I am so tired of hearing about dogs doing what is in their nature to do-protect and guard their territories, and being put down for it! In this particular case-I would have to ask - was there any warning that there was a dog inside and- was it obvious that the store was closed? And where was the owner when the dog attacked? was he not close enough that he could have called off the dog or did the dog just not respond to his owners commands?
Shouldn't the judge be asking these questions before he passes a sentence like that?
I hear stories like this all the time. A dog attacks a trespasser and the dog is put down - because the tresspasser was a child or the dog excessively bites the man who tresspassed. whatever the reason, the dog is doing what comes natural and should not be punished for it. Now if the owner is right there and the dog attacks even after the owner calls him off-that's different. Or if it's not on the dogs property and he attacks someone for no reason. But in cases like this - I have to ask why?