After reading the story "Dangerous pet forces hard choices" (March 20), I feel like the reporter left out some important information. Here are examples of what I think should have been asked: How many times have the police or animal control officers been called to this home? Did the dog have a history of violence? Why did the neighbors call the police, did they feel threatened by the dog? By not asking all the questions or reporting all the information, some people can be led to believe that our deputies would rather shoot first and ask questions later. This is evident in the letter to the editor "Question dog shooting" by Carri Chaddon (March 25). In Tooele City and Tooele County, we have laws that require dogs be on a leash, chain or in a fenced yard. Utah law also says that the owner is responsible for the actions of the dog. All pet owners need to take into account that if their dog bites someone they are legally responsible for the incident. If the owner had followed the law, then the deputy would not have been called to their home and the dog would still be alive. I would hope that most of us would put aside our emotions and ask the questions before we blame someone who is only protecting the public. I'm not saying that we should not question our police officers' actions, but that we should get all the facts first.

Tim Booth Jr.

Tooele