# PPD Question



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Many people have (or desire) a dog that can be used for personal protection, many others bring up the issue of the liability of owning such a dog. So this begs the question, under what circumstances is a homeowner justified under the law to use a dog in this respect? 

Is the use of a dog trained in civil protection only justified when there is an active threat of bodily harm? How about a person breaking into your home? What if that person is unarmed? Intoxicated and/or confused? 

Is the use of such a dog justified in apprehending a person fleeing after having committed a crime at your residence? 

So the question is: When can a civil protection dog be used against a person that is, with intent, committing, or attempting to commit, a crime against your person or property.

I think this may be good for some people who are looking for or already own a PPD to think about.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

As I know nothing about PPD the only logical thought to me would be the PPD would be considered much like use of a gun perhaps?


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

consult an attorney regarding the law in your state.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

As police officers, we are taught to use only that amount of force necessary to stop a threat. The "amount of force" can range from mere presence, verbal, physical to the use of deadly force. Officers in general will recieve a great deal of training of when to escalate the amount of force being used. I've learned over the years, some of the most important words to remember are; "I was in fear of my life". The best advice given in this thread so far however is: consult an attorney regarding the law in your state.

DFrost


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Frost,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I realize that laws vary widely from state to state, perhaps you could respond in regards to the laws existing in TN. 
Here is my thinking on the matter. If someone is unlawfully in my house the first thing I am reaching for is certainly not my leash. In this situation the best I would expect from a dog (any dog) is to buy me a few extra moments to reach the .45 or 12 ga. Where I do see a dog as an asset is in a situation similar to as follows:

I awaken in the night to a noise and look out my window. I see a man breaking into my vehicle in the driveway. I go outside with a gun and dog. I shout "Stop!" and the man takes off running. At this point the gun is not really necessary as I am not in danger. How would your state (or jurisdiction) view using the dog to apprehend the man in this circumstance? 
I could also see a dog as being a way-point between deadly force. Perhaps someone is in your home but they are obviously drunk and confused but seem rather violent. 
If you have any thoughts on the matter please chime-in. Perhaps you could also say what state you are in and what laws would apply.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

First off, I'm in no way giving legal advice. My experience tells me your comment of: "I shout "Stop!" and the man takes off running" says it all. You then admit; "At this point the gun is not really necessary as I am not in danger." In my opinion, the threat is gone, so is the need to protect yourself or your property. Now is when you call the police. 

DFrost


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

also, in most states, it is illegal to use deadly force to protect property. I believe Texas is the only place that allows it. I am on/off several gun groups and it's a common discussion point. In TX, you can shoot a guy walking across your yard with your TV. In every other state, you can't because 1) he is leaving and 2) he can't hurt you (unless maybe he hit you with said TV)

check out "castle doctrine" in your state. some states require that you flee until the last possible instant, while others use the "home is your castle" defense and anyone entering your house is subject to deadly force.

there have been many court precedents citing dogs as lethal weapons and a trained PPD would definitely count. so contact a local attorney and possibly your local district attorney for more information on how things are handled in your area.
ETA: and, as DFrost said, the most important thing to remember is "I was in fear for my life" also, this is the main reason that any self-defense instructor will tell you not to pull a gun unless you intend to kill. shooting to wound will usually leave you with a charge of attempted murder. IE, self-defense means you fear for your life while shooting to scare someone means that you didn't think they were going to kill you


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: I see a man breaking into my vehicle in the driveway. I go outside with a gun and dog. I shout "Stop!" and the man takes off running. At this point the gun is not really necessary as I am not in danger. How would your state (or jurisdiction) view using the dog to apprehend the man in this circumstance?


Here is my advice. The guy is running away. Problem solved. As a citizen you have not the right nor the expertise to be apprehending criminals. You do not have the training. You can get hold of something that you cannot cut lose of. Since you have no training, you could grab the guy and oops, he has a gun or knife and now you are in the morgue. Leave that to we cops and call 9-11


----------



## gagrady (Apr 27, 2009)

So, a rather basic question - what are the legitimate or lawful applications of PPDs today? For commercial property protection? Or, for the protection of people with certain status (the same people who need body guards)? 

Thanks...


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

I would look at it the same as any person who wants to carry a weapon. be it for home defense or personal protection. but, the owner must realize that they will be covered by the same rules as any other means of deadly force.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: DainerraI would look at it the same as any person who wants to carry a weapon. be it for home defense or personal protection. but, the owner must realize that they will be covered by the same rules as any other means of deadly force.


Just for the record and for accuracy, the use of a Police Service Dog is NOT "deadly force". It's an important distinction.

DFrost


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: gagradySo, a rather basic question - what are the legitimate or lawful applications of PPDs today? For commercial property protection? Or, for the protection of people with certain status (the same people who need body guards)?
> 
> Thanks...


My opinion; the best place for you to get an answer that question would be from an attorney, in your state. Police officers go through extensive and specific training on use of force issues. That training is continued throughout a career. Even so, force once used, is often questioned. It's nearly always reviewed by internal affairs and often by the district attorney. Excessive use of force law suits are certainly not uncommon. Only a lawyer can really give you advice could have a profound effect on your daily life.

DFrost


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

yes, but I was assuming that the question was concerning privately owned PPD. which, in several cases, have been declared to be deadly weapons when sicced on someone else....


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

Which is why I specifically stated, "Police Service Dog". 

DFrost


----------



## gagrady (Apr 27, 2009)

Thanks for your responses. I tried to search on the internet but for some reason any information on laws regarding PPDs seems to be quite difficult to find. I am not interested in having a PPD at all but was curious about the disconnect between legal limitations in having a PPD and the ridiculous prices at which number of trainers try to sell PPDs. In other words, why an individual would pay $20K or so to get a PPD only to face a lawsuite when he exercises his/her option to protect the family/property?

My curiosity is not high enough to pay an attorney to understand the details... Was just trying to understand the basic premise of some trainers selling PPDs for such ridiculous prices.

Pl ignore my question if the answer still is the same i.e. consult an attorney...

Thanks!


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

Just for the sake of conversation, and purely my personal opinion, I believe the circumstances would dictate consequences. For example, let's say you used the dog, gun or club in a clear cut case of self-defense, including your home. At worst, even if it went to trial, a jury of your peers would hear your story of protecting yourself. Personally, if I was on a jury and was told a story of a person protecting home and family on his own property, there wouldn 't be a case. In most cases, I would think it would be reviewed by the DA and quite possibly, never go to court. 

DFrost


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

DFrost, yes, sounds logical to me. 
Gagrady, as for the cost, a lot of work goes into training a REAL PPD. (real meaning they didn't just go out with the effort of making a mean dog that would bite anything that moves like some people do) Also, there is a certain potential for liability that goes with being the person who trained the dog. If the new owner gets hurt, they can sue you. If the owner got sued, then the victim AND the owner could come after you.

As for the reasons someone would pay so much money is as varied as the people who decide to go that route...

it is odd, since I thought of your previous post, that a Police Dog is considered "less than lethal" force, but a PPD is considered a deadly weapon. but I guess that would be another topic entirely..


----------

