Thank you for sharing your reaction, Lola. The emotional weight of this issue is real, and I understand where that frustration comes from. My hope is that by spotlighting these patterns, we can shift the culture—toward empathy, accountability, and real change.
Thank you, Noelani! I’m so glad that point resonated with you. It really is a practical step—easy to implement, cost-effective, and with the potential to prevent so much needless harm. Appreciate your support!
Many years ago, there was a news report, with video, of a cop pulling over a car for some traffic violation. The family was made up of a father, driver, Mother, young boy and the family dog, The dog looked like a golden retriever and was not on a leash. They all got out of the car. The dog was barking but not lunging or growling. The officer had drawn his gun. The little boy ran towards his pet to calm it down. The officer fired, killed the dog and missed the boy by inches. I wonder how many people have been shot or killed while trying to instinctually protect their pet ... their family member. Although not shot, I am sure this little boy was scared for life having gone through this horrific encounter with a police officer. I have no idea if there was any reprimand or compensation ... but anything would be too little, too late.
Thank you for sharing that, Rosemary. That story is heartbreaking—and sadly, it mirrors so many others where a family pet is treated as a threat and tragedy follows. You're absolutely right to raise the point about the human toll. When a dog is gunned down, it’s not just an animal who suffers—it’s the children, the families, the bystanders who carry that trauma for life. These are family members, not disposable risks. Your comment gets to the heart of why real reform is so urgently needed.
Yet you absolutely should be anti police. I was married to a cop. The forced he worked on was found to be corrupt from the chief threw the ranks, including his best friend.
Thank you for sharing that, Jasmine. I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been to witness that kind of corruption up close. While this article focuses on reform rather than condemnation, your perspective is valid—and underscores just how deeply some departments have broken public trust. Stories like yours remind us why accountability isn't optional—it's essential.
That’s such a great point, Trevy. It really highlights how surprising—and frustrating—it is that so many officers still lack this basic skill. If everyday people can read a dog’s intent, there’s no excuse for professionals not to be trained to do the same. Thanks for making that so clear.
Police are bullies and cowards. I was with one for 10 years. Seeing behind the veil shows you how absolutely heartless and evil they are. I’ve never met a more deranged individual. Fortunately he was kind to animals, but not to women or POC. The only thing that will fully stop them is threatening their jobs so we need stricter punishment in addition to training.
Thank you for speaking so candidly, Christianna. Hearing what you experienced from inside that world adds a powerful layer to this conversation. You're absolutely right—real accountability must include consequences, not just training. Policies without enforcement don’t change behavior. I appreciate you raising your voice and pushing for deeper reform.
Thank you, TNR, for bringing that up! The PACT Act was a major step forward in recognizing the seriousness of animal cruelty at the federal level. Applying it to law enforcement use-of-force cases is a complex but important conversation—and one that underscores just how urgently we need clear standards and accountability.
Ed, there is NO "increasing number of avoidable dog shootings by police during routine encounters, many involving dogs that posed no clear threat." That's a propaganda line with no verifiable data to support it, just a few questionable videos drawn from incidents often years & many miles apart. What Beth & I can document, & have documented, are increasing numbers of both cops & civilians getting mauled because cops increasingly often hesitate to pull the trigger. Such a fatality appears to have occurred just yesterday in LaGrange, Georgia, where a pit bull was shot seconds too late to save Theresa Patterson, 60, & a Cane Corso whose presence also contributed to the circumstances was removed alive. Patterson was killed, incidentally, just a few steps from her house, by a pit bull who already had bite history.
Thanks, Merritt. I appreciate the data you and Beth continue to track and share. As you note, there are tragic cases where delayed response has cost lives, and those deserve serious attention. The article’s focus, though, is on routine encounters—welfare checks, noise complaints, traffic stops—where dogs are shot before any threat is clearly established.
The broader point remains: improved training and tools give officers more options. That’s not about telling police not to act—it’s about giving them the ability to read a situation more clearly and choose the right response, moment by moment.
I respect that we may differ on emphasis, but I’m glad we share the goal of reducing harm.
I know a family that lost its dog, a young intact male American Pit.
The dog was wonderful with the young children, 8 and 11. But bit the father, an experienced and loving dog person, twice. The family called animal rescue, who came to the home and talked with the parents. A decision was made and the representative took the animal away. The plan was for him to be evaluated and rehomed, if possible. It didn't work and the dog was euthanized without his family present. Or they with him.
Thank you for sharing that, Susan. What a heartbreaking situation—for the family, for the dog, and for everyone who tried to do the right thing. Stories like this remind us just how complex these decisions can be, and how deeply they affect everyone involved. You're right—there's so much sadness, and it underscores the need for compassion and better systems all around.
Ed, this column is basically complete pit bull shit, beginning with the oft-amplified allegation usually misattributed to the U.S. Department of Justice that police shoot as many as 10,000 dogs per year. This fallacious claim appears to trace back to a guesstimate that police may shoot as many as 25 dogs a day, included in both a 2010 publication by the American SPCA and a 2011 paper funded by the pro-pit bull National Canine Research Council, a wholly owned subsidiary of the pit bull advocacy front Animal Farm Foundation. Police officers must report every time they fire their guns. The data is available, & indicates that police actually shoot less than a third as many dogs as is claimed, many of the shootings actually done to dispatch dogs who have been hit by cars. ANIMALS 24-7, meanwhile, has logged the data on police shootings of dogs reported by mass media since 2005. Of the 1,267 dogs shot by police in logged cases, 1,060, or 84%, were pit bulls. Pit bulls were 87% of the dogs shot by police in 2018-2023. Humans were already injured by the dogs who were shot in 75% of the shootings in 2023. Police officers were injured by 30% of the dogs who were shot; civilians in 49%. These numbers are markedly up over the years. Police in 2005-2006 were injured by a dog before opening fire on the dog in only one case in 12; civilians were injured before a dog was shot in one case in nine. Amid rising controversy over police shooting dogs, the police injury rate rose to one case in six by 2017, while the civilian injury rate reached one case in three. Over the five years 2018-2022, police were injured first by the dogs they shot in 28% of the cases; civilians were injured first in 47%. What the cumulative numbers clearly show is that police have become increasingly reluctant to shoot dogs until the dogs have already inflicted injuries on humans. But this does not mean that fewer dogs are being shot, only that the dogs who are shot are being allowed considerably more opportunity to wreak havoc before taking a bullet. This indicates that police should be shooting sooner, not later. Further to be remembered, amid the controversy, is that when a pit bull or any other big & potentially dangerous dog is running at large, in a position to injure someone, the owner is ultimately to blame for failing to secure the dog, not the cops who are responding to an already bad situation, whether doing a welfare check, serving a warrant, or knowingly responding to a dog attack in progress. No amount of training police to recognize dog behavior can compensate for owners allowing dogs kept at least partially because they are intimidating to potential intruders to "escape" when a door is opened in response to a knock. This is by far the leading scenario in which police end up shooting a dog, also in which non-members of the dog-owning household are killed or injured by a dog, usually a pit bull, and is 100% the fault of the dog owners.
Corruption in police departments is rampant in this country and many incidents go unreported or covered up. Cops are on power trips, not all of them, but the majority of them are not there to “protect and serve”, but to conquer. If it means killing your pet to make their point they will do it.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Sylvia. There’s no question that systemic issues in policing—including lack of transparency—have eroded public trust, which is certainly not fair to the many outstanding officers who serve their communities. That’s exactly why accountability, training, and oversight matter so much. We can—and must—build a system that protects both people and the animals they love.
If there is no data how is Mr. Boks able to assert this?
As retired LEO who is a dog lover, I reject the idea that most police randomly shoot dogs without justification and that “training” could help de escalate a charging pit bull.
Pit bulls cause life threatening injuries in seconds.
There are officers that have been hospitalized after being attacked by pit bulls because they tried other methods to avoid shooting the dog.
There may be instances where a rogue cop shot a non threatening dog which is terrible, but to villainize all police for protecting themselves or others by shooting dogs that were charging them is irresponsible.
Thank you, Ann Marie—I appreciate your perspective, especially as someone with law enforcement experience and a love for dogs.
To clarify, the article doesn’t claim that most police officers randomly shoot dogs or that there’s never justification. It highlights how inconsistent training and policy gaps can lead to tragic outcomes—even in well-intentioned departments. The phrase “in most cases, the dogs posed no real threat” reflects the analysis of civil lawsuits, bodycam footage, and investigative reporting—not perfect data, but meaningful patterns.
You're right: pit bulls can cause serious injuries in seconds. But the overwhelming majority of police dog shootings aren’t clear-cut, high-risk attacks—they often happen during welfare checks, traffic stops, or as a dog approaches a gate. That’s where better training, better tools, and clearer protocols can help—not just to protect dogs, but also officers, like those you mentioned, who’ve been hurt trying to do the right thing.
This isn’t about villainizing police—it’s about equipping them to succeed in complex, emotional moments where lives are at stake. I’m grateful for your comment and for your service.
Hi Merritt, thanks for weighing in. I’ve always respected your commitment to tracking dog attack data, and I recognize that your work has contributed greatly to public awareness around dangerous dog cases.
This article, however, addresses a different but related issue: the increasing number of avoidable dog shootings by police during routine encounters, many involving dogs that posed no clear threat. While national tracking is weak and estimates like the 10,000 figure vary depending on source and methodology, the broader issue remains—there is no mandatory, uniform training standard in most states, and that gap has led to preventable tragedies involving many breeds.
I appreciate you sharing your data on pit bulls specifically. But my focus here is on how officers respond in the moment, and whether better training and tools might reduce harm—to people, to officers, and to dogs.
I welcome continued conversation, especially when it challenges us to think more critically. Thanks again for engaging.
Thanks for your thoughtful question, Ann Marie—and for raising a point that often comes up in these discussions.
Merritt Clifton and Animals 24-7 have compiled long-running data on serious dog attacks involving humans, and his work does show that pit bulls are disproportionately represented in severe maulings and fatal attacks. However, it’s important to note that his database focuses on civilian incidents—not police shootings of dogs.
When it comes to dogs shot by law enforcement, there’s no centralized national database—and most departments don’t track breed at all. What we do have, through lawsuits, press investigations, and bodycam footage, shows that many breeds have been shot by police, including retrievers, shepherds, terriers, Chihuahuas—and yes, pit bulls. In many cases, the dogs weren’t aggressive, weren’t attacking, and were even retreating when shot.
That’s why experts emphasize behavior over breed. Police training programs like Texas’s Canine Encounters (TCOLE #4065) and national models like LEDET teach officers to interpret body language—tail position, posture, eye contact—not breed labels, which are often misidentified anyway.
So while Merritt’s work is relevant in broader public safety conversations, it doesn’t speak to the core issue here: officers using deadly force against dogs they often misread, regardless of breed, due to lack of training.
That said, if Merritt has compiled specific data on police-involved dog shootings, I’d welcome the opportunity to review it. The more we understand about how and why these encounters escalate, the better positioned we are to push for real reform.
People love guns, they love cruelty.
Thank you for sharing your reaction, Lola. The emotional weight of this issue is real, and I understand where that frustration comes from. My hope is that by spotlighting these patterns, we can shift the culture—toward empathy, accountability, and real change.
Your assertion that mandatory training is low-hanging fruit is 🎯
A simple, actionable step that can save lives and strengthen communities
Excellent article!!!
Thank you, Noelani! I’m so glad that point resonated with you. It really is a practical step—easy to implement, cost-effective, and with the potential to prevent so much needless harm. Appreciate your support!
Many years ago, there was a news report, with video, of a cop pulling over a car for some traffic violation. The family was made up of a father, driver, Mother, young boy and the family dog, The dog looked like a golden retriever and was not on a leash. They all got out of the car. The dog was barking but not lunging or growling. The officer had drawn his gun. The little boy ran towards his pet to calm it down. The officer fired, killed the dog and missed the boy by inches. I wonder how many people have been shot or killed while trying to instinctually protect their pet ... their family member. Although not shot, I am sure this little boy was scared for life having gone through this horrific encounter with a police officer. I have no idea if there was any reprimand or compensation ... but anything would be too little, too late.
Thank you for sharing that, Rosemary. That story is heartbreaking—and sadly, it mirrors so many others where a family pet is treated as a threat and tragedy follows. You're absolutely right to raise the point about the human toll. When a dog is gunned down, it’s not just an animal who suffers—it’s the children, the families, the bystanders who carry that trauma for life. These are family members, not disposable risks. Your comment gets to the heart of why real reform is so urgently needed.
Yet you absolutely should be anti police. I was married to a cop. The forced he worked on was found to be corrupt from the chief threw the ranks, including his best friend.
Thank you for sharing that, Jasmine. I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been to witness that kind of corruption up close. While this article focuses on reform rather than condemnation, your perspective is valid—and underscores just how deeply some departments have broken public trust. Stories like yours remind us why accountability isn't optional—it's essential.
It seems to me that the average person I pass in the park while walking my dog understands how to read a dog's body language.
That’s such a great point, Trevy. It really highlights how surprising—and frustrating—it is that so many officers still lack this basic skill. If everyday people can read a dog’s intent, there’s no excuse for professionals not to be trained to do the same. Thanks for making that so clear.
Police are bullies and cowards. I was with one for 10 years. Seeing behind the veil shows you how absolutely heartless and evil they are. I’ve never met a more deranged individual. Fortunately he was kind to animals, but not to women or POC. The only thing that will fully stop them is threatening their jobs so we need stricter punishment in addition to training.
Thank you for speaking so candidly, Christianna. Hearing what you experienced from inside that world adds a powerful layer to this conversation. You're absolutely right—real accountability must include consequences, not just training. Policies without enforcement don’t change behavior. I appreciate you raising your voice and pushing for deeper reform.
They should be held to criminally accountable under the new federal law PACT Act
Thank you, TNR, for bringing that up! The PACT Act was a major step forward in recognizing the seriousness of animal cruelty at the federal level. Applying it to law enforcement use-of-force cases is a complex but important conversation—and one that underscores just how urgently we need clear standards and accountability.
Ed, there is NO "increasing number of avoidable dog shootings by police during routine encounters, many involving dogs that posed no clear threat." That's a propaganda line with no verifiable data to support it, just a few questionable videos drawn from incidents often years & many miles apart. What Beth & I can document, & have documented, are increasing numbers of both cops & civilians getting mauled because cops increasingly often hesitate to pull the trigger. Such a fatality appears to have occurred just yesterday in LaGrange, Georgia, where a pit bull was shot seconds too late to save Theresa Patterson, 60, & a Cane Corso whose presence also contributed to the circumstances was removed alive. Patterson was killed, incidentally, just a few steps from her house, by a pit bull who already had bite history.
Thanks, Merritt. I appreciate the data you and Beth continue to track and share. As you note, there are tragic cases where delayed response has cost lives, and those deserve serious attention. The article’s focus, though, is on routine encounters—welfare checks, noise complaints, traffic stops—where dogs are shot before any threat is clearly established.
The broader point remains: improved training and tools give officers more options. That’s not about telling police not to act—it’s about giving them the ability to read a situation more clearly and choose the right response, moment by moment.
I respect that we may differ on emphasis, but I’m glad we share the goal of reducing harm.
I know a family that lost its dog, a young intact male American Pit.
The dog was wonderful with the young children, 8 and 11. But bit the father, an experienced and loving dog person, twice. The family called animal rescue, who came to the home and talked with the parents. A decision was made and the representative took the animal away. The plan was for him to be evaluated and rehomed, if possible. It didn't work and the dog was euthanized without his family present. Or they with him.
Such sadness to go around.
Thank you for sharing that, Susan. What a heartbreaking situation—for the family, for the dog, and for everyone who tried to do the right thing. Stories like this remind us just how complex these decisions can be, and how deeply they affect everyone involved. You're right—there's so much sadness, and it underscores the need for compassion and better systems all around.
Ed, this column is basically complete pit bull shit, beginning with the oft-amplified allegation usually misattributed to the U.S. Department of Justice that police shoot as many as 10,000 dogs per year. This fallacious claim appears to trace back to a guesstimate that police may shoot as many as 25 dogs a day, included in both a 2010 publication by the American SPCA and a 2011 paper funded by the pro-pit bull National Canine Research Council, a wholly owned subsidiary of the pit bull advocacy front Animal Farm Foundation. Police officers must report every time they fire their guns. The data is available, & indicates that police actually shoot less than a third as many dogs as is claimed, many of the shootings actually done to dispatch dogs who have been hit by cars. ANIMALS 24-7, meanwhile, has logged the data on police shootings of dogs reported by mass media since 2005. Of the 1,267 dogs shot by police in logged cases, 1,060, or 84%, were pit bulls. Pit bulls were 87% of the dogs shot by police in 2018-2023. Humans were already injured by the dogs who were shot in 75% of the shootings in 2023. Police officers were injured by 30% of the dogs who were shot; civilians in 49%. These numbers are markedly up over the years. Police in 2005-2006 were injured by a dog before opening fire on the dog in only one case in 12; civilians were injured before a dog was shot in one case in nine. Amid rising controversy over police shooting dogs, the police injury rate rose to one case in six by 2017, while the civilian injury rate reached one case in three. Over the five years 2018-2022, police were injured first by the dogs they shot in 28% of the cases; civilians were injured first in 47%. What the cumulative numbers clearly show is that police have become increasingly reluctant to shoot dogs until the dogs have already inflicted injuries on humans. But this does not mean that fewer dogs are being shot, only that the dogs who are shot are being allowed considerably more opportunity to wreak havoc before taking a bullet. This indicates that police should be shooting sooner, not later. Further to be remembered, amid the controversy, is that when a pit bull or any other big & potentially dangerous dog is running at large, in a position to injure someone, the owner is ultimately to blame for failing to secure the dog, not the cops who are responding to an already bad situation, whether doing a welfare check, serving a warrant, or knowingly responding to a dog attack in progress. No amount of training police to recognize dog behavior can compensate for owners allowing dogs kept at least partially because they are intimidating to potential intruders to "escape" when a door is opened in response to a knock. This is by far the leading scenario in which police end up shooting a dog, also in which non-members of the dog-owning household are killed or injured by a dog, usually a pit bull, and is 100% the fault of the dog owners.
Corruption in police departments is rampant in this country and many incidents go unreported or covered up. Cops are on power trips, not all of them, but the majority of them are not there to “protect and serve”, but to conquer. If it means killing your pet to make their point they will do it.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Sylvia. There’s no question that systemic issues in policing—including lack of transparency—have eroded public trust, which is certainly not fair to the many outstanding officers who serve their communities. That’s exactly why accountability, training, and oversight matter so much. We can—and must—build a system that protects both people and the animals they love.
Thank you! I agree.
“In most cases, the dogs posed no real threat.”
If there is no data how is Mr. Boks able to assert this?
As retired LEO who is a dog lover, I reject the idea that most police randomly shoot dogs without justification and that “training” could help de escalate a charging pit bull.
Pit bulls cause life threatening injuries in seconds.
There are officers that have been hospitalized after being attacked by pit bulls because they tried other methods to avoid shooting the dog.
There may be instances where a rogue cop shot a non threatening dog which is terrible, but to villainize all police for protecting themselves or others by shooting dogs that were charging them is irresponsible.
Thank you, Ann Marie—I appreciate your perspective, especially as someone with law enforcement experience and a love for dogs.
To clarify, the article doesn’t claim that most police officers randomly shoot dogs or that there’s never justification. It highlights how inconsistent training and policy gaps can lead to tragic outcomes—even in well-intentioned departments. The phrase “in most cases, the dogs posed no real threat” reflects the analysis of civil lawsuits, bodycam footage, and investigative reporting—not perfect data, but meaningful patterns.
You're right: pit bulls can cause serious injuries in seconds. But the overwhelming majority of police dog shootings aren’t clear-cut, high-risk attacks—they often happen during welfare checks, traffic stops, or as a dog approaches a gate. That’s where better training, better tools, and clearer protocols can help—not just to protect dogs, but also officers, like those you mentioned, who’ve been hurt trying to do the right thing.
This isn’t about villainizing police—it’s about equipping them to succeed in complex, emotional moments where lives are at stake. I’m grateful for your comment and for your service.
Hi Merritt, thanks for weighing in. I’ve always respected your commitment to tracking dog attack data, and I recognize that your work has contributed greatly to public awareness around dangerous dog cases.
This article, however, addresses a different but related issue: the increasing number of avoidable dog shootings by police during routine encounters, many involving dogs that posed no clear threat. While national tracking is weak and estimates like the 10,000 figure vary depending on source and methodology, the broader issue remains—there is no mandatory, uniform training standard in most states, and that gap has led to preventable tragedies involving many breeds.
I appreciate you sharing your data on pit bulls specifically. But my focus here is on how officers respond in the moment, and whether better training and tools might reduce harm—to people, to officers, and to dogs.
I welcome continued conversation, especially when it challenges us to think more critically. Thanks again for engaging.
Are most of the dogs shot by police pit bulls that are charging the officers? Your article did not mention breed at all.
Thanks for your thoughtful question, Ann Marie—and for raising a point that often comes up in these discussions.
Merritt Clifton and Animals 24-7 have compiled long-running data on serious dog attacks involving humans, and his work does show that pit bulls are disproportionately represented in severe maulings and fatal attacks. However, it’s important to note that his database focuses on civilian incidents—not police shootings of dogs.
When it comes to dogs shot by law enforcement, there’s no centralized national database—and most departments don’t track breed at all. What we do have, through lawsuits, press investigations, and bodycam footage, shows that many breeds have been shot by police, including retrievers, shepherds, terriers, Chihuahuas—and yes, pit bulls. In many cases, the dogs weren’t aggressive, weren’t attacking, and were even retreating when shot.
That’s why experts emphasize behavior over breed. Police training programs like Texas’s Canine Encounters (TCOLE #4065) and national models like LEDET teach officers to interpret body language—tail position, posture, eye contact—not breed labels, which are often misidentified anyway.
So while Merritt’s work is relevant in broader public safety conversations, it doesn’t speak to the core issue here: officers using deadly force against dogs they often misread, regardless of breed, due to lack of training.
That said, if Merritt has compiled specific data on police-involved dog shootings, I’d welcome the opportunity to review it. The more we understand about how and why these encounters escalate, the better positioned we are to push for real reform.