Statistics for defensive dog shootings

[Paladin]

The article I got this stuff from was in the LA Times, and was so opinionated and at times annoying, that I won't post the whole thing.

But statisitics on defensive dog shootings are hard to come by. They seem very important for CHL holders as well as police. Therefore I am posting the statistics with the CHL holder in mind. While most dogs are friendly, dangerous dogs do present a significant threat. The statistics show 1 in 4 LA police shootings involved a dog.

"March 12, 2005
By Matt Lait, Scott Glover and Doug Smith

One out of every four times Los Angeles police officers intentionally fired their guns during the last 20 years, the target was not a man; it was man's best friend.

...

Since 1985, police have shot at more than 465 dogs, killing at least 200 and wounding at least 140, according to incident reports

...

Comparing the rate of dog shootings with those of other police agencies is difficult because there are no nationwide statistics. In New York, with a population more than twice as large as Los Angeles' and a police force nearly four times as big as the LAPD, officers have shot at 803 dogs since 1990.

...

Through most of the early 1990s, [LA] dog shootings hovered around 20 a year — roughly one for every four times that officers fired on suspects. But in 1998 and 1999, officers shot at dogs more often than at people, with 42 dog shootings in 1998 and 43 in 1999. In recent years, dog shootings dropped to lower levels. Last year, for example, there were 20.

In shootings involving canines, two dozen officers have been bitten. Seven officers accidentally shot their partners or bystanders while fending off aggressive dogs.

The data show that officers hit dogs with gunfire in about three-quarters of all shooting incidents involving the animals, an accuracy rate about 10 percentage points higher than that for shootings involving people. Police killed more than 40% of the dogs they fired on, which was considerably higher than the death rate for people, who were killed in about a quarter of police shootings."

[rgoldy]

I wonder if part of the reason for the rise in dog shootings(assuming that this statistic represents a national trend), could be the increase in the paranoia level over pit bulls and other such breeds. I do not have any figures of course, but my impression is that there is a proliferation of this breed, and others that resemble them. Many of them (not by any means all) seem to have been trained or encouraged to be aggressive. Doing so and then not securing the dog is an invitation to having the dog confiscated or destroyed. The pit bulls I have had contact with seem by and large to be sweet dogs who are very loyal and protective of those who are on the "approved list". They are by nature hunting and guard dogs so under stress they can revert. At that point they can become a danger to strangers or even their own family. I think it is a pity that humans have bred and trained a fine breed to the point where there is discussion about prohibiting them in neighborhoods.

[Bubba]

The trend in rural Tarrant County Texas was for the dirtbag drug dealers and theives to keep bad dogs for "protection" from the LEO.
Several died (by other deputies) during my watch.
:(