Here in Texas, the fact that you had a right to shoot at the dog does NOT relieve you of liability (criminal or civil) for hitting a by-stander. Dunno what Cali laws are like on that point.
Observations: <UL TYPE=SQUARE>
[1]Our rookie needs to be relieved of his badge. He clearly panicked and lost all sense of judgement when the doggie went ape.Specifically, he: (a)Fired without being certain of his backstop (boy behind dog). (b)Shot at the head, apparently, of a dog attatched to his FTO, and MISSED. Bad target choice, and, obviously, bad shooting. (c)Used a pistol in a situation that any decently-trained cop should have been able to resolve with an ASP baton or PR-24 nightstick, were they available {dunno if they were in fact available to him. But don't you think that in politically-correct San Francisco they had some intermediate-force weapon available?}.
[2]Our FTO had completely lost control of the situation.
[3]Responding officers pannicked when kid's dad, understandably, went ballistic. Dunno about you, but I'd do anything and everything to keep the dad out of handcuffs. Yes, you put them in for his own safety if you're absolutely certain that he's about to hit someone, but sheesh, it shouldn't come to that.</UL>
Carrying deadly force is a responsibility. Merely having the opportunity to weild it does not merit the mindless projection of it. This cop should, reasonably, be charged with assault through negligence, or some such. Here in TX, you're guilty of assault if you intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly cause bodily injury to another. I'd have to say that this was reckless.
Reckless endangerment might be more appropriate, though.
L.P.