You persist in attacking me and yet once again you are unable to attack any argument I have made. Throwing rocks at my intelligence or lack there of from your seat,  is not an effective communication tool. 

In between your personal attack's, you are in fact proving my and other poster's points better then we are, training and experience is the best thing to throw at this. Im very glad that you run the classes you do. People and pets are safer in your community from law enforcement, because of those classes. We are on the same page, even with my intelligence level, amazing.
 

"I have no idea what your point is and we are definitely not on the same page.  We are very far apart in our way of thinking and our view points, let's not confuse that. "
 

Fair enough Jim, I did not address any of your question, you had a ton so Ill pick the ones that might offer a better understanding of my opinion.

Q) Exactly how many unfortunate instances are there with friendly pets and Police?   I would love to see the real numbers. Exactly how many friendly dogs in their yard are shot by Police each year?

R) The exact number or any real number is impossible to get to. There is no registry for these types of instance's. I have been searching around for months to find that answer. I would bet the house with a short time, due to some of the recent shootings that will change. There are facebook pages that are attempting to track each occurrence. These are subject to personal opinion and emotion and are obviously going to be shot down as biased. Right now, I would rather spend money on traveling you and your class around rather then on keeping track. Just me. Eventually both are best.

One: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dogs-Shot-by-Police/188434097845629

Q) Compared to the  number of dogs that are allowed to roam free each day and get hit by cars by neglectful owners?

R) Allowing your dog to roam freely around the community and creating a chance for you or yours to have to make a crap design and shoot an animal? I propose YOU answer the call collect the animal with your training and the rest of us in the forum hold the owner down while you run their toes over forwards and backwards with your squad car. Note: Dogs are going to get loose, allowing and neglectful are key words.

Q) Then provide the stats for the number of dogs shot by hunters, farmers and citizens?  It is a widely accepted practice by hunters to shoot dogs running at large in the woods and farmers will do it in a heart beat.  But, that is ok?  Couldn't the hunters be trained to use other methods to catch or stop the dogs?  If the hunter was an off duty cop then it becomes an issue? 

R) A hunter a farmer and a citizen are not being payed to protect me and my property. They are not given great leeway on perception threat like I offer you. If I shoot a neighbors 5 pound Chihuahua 3 time's with 9mm hollow points, Im fairly confident, Im a guest in your backseat. (Boy thats a good argument right there for not carrying a 9mm) Sorry tried to resist, I lost.

There are alot of things that stupid people do, that I prefer you not engage in. Shooting an animal without damn good cause, with or without a badge, should be treated the same. 

Q) Please let me know how big of a problem this really is, how often does this occur?  Factually, not just another sensationalized event. 

R) Well, as stated I cant. But I can offer you this. In a DOJ release the director states, I have bolded some, not him.:

The COPS Office understands the importance of dog-related incidents and encounters for the public, law enforcement, and dog owners alike. With the number of dog fatalities by law enforcement on the increase, as well as concerns for officer safety, law enforcement officers must advance beyond automatically using their weapons when encountered by a dog. There are many other ways to ensure public and officer safety through diffusing dog encounters.

Also: 

By developing effective strategies in dog relations and communicating these strategies to all officers and the public, law enforcement will gain the advantage of strong relationships with internal, external, and political audiences.

http://cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e051116358_Dog-Incidents-508.pdf


This is just one piece that helps forms my radical,  pervasive policy view. :)~ If I had stated what he says here I would still have been rebuffed as well. But if there is a need to advance from automatically using a weapon, perhaps there may be, a bit more room for my wild idea.

Enough neg today, out to play with puppies and get some puppy breath.  .99 a shot if anyones interested, a fair price!

I didn't take photos of your kid and I don't have a website, Babyeagle. Best have proof if you say that here again.

Kill peoples pet's when there is no other choice, kill peoples pets when a human life is at risk, kill peoples pets because you made a split second choice and it was wrong choice, but split second.

Please don't kill peoples pet's because your an idiot and your bosses said in the bathroom that it was ok...

Perhaps now that I have spelled it out you and Daryl will see why we do not share the same view points.

Some interesting Facts:
 

With the number of dog fatalities by law enforcement on the increase, as well as concerns for officer safety, law enforcement officers must advance beyond automatically using their weapons when encountered by a dog.

In most police departments, the majority of shooting incidents involve animals, most frequently dogs.

While there are plenty of documented cases that officers have killed dogs there is, is no documented case of a police or peace officer dying as the result of a dog-bite-related injury. The overwhelming majority of dog bites are minor, causing either no injury at all or injuries so minor that no medical care is required. Fewer than 2 percent of the individuals visiting an emergency room complaining of a dog bite require hospitalization. 

(This in my opinion throws a wrench in the common practice of using disproportionate force, Kill dogs when there is no other choice.)

According to Janis Bradley, author of “Dogs Bite, but Balloons and Slippers Are More Dangerous,” more people are killed by lightning each year than by dogs.

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interaction has strongly cautioned against using statistics to target particular breeds as more likely to bite: “Dog bite statistics are not really statistics, and they do not give an accurate picture of dogs that bite.”

Officers encounter dogs in the course of almost every kind of police interaction with the public, from making traffic stops and serving warrants to interviewing suspects and witnesses, and even pursuing suspects. The most times officers fire their weapons, it is at animals and at dogs mostly. Like another poster stated "we should allow seals that are afraid of water?"

There are approximately 77.5 million owned dogs in the United States.1 Indeed, dogs are likely to be encountered in 39 percent of residential locations. A recent poll revealed that approximately 53.5 percent of owners consider their dogs family members, another 45.1 percent view them as companions or pets, and less than 1.5 percent consider them mere property. (Shooting family members and companions without real cause is why I believe, your playing with PR dynamite. Even though the state law says property, you know the firestorms that are created in unjustified shootings, perceived or otherwise.)

From the police perspective, the most obvious harm that can result from a dog-related incident is the injury to an officer when a dog bites. If a responding officer shoots at a dog, however, other harms can result, including bystanders and other officers being shot by friendly fire. When an officer kills or injures a dog that is not a serious threat, other significant harms can result. Such incidents often do serious damage to community trust in the department and profession. Controversy particularly arises when an officer’s assessment of “imminent danger” is challenged by witnesses, the dog’s owner, or a video record of the incident.

The killing or injuring of a dog also opens the officer and the department to lawsuits and other legal actions, including 42 USC 1983 claims (deprivation of property without due process) and internal-affairs investigations.

http://cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e051116358_Dog-Incidents-508.pdf

Pets, most commonly dogs, are defined as personal property under state law so it is important to research the applicable local laws.  State statutes will be the governing law in this area as federal statutes are silent as to the definition of pets as personal property. 

United States v. Place, 469 U.S. 696, 701 (1983).  Further, the Supreme Court has stated unequivocally that a seizure of personal property occurs when “there is some meaningful interference with an individual’s possessory interests in that property.” 

    While the issues involved in the decision to bring a cause of action for the shooting of a pet may seem complex, they are not by any means insurmountable.  There are two general steps to follow to make the determination of whether or not a cause of action exists:

     1)   Review the state statutes to determine if the pet is considered property subject to seizure.  In addition, review any other state statutes relating to animals that may be applicable; and

     2)   Determine whether immunity can be defeated by addressing the policies of the municipality and the actions of the officer(s) involved. 

If the pet is personal property subject to a seizure, no other state statutes defeat or authorize that seizure, and an entity or the officer involved can be held liable by defeating their immunity, a cause of action can be stated and potentially maintained successfully on behalf of the pet owner.

www.animallaw.info/articles/dduspoliceshootingpets.htm

The population is on the rise, dog ownership and the sheer number of dogs in this country is on the rise.  Crime is on the rise, especially violent crime.  Felonies are on the rise, from shoplifting, larcenies, drug use, distribution of drugs, burglaries, robberies and malicious wounding.  Homicide rates are on the rise, crimes committed with firearms are on the rise.  Assaults and homicide of Law Enforcement Officers and K-9's is on the rise.  Police involved shootings with suspects are on the rise.  This is based on crime statistics in my city, voted one of the safest in the country for it's size at one time.....  Statistics are really fascinating, but the world is becoming a very dangerous place.

Again training is crucial to avoid anyone's pets being shot by the Police.  Police Officers need to be trained to deal with aggressive dogs, no doubt.  We do that and so do the vast majority of agencies.  It is mandated training.  My dept may go a step further because I feel it is very important.  Pet owners also need to be trained to properly contain and control their dogs.  That is critical and a role that breeders, pet stores and shelters need to take part in.  They have a responsibility to the animals they breed, sell or re home.  The pet owner has to accept responsibility for the welfare of his / her dogs.  Unfortunately, all too often dog owners are neglectful and let their animals roam free.  IMO, there is no excuse for a dog getting loose twice.  Once, I can understand but more than that is unacceptable. 

In general dog bites are not lethal, but I have seen some pretty horrific damage done by dog bites.  Just as we can site articles and post pictures of dogs (we really do not know what BE's pictures were of or where they came from) shot by the Police; I can site many more articles of children and adults killed by aggressive dogs.   

Daryl, since you breed so many dogs why don't you step up and start training dog owners how to properly contain their dogs.  You have just as much responsibility as any one does.  I do my part and train Officers regularly.   The training idea is great.  Why don't you start teaching people how to keep their dogs safe from the Police, cars, hunters,  farmers and other dogs.  If everyone does their part and acts locally perhaps a difference can be made.