management issues reside. Police perform a necessary function in our society and anybody who uses violence to retaliate when they and theirs are not immediately threatened can expect to be punished, whether they target cops or civilians.
It's interesting, though that these police seem so unconcerned about their canine victims - a few years ago, some cops here in southern California shot and killed, in cold blood, a suspect who was restrained, prone on the ground. His crime? He shot a police dog . . . Clearly, do as they say and not as they do.

Is the discussion here about the value/personality/demeanour of police officers, or about the dangers some dogs can pose to officers trying to do their jobs?

I think what the real issue, is how the people will be able to negotiate when their civil rights have been violated.

Especially as an individual in neighourhoods which are considered high crime nieighbourhoods, and especially when the police officer lacks the experience to know how to exercise his discretionary power in a split second or two.

The right choice for both the pet owner and police officer might be difficult to pre-determine, and could effect their future for the rest of their lives, if they either over react or under react.

I think another difference is, postal carriers don't carry a gun, they have to find other ways to handle dogs, whereas a police officer probably has drawing his gun as an option for any situation he feels threatened in.

I think this will be a growing problem.

There are more dogs that have been abandoned too, so that is another situation they will be facing. And like people, dogs probably feel safer in a group, when they are really alone.

It is easier to look back and say, this decision could have been made then this could have happened, but in reality we have to look forward, and consider the timing, if the public feel threatened by the police, and the police feel threatened by the public, or in this situation, their dogs, there will be a break down of trust, and that won't be good for anyone.

To suggest, like Beast of Bourbon wants, that the police departments issue taser guns to officers for use on animals, like they do on people will only increase the incidence of animal deaths. Taser guns have been proven to be lethal just like regular weapons, many departments are rethinking their use of tasers because of this.
The idea put forth, to require the same training that Postal employees have, is the best idea. Also, tranquilizers in the hands of an untrained person are as deadly as a bullet.
To attack without provocation, a 12 pound chihuahua, is an abominable act worthy of firing, lawsuits are the only way that these rogue police officers will be brought back to reality.
Given the set of circumstances, in many of the attacks on animals, and I have personally experienced this very thing, it
is high time that the people of this country demand of their law enforcement officials a better standard of conduct and a change in their mentality.

My heart goes out to these families. We had two American Eskimo's, and they were outside for they last "pit-stop" of the day, so it was 10:30-11:00pm amd dark. The next morning the male attacked our 11 year old son, and the furniture throughtout the house was distroyed in the night. We took both of them to the vet at once, only to find out they had been dosed real good with crack cocain. We were had to put them down because they attacked our son, and drew blood in several places. The otopsy by the vet found more cocain on undigested pork meat in our pets stomachs. We are still saddened over this 25 years later, they were family. We never found the guilty party, and believe anyone that does such a thing to any animal should be punishid to the maxium.

There is absolutely NO excuse for killing harmless animals. If cops can't tell the difference between an animal that poses a threat and one that does not, they clearly are not qualified to serve the public as taxpayer-salaried police officers and should be decomissioned.

I think cops kill companion animals to punish those who they have already decided are criminals: they figure if we're being sent to get them, they MUST be guilty. Yet whether the people being arrested have committed crimes or not, the animals killed are ALWAYS innocent victims. Even those trained for violence had no choice in their fate, and it is terribly tragic when such lifelong abuse is ended by murder.

One of them should dress up in those outfits they use when training the attack dogs. Have that person carry some juicy steaks in their pocket to distract any dogs.

It is pathetic and amazing that police officers do not get minimally the couple hour dog body language training like the postal service folks get. I suppose when you carry a big gun vs. some tacky leather bag full of letters, you can just shoot anything that makes you feel threatened. Sounds like the police are using fists in situations where just the pinky would do the job.

Let me get this straight....according to some of the posters here, I'm supposed to pen up or leash my family pet inside her own home, in the event that the police screw up, crash my front door down with guns blazing, and she defends her own turf? If I don't pen her up - again, in her own home - she deserves to die when the police mistakenly attack us? Ri-i-i-ight.....