In the past, I've strongly supported High Point police when they've had to shoot a dog.
I can't do that in the latest instance.
It occurred last week.
Two officers and a police dog were pursuing a suspect on foot. The man they were following allegedly had wrecked a stolen car.
They lost sight of the subject, but the dog tracked him across the back yards of several homes on Louise Avenue, police said.
Coming to a fence, the officers climbed over to continue the pursuit. The homeowner's dog ran out from under the house and attacked, according to police. An officer shot the dog three times, killing it.
A police spokeswoman said the officer acted to protect himself. At the same time, the spokeswoman added, the dog wasn't at fault. It was guarding its property.
This bothers me because, in this instance, the exact same thing could have happened to my dog or to almost anyone's.
In other cases, police are called to a neighborhood where a dog is running loose and often threatening people, if not actually attacking.
Such a dog is a danger to public safety and fair game for lethal action as a last resort.
A dog kept in a fenced yard is an entirely different story. It doesn't pose a threat to anyone who doesn't come into its yard. If that happens, the dog is supposed to defend its turf.
If intruders intend to break into the house, they're the ones who are fair game for whatever injury the dog is able to inflict on them.
Well, what if the intruders are police officers crossing the property in the line of duty? Then, apparently, the dog is in big trouble.
Of course, I can't say the officer didn't need to shoot the dog to avoid a painful encounter with a fiercely protective dog. I wasn't there.
But, as I wrote in my previous column, in more than 35 years as a runner, I've been challenged by countless snarling, threatening and occasionally biting dogs, and not one time was I ever in a situation where I was in such jeopardy that I needed even a nonlethal weapon, let alone a gun. Not that it couldn't happen, but just knowing how to deal with the animal can avert a crisis.
In this case, I don't know if a willy-nilly pursuit across private property, and especially into a fenced yard, was the wisest course for officers to take, unless the subject was considered armed and dangerous.
And why didn't he have trouble with the dog if he'd passed through the same yard?
Police didn't get their suspect anyway, so maybe they were on the wrong track.
Perhaps they should reconsider their procedures in such cases. I'm not comfortable with the idea that police might run through my fenced-in back yard and provoke a confrontation with my dog.