You’re an idiot. The LEO was on private property with his gun drawn, yelling at the owner to put his hands up. The owner was not given a chance to control his dog. The cop was out of line and out of control. And, at the wrong address to boot!
Not according to the preliminary evaluation by APD. They say the same.
The LEO was on private property with his gun drawn, yelling at the owner to put his hands up.
Yes, good for him! For your information, domestic disturbance is one of the most extremely dangerous situations for an LEO that exists. Hence his gun drawn, which is his rightful and safe approach. What do you do when an officer, clearly in uniform, and vested with arrest powers, commands you to stop and put your hands up? If you care for your life at all, you stop and put your hands up and DO NOT ARGUE WITH HIM!
The owner was not given a chance to control his dog.
The dog was not under his control (as it should have been), not trained to refrain from attacking a stranger, and therefore terminated. If a person came furiously and aggressively shouting with apparent intent to harm the officer with a dangerous weapon, would he not have shot that person? Wake up!
The cop was out of line and out of control.
Actually, no, he was not. He was under control of the situation. Of course, he knew the occupant might not expect him and be surprised. He was quite prepared for such an event, any event, and acted accordingly. He was pronounced to have done so by his administration, quite rightly.
And, at the wrong address to boot!
He was at the address to which he was directed by the dispatcher. Please note that the mistake was not his. He was in the pursuit of accomplishing his orders. He was not unlawfully entering a residence, only on a property lawfully. Perhaps he heard commotion at the rear of the house. What would you have done, in his position, without backup? It might well have been a life-threatening altercation in progress, with an aggressive animal coming at you.
Who is the idiot here?
Clearly, we have a population trained during and since the 'late '60s and '70s to despise and defy, rather than respect properly constituted authority, especially in the local law officers. They can be wrong, but you risk your life and well-being in being predisposed to resist an LEO, even if they are.
The dog was in the wrong; the LEO was not. In my book, in this case, he gets an A plus.
The owner was negligent in the dog's attitude. The dog-owner gets an F in the dog-obedience course. He heard his dog's behavior and did not immediately curb it.
To me, the FR responders who are more concerned for the dog's welfare than for that of the responding officer have a greatly misplaced compassion.