Cowards with guns

[Tribesman]

Oh man, you didn't read that link, did you? Hilarious!

Crazed Rabbit doesn't understand that his "golden find" statute has absolutely nothing to do with the topic , and on top of that has confused one section c with an entirely different section c to try and make his irrelevant point .
As I am sure you won't understand something so simple rabbit let me put it very plainly . A state statute determining the legal responsibilities and penalties for owners of reported and assesed dangerous dogs and the usual paperwork and appeals process after a report has been made to it has absolutely nothing to do with police methods when responding to a report of a potentially dangerous dog when the dog is unrestrained unattended and outside of its owners property .

Go on and see if you can stick your foot deeper into your mouth.

Oh and Tribesman is just reaching to find some sort of hypocrisy in that.

Hey Panzer ...Some of the same people who are in this thread saying the cop should not have shot the dog because it posed no threat to him (even though they weren't there and can not possibly have any idea whether or not the cop felt threatened) defended the shooter in the other article, saying that the fleeing suspects posed a threat to him and he was absolutely justified in murdering them.