CRITICS OF POLICE NEED TO UNDERSTAND DETAILS

The Free Press has published a steady stream of letters criticizing the
recent police incident in which a dog was shot. I take issue with those who
categorize the police actions as exhibiting indifference, arrogance,
contempt or lack of respect.

Since we have not yet been provided with a comprehensive account of why
this obviously regrettable mistake was made, we should reserve our judgment
and, instead, make an effort to understand the circumstances that led to
this unfortunate incident.

Acting on what we now know to have been incorrect information that this was
a residence from which the occupant trafficked in illegal drugs, the police
did what the community expects and provincial legislation mandates they do,
namely, enforce the laws of this country.

We expect and, indeed, demand, that police make every effort to reduce the
level of drug trafficking in our city. In view of the violence inherent in
the illegal drug trade, they prudently prepared to defend themselves should
the need arise.

Confronted with an obviously agitated dog, the police did what they are
trained to do -- they protected themselves from what they obviously viewed
as a reasonable apprehension of harm.

For us to judge a police officer's actions taken in a split second, from
the comfort of our armchair and with the benefit of hindsight, is patently
unfair.

As a dog owner myself, I fully appreciate the emotional attachment and
unconditional loyalty that develops between a dog and its owner. This,
however, should not close our minds to the police perspective. If anyone
feels police have acted improperly or negligently, they can pursue their
legal remedies, as the resident in this case is apparently doing.

John Lisowski

London