# So much for the $100,000 white house protection dogs...



## DaniFani

One kick and that bad a$$ Malinois, boogy booked it out of there...


VIDEO: Man Jumps White House Fence, Kicks Dog - Fox Nation


----------



## carmspack

but A dog did come back and tackle him, and then an officer with a dog on lead enters the fray till man subdued


----------



## llombardo

It looks to me like at least one if not both dogs were on a long line and the mal was called off and the other dog took him by surprise. I don't think the dog was scared, I think it was following direction. I almost think that they rushed the guy with both dogs, called one off and completely caught the guy off guard. The second dog took some punches I'm more surprised that they allowed the crazy guy to hit the dog at all.


----------



## Nigel

Too hard to tell, but after kicking at the first dog and it leaving, then second dog came in and engaged the man at first, but it was quickly on the ground getting punched?


----------



## llombardo

Nigel said:


> Too hard to tell, but after kicking at the first dog and it leaving, then second dog came in and engaged the man at first, but it was quickly on the ground getting punched?


I think the second dog was shadowing the first one. As soon as the first dog retreated the second dog was there.


----------



## Cheyanna

I think the dogs should have ripped off whatever limb hit or kicked them. Jerk! Makes my blood boil.


----------



## JoeyG

I think the first dog was pulled back or called off is what it looks like. . Frankly I dont know what the cops there were doing and why they weren't on top of him faster. Second dog seems to have taken a good beating unfortunately.


----------



## Nigel

After watching it again it looks like the guy picked up the second dog by the neck/collar and slammed it before punching it.


----------



## llombardo

Nigel said:


> After watching it again it looks like the guy picked up the second dog by the neck/collar and slammed it before punching it.


It's pretty disturbing. Police officers shoot people for a lot less in Chicago and this is the White House? They should have had that guy as soon as he lifted his shirt. The first time I watched the video I thought for sure the guy had a weapon. If that guy had a weapon he could have got a few shots off before he was shot dead.


----------



## mycobraracr

That dog was called back after he was kicked. Dog completely stopped once it was kicked. It was really trying to decide if was going to engage or not. Not a reaction I would want to see. 

At least the second dog was still trying to engage even though it got rocked.


----------



## wolfy dog

If the dogs had been Republican, Fox would have had a different report......


----------



## selzer

wolfy dog said:


> If the dogs had been Republican, Fox would have had a different report......


Hey! You aren't allowed to joke about politics here!!!


----------



## SuperG

wolfy dog said:


> If the dogs had been Republican, Fox would have had a different report......



Be glad dogs don't get caught up in politics....it would ruin their essence.

SuperG


----------



## SuperG

DaniFani said:


> One kick and that bad a$$ Malinois, boogy booked it out of there...
> 
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Dog created a moment of distraction and imbalance on the part of the intruder.....changed the overall odds as to who was going to lose. Dog did it's job.
> 
> 
> SuperG


----------



## wolfy dog

selzer said:


> Hey! You aren't allowed to joke about politics here!!!


I realized I was entering murky waters but couldn't resist


----------



## llombardo

mycobraracr said:


> That dog was called back after he was kicked. Dog completely stopped once it was kicked. It was really trying to decide if was going to engage or not. Not a reaction I would want to see.
> 
> At least the second dog was still trying to engage even though it got rocked.


The dog followed orders. Nothing about his retreat looked like he was scared. He might have not wanted to retreat but I still think that is part of the operation they carry out when using two dogs.


----------



## Colie CVT

Lol Wolfy Dog, when I saw who was reporting it... 

The flashing light and darkness made it hard to tell completely what was going on, though it looked more like the first dog was called back. Being kicked could still stun an animal, and by that point another officer with another dog was close. They likely were giving the guy a moment to consider what he was doing. Unless for some reason there were members of the White House within range of a gun, being at the fence isn't a shoot at them offense I would hope. 

We do want to see less use of guns with rather trigger happy police don't we?


----------



## Baillif

No way of knowing without being there but dog 1 was supposed to recall significantly earlier than he did which was why he got kicked. Dog 2 was the catch dog and dog 1 did reengage when told. The tactics they use are opsec ttp kind of stuff but theres the other side to the story. 

From a sport perspective what happened was a problem but they aren't doing a sport.


----------



## LaRen616

Here is a video that is much more clear than the original one posted.

Meet the Secret Service Dogs Who Took Down White House Fence Jumper - ABC News


----------



## mycobraracr

I agree no way of knowing without being there. 

So even if the dog was called off, did it late and got kicked. Once it was kicked all bets would be off. 

I recently decoyed a police and military k9 trial. One of my scenarios was a call off. When a dog blew the call off, I was to stay passive/compliant until dog engaged. Then I could fight the dog until handler retrieved the dog. Not one dog once I started fighting,decided oh "I better go back to my handler now".


----------



## SuperG

The other headline attached to the story 
*"Alleged White House Fence Jumper Accused of Kicking Dog"*



Seriously ? Who'd a ever thunk? I suppose this deranged individual was just to lay down and play "dead" ??


The media really cracks me up ..all too often.


I'm just guessing...but if some fool is willing to jump the WH fence, I would hope they would put the fool down with severe prejudice.


Geezzzzz..he kicked the dog...of course he did...the guy is messed up and a wild card capable of who knows what? 



Even though I have cared more for my dogs than many people...dogs used in this sector of security, besides being a deterrent are also there for stacking the deck in the favor of the "good guys"....and at the end of the day....more expendable than the human backing them up.


SuperG


----------



## DaniFani

mycobraracr said:


> That dog was called back after he was kicked. Dog completely stopped once it was kicked. It was really trying to decide if was going to engage or not. Not a reaction I would want to see.
> 
> At least the second dog was still trying to engage even though it got rocked.


Yeah, this seems to be the common consensus amongst the experienced LE k9 handlers I am friends with and the people I know that train the handlers and dogs. They were blowing up my newsfeed. Crazy small world, one of my trainer girl friends actually knows the trainer of these and other SS dogs. It was really cool to talk about SS training techniques and where they get their dogs. I'm hoping she has a chat with him after everything cools down. I'd love to hear his thoughts and perspective, on the training etc...although I'm sure there is a lot of stuff that officially can't be discussed. 

Thanks for posting the more clear link, laren. This morning that one and another one popped up in my newsfeed. I couldn't find a more clear one when I first was talking with my friend about it. 

I can't get over how MUCH he was fighting the dogs. It's crazy. And pretty scary. Glad the guy was subdued, period. He was really fighting. Crazy how many of these types of attempts are being made lately.

Despite my smart aleck response -)), I do have a lot of respect for these trainers and their dogs, and realize I am a humble noob to all this. I'm new to the working dog training world, but enjoy it very very much. I'm learning a lot about "good dogs" vs "not so good dogs" as far as performance. It's very enlightening, and even more fun.  It's amazing how extremely different expectations, standards, and training is from department to department, and division to division.


----------



## misslesleedavis1

Really hard to watch it because of the way the vid is turning out on my phone but, you would think the white house would be equipped with "balls to the wall" dogs?


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

I would wash any dog that got shut down by a kick for sport forget real life. A decent dog should be in it to win it after getting punked like that regardless of a call off. Too bad the SS are not immune to getting sold average dogs.


----------



## volcano

I finally see a use for guantanamo let the dogs go there to train on biting live idiots like this guy.


----------



## volcano

The white house can NOT have balls to the walls dogs. An old lady or kids or whatever can happen and theres alot of cameras and scrutiny. Can you imagine what other countries might think/spin a story if a dog bit a kid on the front lawn of the white house? Its not as if a drugged out person on the lawn is an actual security issue either, but it cannot be allowed.


----------



## SuperG

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> I would wash any dog that got shut down by a kick for sport forget real life. A decent dog should be in it to win it after getting punked like that regardless of a call off. Too bad the SS are not immune to getting sold average dogs.


If in fact...that was exactly what happened ...I would do the same..especially for "real life".

I know little of the "sport" but if I am one of the dudes getting gnawed on during the "sport" version...am I at liberty to kick the dog as hard as I can during it's " sport" training?

All I ever see are these wimpy little horse crops being waved about...never have I seen where the guy tees off on the dog....but like I say...I know little of the "sport".

SuperG


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

SuperG said:


> If in fact...that was exactly what happened ...I would do the same..especially for "real life".
> 
> I know little of the "sport" but if I am one of the dudes getting gnawed on during the "sport" version...am I at liberty to kick the dog as hard as I can during it's " sport" training?
> 
> All I ever see are these wimpy little horse crops being waved about...never have I seen where the guy tees off on the dog....but like I say...I know little of the "sport".
> 
> SuperG


If your training the right way and living with the dog you figure put pretty quick what he can handle and what his potential is.
You dont even have to T off on him .


----------



## mycobraracr

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> If your training the right way and living with the dog you figure put pretty quick what he can handle and what his potential is.
> You dont even have to T off on him .


:thumbup: What happens in training an what happens on a trial field are very different things. Training with a dog will tell you all about it.


----------



## volcano

I agree, I question whether dogs will really hold up to a beatdown. But apparently the handlers know alot more than me and are able to put "pressure" on the dogs without beating them half to death. When I play rough with my girl she amps it up, but if theres a ball or toy in sight she will go to that to relieve her stress. Shes soft like that and I dont mind.


----------



## SuperG

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> If your training the right way and living with the dog you figure put pretty quick what he can handle and what his potential is.
> You dont even have to T off on him .


I can't disagree with you since I know little of the training....but there is a first time for everything which a dog is exposed to...or more importantly what it hasn't been. I assume there are some assumptions made and when the dog actually crosses that bridge in "real life"..well then we all know.

SuperG


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

SuperG said:


> I can't disagree with you since I know little of the training....but there is a first time for everything which a dog is exposed to...or more importantly what it hasn't been. I assume there are some assumptions made and when the dog actually crosses that bridge in "real life"..well then we all know.
> 
> SuperG


 
Ok.


----------



## G-burg

Interesting comments!


----------



## brembo

What I saw was two dogs completely engage and keep a potentially dangerous person busy while the humans arrived with weapons. No one got killed, dogs got a little banged up and things went back to normal operation in ~20 seconds. 

I am surprised a bit that he didn't get zapped when he lifted his shirt though. Had I been behind a sniper scope that would have made my finger tighten up some, and I betcha he had a few sets of crosshairs on him.


----------



## DaniFani

brembo said:


> What I saw was two dogs completely engage and keep a potentially dangerous person busy while the humans arrived with weapons. No one got killed, dogs got a little banged up and things went back to normal operation in ~20 seconds.
> 
> I am surprised a bit that he didn't get zapped when he lifted his shirt though. Had I been behind a sniper scope that would have made my finger tighten up some, and I betcha he had a few sets of crosshairs on him.


There were people and crowds everywhere....always assess your backdrop before firing. Every bullet lands somewhere, and statistically, most bullets don't hit their moving target.


----------



## Lilie

What I see is dog #1 going in for the bite, hesitate when not offered the sleeve, receive a kick due to it's hesitation, turned to look for guidance and was either called or returned to it's handler. 

Dog #2 didn't hesitate.


----------



## Sunflowers

Get a couple of decent GSDs in there


----------



## Sunflowers

volcano said:


> The white house can NOT have balls to the walls dogs. An old lady or kids or whatever can happen and theres alot of cameras and scrutiny. Can you imagine what other countries might think/spin a story if a dog bit a kid on the front lawn of the white house? Its not as if a drugged out person on the lawn is an actual security issue either, but it cannot be allowed.


I can't imagine an old lady scaling the walls of the White House LOL.


----------



## Sabis mom

Lilie said:


> What I see is dog #1 going in for the bite, hesitate when not offered the sleeve, receive a kick due to it's hesitation, turned to look for guidance and was either called or returned to it's handler.
> 
> Dog #2 didn't hesitate.


That's what I saw to. 

I can tell you had that been my dog getting punched, I would have ripped his head off. You touch my dog, you're gonna have to deal with me. And yes I have worked dogs in real life. I recall someone kicking Sabi and another hitting her with a folding chair. Neither liked the outcome, or the accommodations they got for the night.


----------



## SuperG

Sabis mom said:


> That's what I saw to.
> 
> I recall someone kicking Sabi and another hitting her with a folding chair.



What prompted these people to do as such ?....I assume Sabi was minding her own business.

SuperG


----------



## Sabis mom

SuperG said:


> What prompted these people to do as such ?....I assume Sabi was minding her own business.
> 
> SuperG


One was an intoxicated trespasser that was being escorted off premises. Would have been released with no charges had he not kicked Sabi.

One was the buddy of a person being detained during a riot. His buddy was released with no charges once the crowd was dispersed.

I would have to say no Sabi was not minding her business, she was working.


----------



## Muskeg

It seems a lot of sport dog trainers think these dogs were weak. I'm not so sure. Huge difference between real life and the sport field. Sport scenario, dog knows it's a game. Everything is pretty predictable. Real life, not so much, not predictable. The bad guy could really try to hurt the dog. 

Decoys act in very predictable ways, may pretend to try to do harm to the dog, but it's not really serious (KNPV can get a bit more serious, particularly in training, but I'm talking sports we have here, ring, IPO). I've seen plenty of ring/IPO malinois that don't have that "civil edge" or whatever you might call it to engage the man for real, but can look super flashy on the sport field. And vice versa- dogs with too much defense may take a lot of work to look flashy in sport. Nerves may be an issue. It's a real balance, especially in the malinois. 

I'm guessing the SS gets dogs from reputable vendors and will wash out dogs that can't perform. Even a dog with really strong nerves and fight might look a bit "weak" to a sport dog trainer that expects to see the dog launch itself at a decoy without a care. This wasn't a decoy, this was real, and the dogs did their jobs. 

I think it's important to distinguish between sport and real life. We have a local malinois police dog that was punched and kicked off but re-engaged. No video, but the dog did drop off briefly, but did take down the victim in the end and did his job regardless. Also had a working malinois here get stabbed, dog still did his job (he's OK).

What I'm saying is it's OK for a dog to react to being severely kicked by temporarily dropping off as long as the dog re-engages. In fact this strategy may prevent further injury to the dog and be a more effective means of subduing a subject. Holding on through fake stick hits in IPO is quite a different thing altogether.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

Muskeg said:


> It seems a lot of sport dog trainers think these dogs were weak. I'm not so sure. Huge difference between real life and the sport field. Sport scenario, dog knows it's a game. Everything is pretty predictable. Real life, not so much, not predictable. The bad guy could really try to hurt the dog.
> 
> Decoys act in very predictable ways, may pretend to try to do harm to the dog, but it's not really serious (KNPV can get a bit more serious, particularly in training, but I'm talking sports we have here, ring, IPO). I've seen plenty of ring/IPO malinois that don't have that "civil edge" or whatever you might call it to engage the man for real, but can look super flashy on the sport field. And vice versa- dogs with too much defense may take a lot of work to look flashy in sport. Nerves may be an issue. It's a real balance, especially in the malinois.
> 
> I'm guessing the SS gets dogs from reputable vendors and will wash out dogs that can't perform. Even a dog with really strong nerves and fight might look a bit "weak" to a sport dog trainer that expects to see the dog launch itself at a decoy without a care. This wasn't a decoy, this was real, and the dogs did their jobs.
> 
> I think it's important to distinguish between sport and real life. We have a local malinois police dog that was punched and kicked off but re-engaged. No video, but the dog did drop off briefly, but did take down the victim in the end and did his job regardless. Also had a working malinois here get stabbed, dog still did his job (he's OK).
> 
> What I'm saying is it's OK for a dog to react to being severely kicked by temporarily dropping off as long as the dog re-engages. In fact this strategy may prevent further injury to the dog and be a more effective means of subduing a subject. Holding on through fake stick hits in IPO is quite a different thing altogether.


Its not about sport vs real life. Its about quality.
Those fringe dogs are why you see embarassing vids like the one being discussed. Dogs hesitating or getting run by the bad guy that doesnt cower run or scream like they usually do. Fringe dogs are what leave you hanging when it gets real. I hope they got a good deal on dog # 1....lol.


----------



## DaniFani

Muskeg said:


> It seems a lot of sport dog trainers think these dogs were weak. I'm not so sure. Huge difference between real life and the sport field. Sport scenario, dog knows it's a game. Everything is pretty predictable. Real life, not so much, not predictable. The bad guy could really try to hurt the dog.
> 
> Decoys act in very predictable ways, may pretend to try to do harm to the dog, but it's not really serious (KNPV can get a bit more serious, particularly in training, but I'm talking sports we have here, ring, IPO). I've seen plenty of ring/IPO malinois that don't have that "civil edge" or whatever you might call it to engage the man for real, but can look super flashy on the sport field. And vice versa- dogs with too much defense may take a lot of work to look flashy in sport. Nerves may be an issue. It's a real balance, especially in the malinois.
> 
> I'm guessing the SS gets dogs from reputable vendors and will wash out dogs that can't perform. Even a dog with really strong nerves and fight might look a bit "weak" to a sport dog trainer that expects to see the dog launch itself at a decoy without a care. This wasn't a decoy, this was real, and the dogs did their jobs.
> 
> I think it's important to distinguish between sport and real life. We have a local malinois police dog that was punched and kicked off but re-engaged. No video, but the dog did drop off briefly, but did take down the victim in the end and did his job regardless. Also had a working malinois here get stabbed, dog still did his job (he's OK).
> 
> What I'm saying is it's OK for a dog to react to being severely kicked by temporarily dropping off as long as the dog re-engages. In fact this strategy may prevent further injury to the dog and be a more effective means of subduing a subject. Holding on through fake stick hits in IPO is quite a different thing altogether.


The problem most le officers and trainers (that I personally have been discussing this with) isn't the need for a regrip or the fact that the dog came off. It's the hesitation and mannerisms after the kick. The dog did not appear strong or sure of himself. The people I've seen discussing this have been predominately police or experienced le trainers that are not impressed at all with dog number 1. Have no idea why it's being compared to sport? Sport people expect too much out of dogs? Because I'll tell you, I've seen training (in le and sport) where the dogs are tested through great fight, and perform strongly. But....like I said, every department and organization has its own set of standards and expectations and they range in the whole spectrum.


----------



## Nigel

I was underwhelmed with the whole thing. I suppose if the first dog actually did its job, the second dog wouldn't have gotten ragdolled, maybe the guy would have been down for good too. The second one took a beating and came back for more, but the guy was having his way with it.


----------



## SuperG

Sabis mom said:


> One was an intoxicated trespasser that was being escorted off premises. Would have been released with no charges had he not kicked Sabi.
> 
> One was the buddy of a person being detained during a riot. His buddy was released with no charges once the crowd was dispersed.
> 
> I would have to say no Sabi was not minding her business, she was working.


Sabis mom,

Cool, appreciate the background of the incidents as well as other pertinent information.

Now...it leads me to other questions. Since you and I (I'm assuming ) do not enjoy the same "latitude" when some no-mind jerk off brings any harm to bear on our dogs...If somebody physically messed with my dog, I would engage the individual in a fashion which might get me thrown in jail whereas you perhaps enjoy the benefit of having a higher status for your dog which allows you to bring force on an individual who physically assaults your dog in most any fashion ( while working )....AND without the same ramifications I would have to deal with...do I have this somewhat correct?

Anyway, regardless of our different situations most likely....we both are in agreement regarding what will happen if someone lays a finger on our shepherds in a harmful manner.

Oh.....sounds like was Sabi was tending to "business".


SuperG


----------



## llombardo

I must need glasses because I just don't see a dog running and cowering. Mass confusion , maybe, that had to be a very loud scene. It looks like nothing more then an operation. The first dog runs at the guy and while he is focused on that dog the other dog is on him. Everyone wants to see a weak dog but I see a highly trained dog. This very scenario might even be practiced as part of training. It was the perfect way to get the guy. The secret service is not going to have anything but highly trained dogs and they certainly aren't going to talk about they run operations, that would blow it for the next wacko that jumps the fence in the next couple weeks


----------



## carmspack

I would like to volunteer some people to jump the fence and test the waters , takers anyone ?


----------



## carmspack

the scenario reminds me of dogs in Belgian ring - Mondio and the French Ring Campage where the dog may have to push through a barrage , whether it be boots, chairs, bikes used as a shield . The dog came in with energy . Looked like a call off , OR dog recognizing a bad entry , just as in Mondio the dog will avoid the bike being used by the dismounted person as a shield . Dog repositions itself , does a quick analysis and goes in from a different angle , plus the guy is rattled and easier .

The dog went back in , quickly.
Dogs that hunt will avoid injury but keep on going in .


----------



## G-burg

From my understanding, multiple dogs are never sent in on the same suspect.


----------



## Nigel

llombardo said:


> I must need glasses because I just don't see a dog running and cowering. Mass confusion , maybe, that had to be a very loud scene. It looks like nothing more then an operation. The first dog runs at the guy and while he is focused on that dog the other dog is on him. Everyone wants to see a weak dog but I see a highly trained dog. This very scenario might even be practiced as part of training. It was the perfect way to get the guy. The secret service is not going to have anything but highly trained dogs and they certainly aren't going to talk about they run operations, that would blow it for the next wacko that jumps the fence in the next couple weeks


It's possible the first dog was called off, but once the second dog took the guy down, why give him the chance to get back up and beat the dog? thats the part I have the most trouble with.


----------



## SuperG

G-burg said:


> From my understanding, multiple dogs are never sent in on the same suspect.


If what you state is true ( no reason to doubt you )....are you suggesting the second dog was sent in due to the discrepancy of the first dog's impact of the situation at hand?

It would be difficult to imagine that redundancy isn't figured into the equation which we all saw exhibited in this particular occasion.

SuperG


----------



## mharrisonjr26

Ok no doubt the guys a d-bag but do we really expect people not to fight back. Some people swid theguy should have been shot. Really for defending himself? Yes its secret service dogs but they are essentially a tool. I think its enough punishment taking thos bites. Seriously though they need to step it up at the white house.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

How about staking your life on dog # 1. Takers anyone?


----------



## mycobraracr

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> How about staking your life on dog # 1. Takers anyone?



:thumbup: Many people seem to forget that part.


----------



## llombardo

SuperG said:


> If what you state is true ( no reason to doubt you )....are you suggesting the second dog was sent in due to the discrepancy of the first dog's impact of the situation at hand?
> 
> It would be difficult to imagine that redundancy isn't figured into the equation which we all saw exhibited in this particular occasion.
> 
> SuperG


I've either read or heard the same thing about multiple dogs being sent on a subject. That is part of my theory that this was nothing more then an operation or tactic used to bring the suspect down. Just think about it..crazy man yelling and screaming, police and secret service everywhere, the man is being approached and moving backwards, the first dog, which looks not to be on a line runs at him, causing the crazy guy to stumble slightly backwards as he acts in defense of himself, with the second dog on a line right in the shadows ready to pounce and take the guy down. There isn't a moment where the guy wasn't occupied. Second dog is then doing its job and keeping the crazy guy busy until he is subdued. Nothing less then perfect timing on the dogs part IMO.


----------



## llombardo

And I read in a couple articles that these dogs cost no more then $8500 and come trained as either bomb dogs or guard dogs and get the same training as the military dogs, not sure where $100,000 came from?


----------



## Sabis mom

carmspack said:


> the scenario reminds me of dogs in Belgian ring - Mondio and the French Ring Campage where the dog may have to push through a barrage , whether it be boots, chairs, bikes used as a shield . The dog came in with energy . Looked like a call off , OR dog recognizing a bad entry , just as in Mondio the dog will avoid the bike being used by the dismounted person as a shield . Dog repositions itself , does a quick analysis and goes in from a different angle , plus the guy is rattled and easier .
> 
> The dog went back in , quickly.
> Dogs that hunt will avoid injury but keep on going in .


Bad entry for sure. I thought the dog showed uncertainty, then perhaps was either called off or ran but was brought back by the handler to 'reset', get the bad guy and the praise. It reminded me very much of using an older/steadier/more experienced dog to guide a youngster. 

Real life is a crap shoot. Training should give a young dog the base, and the trust in it's handler, to carry on. But however hard we try life is full of curve balls we will never see coming until they hit us in the head.


----------



## G-burg

Super G~ I'm not suggesting anything... Just a comment about multiple dogs... But I do believe the first dog was called off. And I'll leave it at that..


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

One question I've heard posed by PSA friends was why did dog 1 target the arm and not the leg?

Also I was under the impression that for the most part police/military and similar work venues dogs are not trained with an "out". So how could the dog be called off? 

Correct or no?

Another thought, the way the suspect was able to pick the dog up and fling it down like that. Often we hear that Malis are good at what they do partly due to their generally smaller size. Maybe that's not always true...I know it's gotta be a balance of function but "too small" can be an issue too. (And yes that's a bit of a positive plug for our GSDs . )


----------



## mycobraracr

Gwenhwyfair said:


> One question I've heard posed by PSA friends was why did dog 1 target the arm and not the leg?
> 
> Also I was under the impression that for the most part police/military and similar work venues dogs are not trained with an "out". So how could the dog be called off?
> 
> Correct or no?
> 
> Another thought, the way the suspect was able to pick the dog up and fling it down like that. Often we hear that Malis are good at what they do partly due to their generally smaller size. Maybe that's not always true...I know it's gotta be a balance of function but "too small" can be an issue too. (And yes that's a bit of a positive plug for our GSDs . )



In PSA is allowed to bite upper or lower body. Some teach dogs to bite both. I do not. I have found doing this can cause a dog to try and beat the decoy. That is very unsafe for the dog as well as decoy. Now remember this part is for sport. That being said, I have found strong dogs will take what is presented. For example, I worked a dog who was raised doing IPO. Dog only saw sleeve bites. I presented a bicep bite in a suit and the dog still took the bite. I think dogs look for what they are used to seeing, if it's not there will take next best thing. That's whatever is presented. 

I assure you the dogs are trained to out. It may not be as clean or pretty as a sport dog, but they have to out to cert. At least in my area. Now most will hard out because it builds drive for the next bite. They don't want the dogs to hesitate. 

A call off generally has little to do with an "out". I guess like everything else there are many ways to teach it though.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

As you know I completely respect your knowledge. Thank you for responding.

But...

Two things, here on this forum we've had folks involved with law enforcement say that don't bother with an out and my trainer has decoyed for police and said the same thing. They don't train for an out. They choke the dogs off and if that doesn't work they cut the shorts off the suspect (remember that video?). Neighbor who is an active duty LEO said they needed a break stick to get a Mali of off another police officer. Maybe what I'm missing is that a call off can happen when the dog is not engaged in a bite? 

So I know you know what you're talking about but others who know what they are talking about say something different. 


Two - cool so not "all" IPO dogs are "sleeve happy". 




mycobraracr said:


> In PSA is allowed to bite upper or lower body. Some teach dogs to bite both. I do not. I have found doing this can cause a dog to try and beat the decoy. That is very unsafe for the dog as well as decoy. Now remember this part is for sport. That being said, I have found strong dogs will take what is presented. For example, I worked a dog who was raised doing IPO. Dog only saw sleeve bites. I presented a bicep bite in a suit and the dog still took the bite. I think dogs look for what they are used to seeing, if it's not there will take next best thing. That's whatever is presented.
> 
> I assure you the dogs are trained to out. It may not be as clean or pretty as a sport dog, but they have to out to cert. At least in my area. Now most will hard out because it builds drive for the next bite. They don't want the dogs to hesitate.
> 
> A call off generally has little to do with an "out". I guess like everything else there are many ways to teach it though.


----------



## carmspack

train for a call-off though


----------



## mycobraracr

Gwenhwyfair said:


> As you know I completely respect your knowledge. Thank you for responding.
> 
> But...
> 
> Two things, here on this forum we've had folks involved with law enforcement say that don't bother with an out and my trainer has decoyed for police and said the same thing. They don't train for an out. They choke the dogs off and if that doesn't work they cut the shorts off the suspect (remember that video?). Neighbor who is an active duty LEO said they needed a break stick to get a Mali of off another police officer. Maybe what I'm missing is that a call off can happen when the dog is not engaged in a bite?
> 
> So I know you know what you're talking about but others who know what they are talking about say something different.
> 
> 
> Two - cool so not "all" IPO dogs are "sleeve happy".



I can only speak of with any certainty is what I see. I train with LE dogs on a weekly basis. There are many reasons for using a "hard out", but that doesn't mean the dogs don't have one. 

Yes, that same IPO dog took an upper shoulder/tricep bite as well on a runaway in a suit with no hesitation. So no, not "all" are sleeve happy. There are nice dogs in every venue. Just a matter of finding them


----------



## martemchik

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Two - cool so not "all" IPO dogs are "sleeve happy".


No, they aren't. Lol. Higher prey drive dogs, will bite just about anything. The reason they bite a sleeve is that it's safe and in sport they haven't been shown that they can bite something that's not a sleeve. It's a pretty simple switch out to get a dog from a sleeve, to a hidden sleeve and show the dog it can bite other parts of the body.

A more defensive dog that has a harder time switching into prey for the bite, might get flustered, but it's not something thats impossible to work through. If you really think about what prey drive means, it's hunting for food, and the dog more than likely doesn't care where and how it captures it's food just as long as it's dead...so transfer that to a human and you see why a higher prey drive allows the dog to just bite whatever is presented.

My boy had no issue biting whatever was presented to him, but due to training being mainly on the forearm, he would prefer to do that. IMO...dogs will revert to what they were trained to do, and a dog that has one target will show much more power and not hesitate when it comes to a bite in a "not perfect" situation. You really wouldn't want the dog trying to assess where the best place to bite a perpetrator is, and just go in for whatever it's comfortable with. If you think about it from any fight situation, if you're standing there figuring out what the best method of entry is into the fight, and the other guy just goes...more than likely the one who doesn't hesitate will win.


----------



## Lilie

mycobraracr said:


> *I assure you the dogs are trained to out. It may not be as clean or pretty as a sport dog, but they have to out to cert*. At least in my area. Now most will hard out because it builds drive for the next bite. They don't want the dogs to hesitate.


I think some folks are having a hard time separating the sport from real work.


----------



## carmspack

http://www.buzzfeed.com/erinchack/the-internet-cant-handle-this-tiny-puppy-in-a-police-vest

yes they have to have an out , show control and controllability , and they have to have a call off , show control and controllability


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I think that dogs in LEO venues aren't really trained to be called off or out. I've spoken with too many people IRL and people on this forum (Lou was one) who were upfront about it and actually work these dogs. They were knowledgeable and experienced and I am only repeating what they told me. 

Like the dogs in this incident, GMA did a segment on them trying to soften their image to the public. I think some of it is P.R.

The tactical reasons have been explained to me justifying why they don't really train an out. I'm not going to argue about the validity of the reasoning as that's not my place of experience or concern.

As far as I'm concerned these dogs did their job and stopped the bad guy.





Lilie said:


> I think some folks are having a hard time separating the sport from real work.


----------



## carmspack

policek9.com "
As one Federal case, *Kerr v City of West Palm Beach*, stated, "…the handler must have complete control over the actions of the dog. With such control, the handler can recall and restrain the dog before a bite occurs. Alternately, the handler can quickly remove the dog from the apprehended suspect". 

Jerry Bradshaw "The book further features key skills training including training guarding behavior, out on command, redirected bites and the out and return, and the best way to train a call off with little to no pressure on the dog. If you have trouble with the recall (call-off) exercise being reliable, the information alone on training the call off in a new and different way is worth the price of the book hands down. " Jerry Bradshaw - Police K9 Training & Operations

Wendell Nope Training perspectives: Q&A with Wendell Nope - PoliceK-9Magazine.com

from friend Jason Coutts "
Furthermore, in addition to the two above cases where the United States Department of justice attempt to mandate PSD policies and procedures for both the Miami and the Cincinnati Police Departments. Contained within the document entitled” The principles for Promoting Police Integrity “(_PRINCIPLES FOR PROMOTING POLICE INTEGRITY_, 2001). From the U.S. Department of Justice, a clear endeavor to mandate detailed PSD deployment methods was made, including the following passage:

_“The use of a canine to attempt to apprehend or seize a civilian is a use of force. Special precautions are required to ensure that such force is not used unnecessarily or unreasonably. A_ 
_canine should be de__ployed to apprehend or seize and __individual only where: (a) the individual is suspected of having committed a serious or violent felony, (b) less potentially injurious techniques are insufficient, and (c) unless it is precluded by officer safety, a verbal warning is given prior to deployment and a supervisor’s approval is obtained. Agencies should train their canines to follow the approach of “find and bark,” rather than “find and bite.”_(_PRINCIPLES FOR PROMOTING POLICE INTEGRITY_, 2001, p. 4-5).


The fact that sending a dog, after giving the proper callout (a minimum of three in most states), it is the dec
ision of the handler for the PSD to be inserted to find a suspect, and the canine will apprehend the suspect, unless the suspect gives up on seeing or hearing the PSD approaching him/her. There is another concern that I have observed with the training of the PSD. This could involve a simple training mistake involving the "Bark and Hold" that could cause confusion on the canine’s ability to reason between training for a sport tactic, and training for a real life scenario that happens on the street in the life of a Police Canine team.


Mike Harlow’s book K-9 Body-Guards, (Harlow, 1995,) the author states, “What a shame. The dogs learn how to work the street, then two or six weeks before a competition they start working on the competition drill” (Harlow, ..................... 

article in full Bark and Hold vs Find and Bite

*Lawsuits Involving Police Dogs*

John Burris is a veteran civil rights attorney who has won numerous verdicts and settlements in dog bite lawsuits against California police departments. Our clients have included both criminal suspects and innocent bystanders who suffered serious lacerations, scarring, nerve damage or emotional trauma from being chased and bitten by German shepherd police dogs.
We work to show that the injuries should have been prevented or represented a violation of the constitutional right against excessive force. Some examples:


The dog could not be stopped, ignoring the handler's commands to quit biting.
The officer failed to call off the dog, or did not call it off immediately.
The dog escaped its handler and attacked an innocent person.
The officer sicced the dog on the wrong (innocent) person.
The officer deployed the dog against a suspect who posed no threat.
The officer ordered the dog to bite in a punitive manner.
another from a R S Eden article

"Tim Tieken is a 23 year veteran of the Seattle Police K9 Unit ........ Tieken states:
"In reality, the dog that is trained to bite and hold is only one member of a team. The other member is a trained officer who possesses judgment and controls the dog. That control is deter mined by department policy and existing law. The dog can be recalled at any time. The handler is able to read the behavior of the dog and is able to tell when he nears a suspect. If force is unwarranted the dog can be recalled. Prior to applying the dog, a determination should be made as to whether a crime has in fact occurred, and its severity and the threat level of the sus pect(s). Decisions can then be made as to how the dog will be applied.​ AND that the handler can make judgments and that the dog can be called off.​ AND​ A well trained service dog can be recalled at any point from the attack. Control of the dog through voice command permits the officer to call the dog off prior to or subsequent to the apprehension, as the situation warrants. Once the dog is called off, he is positioned where he can safely watch the suspect while the officer approaches and secures him. Total control is with the officer. If the suspect is intoxicated and unstable on his feet, or if he is loud and abusive, the dog is close enough to be of instant assistance to the officer if needed, however far enough away, and conditioned in such a manner that he will tolerate such movement and actions by the suspect, without the officer having to be concerned about the dog biting at his own discretion.​ ​ ​ The video that we are looking at appears as if the dog got away from the handler and rushed the trespassing man -- dog called off , called back - but man made aggressive (defensive move) in kicking at the dog , so other team member comes running in , dog ON LEAD http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/10/23/video-man-jumps-white-house-fence-kicks-dog​


----------



## G-burg

> yes they have to have an out , show control and controllability , and they have to have a call off , show control and controllability


 Carmen~ that's my understanding too!


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

There is not agreement even within the LEO community. :shrug:

Testing is also inconsistent as mentioned by those directly involved and therefore it's not me being an I.E. I don't know if there is any independent testing of secret service dogs? Independent meaning evaluation by an impartial person.

Exhibit A - good thread discussing training, including to "out" or "not" which includes people who currently work, have worked or train for LEO.

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/police-k-9/288098-do-we-really-need-police-k-9s-bite.html


----------



## Slamdunc

carmspack said:


> policek9.com "
> As one Federal case, *Kerr v City of West Palm Beach*, stated, "…the handler must have complete control over the actions of the dog. With such control, the handler can recall and restrain the dog before a bite occurs. Alternately, the handler can quickly remove the dog from the apprehended suspect".
> 
> Jerry Bradshaw "The book further features key skills training including training guarding behavior, out on command, redirected bites and the out and return, and the best way to train a call off with little to no pressure on the dog. If you have trouble with the recall (call-off) exercise being reliable, the information alone on training the call off in a new and different way is worth the price of the book hands down. " Jerry Bradshaw - Police K9 Training & Operations
> 
> Wendell Nope Training perspectives: Q&A with Wendell Nope - PoliceK-9Magazine.com
> 
> from friend Jason Coutts "
> Furthermore, in addition to the two above cases where the United States Department of justice attempt to mandate PSD policies and procedures for both the Miami and the Cincinnati Police Departments. Contained within the document entitled” The principles for Promoting Police Integrity “(_PRINCIPLES FOR PROMOTING POLICE INTEGRITY_, 2001). From the U.S. Department of Justice, a clear endeavor to mandate detailed PSD deployment methods was made, including the following passage:
> 
> _“The use of a canine to attempt to apprehend or seize a civilian is a use of force. Special precautions are required to ensure that such force is not used unnecessarily or unreasonably. A_
> _canine should be de__ployed to apprehend or seize and __individual only where: (a) the individual is suspected of having committed a serious or violent felony, (b) less potentially injurious techniques are insufficient, and (c) unless it is precluded by officer safety, a verbal warning is given prior to deployment and a supervisor’s approval is obtained. Agencies should train their canines to follow the approach of “find and bark,” rather than “find and bite.”_(_PRINCIPLES FOR PROMOTING POLICE INTEGRITY_, 2001, p. 4-5).
> 
> 
> The fact that sending a dog, after giving the proper callout (a minimum of three in most states), it is the dec
> ision of the handler for the PSD to be inserted to find a suspect, and the canine will apprehend the suspect, unless the suspect gives up on seeing or hearing the PSD approaching him/her. There is another concern that I have observed with the training of the PSD. This could involve a simple training mistake involving the "Bark and Hold" that could cause confusion on the canine’s ability to reason between training for a sport tactic, and training for a real life scenario that happens on the street in the life of a Police Canine team.
> 
> 
> Mike Harlow’s book K-9 Body-Guards, (Harlow, 1995,) the author states, “What a shame. The dogs learn how to work the street, then two or six weeks before a competition they start working on the competition drill” (Harlow, .....................
> 
> article in full Bark and Hold vs Find and Bite
> 
> *Lawsuits Involving Police Dogs*
> 
> John Burris is a veteran civil rights attorney who has won numerous verdicts and settlements in dog bite lawsuits against California police departments. Our clients have included both criminal suspects and innocent bystanders who suffered serious lacerations, scarring, nerve damage or emotional trauma from being chased and bitten by German shepherd police dogs.
> We work to show that the injuries should have been prevented or represented a violation of the constitutional right against excessive force. Some examples:
> 
> 
> The dog could not be stopped, ignoring the handler's commands to quit biting.
> The officer failed to call off the dog, or did not call it off immediately.
> The dog escaped its handler and attacked an innocent person.
> The officer sicced the dog on the wrong (innocent) person.
> The officer deployed the dog against a suspect who posed no threat.
> The officer ordered the dog to bite in a punitive manner.
> another from a R S Eden article
> 
> "Tim Tieken is a 23 year veteran of the Seattle Police K9 Unit ........ Tieken states:
> "In reality, the dog that is trained to bite and hold is only one member of a team. The other member is a trained officer who possesses judgment and controls the dog. That control is deter mined by department policy and existing law. The dog can be recalled at any time. The handler is able to read the behavior of the dog and is able to tell when he nears a suspect. If force is unwarranted the dog can be recalled. Prior to applying the dog, a determination should be made as to whether a crime has in fact occurred, and its severity and the threat level of the sus pect(s). Decisions can then be made as to how the dog will be applied.​ AND that the handler can make judgments and that the dog can be called off.​ AND​ A well trained service dog can be recalled at any point from the attack. Control of the dog through voice command permits the officer to call the dog off prior to or subsequent to the apprehension, as the situation warrants. Once the dog is called off, he is positioned where he can safely watch the suspect while the officer approaches and secures him. Total control is with the officer. If the suspect is intoxicated and unstable on his feet, or if he is loud and abusive, the dog is close enough to be of instant assistance to the officer if needed, however far enough away, and conditioned in such a manner that he will tolerate such movement and actions by the suspect, without the officer having to be concerned about the dog biting at his own discretion.​ ​ ​ The video that we are looking at appears as if the dog got away from the handler and rushed the trespassing man -- dog called off , called back - but man made aggressive (defensive move) in kicking at the dog , so other team member comes running in , dog ON LEAD VIDEO: Man Jumps White House Fence, Kicks Dog - Fox Nation​


Thank you for providing some accurate information, it is rarely seen in these type of threads.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Slamdunc said:


> Thank you for providing some accurate information, it is rarely seen in these type of threads.


You and Lou Castle go back and forth on some of "these type of threads".

So when you run up against some one with real life on the street LEO experience who disagrees with you then what?

On the other side of the coin-

When a dog is used in a manner that would be considered excessive use of force anyone daring to say so gets told they don't know what they are talking about...again. 

For the record the guy in this video deserved every bit of what he got ... IMO......


----------



## Slamdunc

Gwenhwyfair said:


> You and Lou Castle go back and forth on some of "these type of threads".
> 
> So when you run up against some one with real life on the street LEO experience who disagrees with you then what?
> 
> On the other side of the coin-
> 
> When a dog is used in a manner that would be considered excessive use of force anyone daring to say so gets told they don't know what they are talking about...again.
> 
> For the record the guy in this video deserved every bit of what he got ... IMO......


Yes, Lou and I went back and forth on a few threads, so? I disagree with some of what he has posted, he can disagree with me as well. That is what forums are for. I will spend the time to "go back and forth with him" because he does have some experience and I respect his view point even when I don't agree or have a different point of view. 

*When a dog is used in a manner that would be considered excessive use of force anyone daring to say so gets told they don't know what they are talking about...again.*

Well to be frank, most do not know what they are talking about. It is fine to share opinions, but that is simply what they are, opinions. Most are simply sharing 3rd or 4th hand info from someone that "spoke" to a cop once or knew some one that knew a former K-9 handler. Or, "I know a small town cop that knew a K-9 handler from a neighboring county that said"…….. 

_For the record_….the guy in the video needs some help. He needs to be committed to a psychiatric facility that can get him help. Then if he is deemed fit to stand trial, he deserves a fair trial.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Slamdunc said:


> Yes, Lou and I went back and forth on a few threads, so? I disagree with some of what he has posted, he can disagree with me as well. That is what forums are for. I will spend the time to "go back and forth with him" because he does have some experience and I respect his view point even when I don't agree or have a different point of view.
> 
> *When a dog is used in a manner that would be considered excessive use of force anyone daring to say so gets told they don't know what they are talking about...again.*
> 
> Well to be frank, most do not know what they are talking about. It is fine to share opinions, but that is simply what they are, opinions. Most are simply sharing 3rd or 4th hand info from someone that "spoke" to a cop once or knew some one that knew a former K-9 handler. Or, "I know a small town cop that knew a K-9 handler from a neighboring county that said"……..
> 
> _For the record_….the guy in the video needs some help. He needs to be committed to a psychiatric facility that can get him help. Then if he is deemed fit to stand trial, he deserves a fair trial.


So it illustrates that this isn't just about "internet experts" it's about a larger inconsistency that's bigger then just one officer or one department.

I agree the man in the video probably needs psych help but when he jumped the fence the safety of the people working around the White House and in the White House comes first. I didn't want to broach the topic of our practically non-existent, patch work mental health system where we use jails as pyschiatric wards and _for the record_ I think it's wrong that police are expected to deal with people like this who should have been helped long ago. You guys aren't supposed to be therapists, but that's a whole other big kettle of stink that's only going to get worse ......

It's one thing when you've got a person, alone standing on the edge of a bridge, or alone in a house with a gun threatening harm to themselves only. The tactics change, right? When you've got a person threatening the safety of other innocent people I fully support police/S.S. Using what force is necessary to protect innocent lives, including their own first. That is something most reasonable people understand.

Topics like this cannot easily be parsed down into 'gotcha' one liners, there's a much larger context that is all too often ignored.

As to Carmen's post, had I posted a bunch of links supporting my P.O.V. I would have been called an "internet expert".

Another point, I have great respect for Carmen who is very knowledgeable on many dog related topics, genetics, breeding, history of the German Shepherd and on, but this has wandered into a more macro area that isn't so much about specific tactics or dogs and training but rather about the culture. She lives in Canada and while they do have problems with violence and crazy people creating mayhem, as a general rule it's a much kinder gentler country that sees far less of the mayhem (such as bi-monthly school shootings) then we do in the U.S.

As far as your comment that I was responding to is concerned, you certainly have the right to post your thoughts regarding the comments here but it comes across as very dismissive and demeaning. But I also get that you have to deal with a lot of crooks and really bad sorts of people who are going to challenge you, from being smart alecks to down right threats to your safety and the safety of those near by. 

I came into the "bite dog world" to use a more generic term thinking the following. There was consistency and agreement on how police dogs are trained (this include single purpose drug dogs). That police dogs were trained and tested in a consistent manner across this country. 

I've seen come to learn this is not the case. The fact of the matter is some departments aren't training dogs to release a bite on command, period, they choke the dog out, they cut the pants off the suspect or they use a break stick.

We have a local PD whose Mali had multiple bites on police officers, multiple. The last time the dog bit another police officer they had to use a break stick to get it off the officer who then required hospital care and time off. 

How can a dog like this be allowed to work after multiple incidents? Poor training? Poor handling? Lack of rigorous testing for suitability. See this was told to me not by a story on the internet, this was told to me by my friend who is an active duty police officer that has watched this dog working first hand. 

You probably heard about the police dog in Las Vegas that had to be shot because it was attacking another police officer? That was reported in the news.

Then a decoy, who used to work help our local police work their K9s but had to quit. It was getting too dangerous and the final straw was the dog chomping up his bite suit arm getting close to his face and officer could not get the dog off. At that point he had to stop helping because he couldn't afford the medical bills if he got hurt. He's a super tough guy too, been in sport and protection and worked police dogs for many years.

I'd also like to note that how I learn this is by not being abrasive or argumentative, but because I am friends with these folks in real,life and I shut up and listen.

The point is, these dogs didn't get this way from one day to the next. I'm not going to parse this down to tactics, that's not my area of expertise, but that doesn't stop me from seeing, hearing, mostly IRL with people actually involved and comprehending that there are some problems with the 'system' by the simple fact these problems exist and there is NOT a clear consensus amongst the law enforcement community itself.

Another for the record - I personally have never had a problem with a police officer. During traffic stops they have been professional and polite with me. I am also smart enough to not challenge them or get smart alecky with them even on the couple of occasions they pulled me over when I was not violating any traffic laws (I went to traffic court, made my case politely and professionally and got the tickets removed). They see me with my German Shepherds and stop to chat and I really enjoy that. It gives them a break from a job that goes from boredom to very dangerous in a matter of minutes. I enjoy making those connections with police officers.

I have neighbors and friends who are police officers and I appreciate them and when they tell me their stories I don't make it an argument and most of the time deep down they know they have a problem, they just have a hard time admitting and addressing the problem for various reason (departmental politics being one).

I don't view police officers on the whole negatively but when there are genuine problems within a department they do have a hard time accepting and addressing those problems and sometimes it comes back to bite them.

I can draw these sorts of macro conclusions without the need to know about specific tactics because, inconsistency isn't about police tactics but a larger systemic problem.

I can also draw these conclusions without feeling negatively about individual police officers.

Just for the record.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

*phew*. See that's why these sort of things are so hard to discuss on the net. 

It's just not a simple one liner sort of topic.

To avoid being pigeon holed or stereo typed takes explanation, time and patience and it still might not make a dent.

I get PMs from people who appreciate the points I make but they just don't want to get embroiled in lengthy debates. Which is understandable.

So I get be the annoying one. Lol!


I'm hoping and praying by next spring I'll be better able to spend time doing things with the dogs and not stuck at home so much annoying you guys!

 

Yup one of the two things that will shut me up is to get busy training the pups.....I want to get back to tracking with Ilda and get a CGC with Autumn. Fingers crossed....


----------



## DaniFani

As usual Gwen, very well thought out and delivered stance. :-D I agree whole heartedly. I live with one and am friends with dozens more (LE officers), as well as train with k9 trainers and handlers. 

Very very many seem to see things the way you described (especially the trainers of the handler teams). The range of training from department to department seems extremely broad, even amongst the several I have trained with occasionally and the ones I train with regularly. From lack luster dogs that can be frightened away, to ones that have a record of biting other LE officers, from IPO titled dogs turned LE, KNPV dogs turned LE, dogs that one department washed but another department picked up, awesome dogs I'd love for myself, and ones I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, the spectrum of expectation/standard/training is huge.


----------



## Slamdunc

Well, that is a lot of things to respond too and must have taken quite some time to post. 

First, regardless of what you are being told, what you have seen or what others have posted, all Police K-9's need to be trained to out on verbal command. You can review the NAPWDA certification rules and see what is required to certify. Now, with that being said, not all Police K-9's will out a "live bite." Dogs do not understand the "use of force continuum and do not abide by the rules of excessive force. The handler is the one that is responsible and liable for his and his dogs actions. If a suspect has kicked or punched a Police K-9, like we saw in the video, a strong dog may not "verbally out" when ordered. The handler must then remove the dog when the suspect is compliant and it is safe to do so. To allow a dog to bite someone that is compliant is excessive force and no different than me continually striking a person after they are handcuffed. My dog will verbally out a street bite and has on many "real bites." If he didn't, I would need to remove him from the suspect. This is standard across the US. It is inconceivable to me to even hear that some PD's do not train their dogs to out. I find this very hard to believe. Now, just like every other occupation in the world and every dog owner, some K-9 handlers are very good and a few are lacking in skills and training. The reality is this, training a dog to out is not very hard, but it does take experience and skilled training. The other reality is that a K-9 does not not have to verbally out a real bite, but it must be made to release a bite and it must be done in a reasonable time. For certification every agency that operates under the NAPWDA guidelines or a similar certifying agency must verbally out for certification. An agency that doesn't teach it's dogs to out opens itself up for tremendous liability and civil litigation. There is no PD in the US that wants this, it is common sense. 

When it comes to decoying for Police dogs or any dogs for that matter it is potentially dangerous. On occasion you get bit, you always get bruised and getting hurt is part of the job. If a decoy feels uncomfortable with being bit or feels it is becoming too dangerous then he probably shouldn't decoy. An experienced decoy knows how to get the dog to target the correct area and like a boxer, you never lead with your head. 

I'm not going to comment on the situation you mentioned with the dog and Officer in Las Vegas or the few examples that you gave of LE dogs. I don't like to Monday morning quarterback other Officers on internet forums, especially when we are not dealing with first hand information.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I readily admit I have way too much time on my hands for internet these days but please know it's not by choice.

Yeah it's a lot because this isn't as simple as we try to make it out in short posts on the 'net.

The problem is, however, well illustrated in your last sentence.

If people like you aren't willing to analyze, discuss and point out flaws (something Lou is willing to do and gets in hot water over) then who is?

At some point incidents like the ones I mentioned become common enough to conclude there's an over all problem. It goes from anecdotal to empirical evidence. 



Slamdunc said:


> Well, that is a lot of things to respond too and must have taken quite some time to post.
> 
> First, regardless of what you are being told, what you have seen or what others have posted, all Police K-9's need to be trained to out on verbal command. You can review the NAPWDA certification rules and see what is required to certify. Now, with that being said, not all Police K-9's will out a "live bite." Dogs do not understand the "use of force continuum and do not abide by the rules of excessive force. The handler is the one that is responsible and liable for his and his dogs actions. If a suspect has kicked or punched a Police K-9, like we saw in the video, a strong dog may not "verbally out" when ordered. The handler must then remove the dog when the suspect is compliant and it is safe to do so. To allow a dog to bite someone that is compliant is excessive force and no different than me continually striking a person after they are handcuffed. My dog will verbally out a street bite and has on many "real bites." If he didn't, I would need to remove him from the suspect. This is standard across the US. It is inconceivable to me to even hear that some PD's do not train their dogs to out. I find this very hard to believe. Now, just like every other occupation in the world and every dog owner, some K-9 handlers are very good and a few are lacking in skills and training. The reality is this, training a dog to out is not very hard, but it does take experience and skilled training. The other reality is that a K-9 does not not have to verbally out a real bite, but it must be made to release a bite and it must be done in a reasonable time. For certification every agency that operates under the NAPWDA guidelines or a similar certifying agency must verbally out for certification. An agency that doesn't teach it's dogs to out opens itself up for tremendous liability and civil litigation. There is no PD in the US that wants this, it is common sense.
> 
> When it comes to decoying for Police dogs or any dogs for that matter it is potentially dangerous. On occasion you get bit, you always get bruised and getting hurt is part of the job. If a decoy feels uncomfortable with being bit or feels it is becoming too dangerous then he probably shouldn't decoy. An experienced decoy knows how to get the dog to target the correct area and like a boxer, you never lead with your head.
> 
> I'm not going to comment on the situation you mentioned with the dog and Officer in Las Vegas or the few examples that you gave of LE dogs. I don't like to Monday morning quarterback other Officers on internet forums, especially when we are not dealing with first hand information.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Thank you ... And hello!!! 



DaniFani said:


> As usual Gwen, very well thought out and delivered stance. :-D I agree whole heartedly. I live with one and am friends with dozens more (LE officers), as well as train with k9 trainers and handlers.
> 
> Very very many seem to see things the way you described (especially the trainers of the handler teams). The range of training from department to department seems extremely broad, even amongst the several I have trained with occasionally and the ones I train with regularly. From lack luster dogs that can be frightened away, to ones that have a record of biting other LE officers, from IPO titled dogs turned LE, KNPV dogs turned LE, dogs that one department washed but another department picked up, awesome dogs I'd love for myself, and ones I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, the spectrum of expectation/standard/training is huge.


----------



## Slamdunc

*At some point incidents like the ones I mentioned become common enough to conclude there's a problem. It goes from anecdotal to empirical evidence. *

I would have to disagree. Because a fraction of a percent of dog handlers make mistakes doesn't make this empirical evidence. There are thousands of handlers working every day doing a good job, getting drugs, guns and felons off the street. Naturally, every time one screws up it makes National news. I would say that police Officers as a whole have a better percentage of being honorable, ethical and good decision making skills than clergy, lawyers, doctors and certainly Politicians. Less than 1% of Officers screw up and disrespect their badge and that is pretty good for any profession. 

What you describe as "common enough" is not my experience working with Handlers and doing the job every day. I would say it is the exception.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

No it doesn't always make national news. The Las Vegas incident was a report I saw in a local paper online.

The incident I mentioned with the dog biting the officer and putting her in the hospital was not even in the local news. You would not be aware of this or others if they aren't reported consistently, right?

Two things about the below: when a dog does cause serous physical harm where it was not called for, due to lack of handler training or some PDs sticking with bad kennels, bad lines, what have you, individual incidents carry more weight due to the serious nature of the incident. Second, I don't think there's an accurate accounting of this as it is in the depts best interest to minimize these incidents.

Also, somewhat along those lines, the two Malis in the White House incident were quickly defended on Good Morning America (wrong or rightfully I don't know really) but they took pains to show pics of the dogs, friendly poses, mouth open tongues lolling out with a kong nearby and talking about how fun and nice they are playing with their Kongs. 

Of course my main concern was "great now everyone thinks Malis are nothin' but family cuddle bugs". LOL.

That's not good either. 




Slamdunc said:


> *At some point incidents like the ones I mentioned become common enough to conclude there's a problem. It goes from anecdotal to empirical evidence. *
> 
> I would have to disagree. Because a fraction of a percent of dog handlers make mistakes doesn't make this empirical evidence. There are thousands of handlers working every day doing a good job, getting drugs, guns and felons off the street. Naturally, every time one screws up it makes National news. I would say that police Officers as a whole have a better percentage of being honorable, ethical and good decision making skills than clergy, lawyers, doctors and certainly Politicians. Less than 1% of Officers screw up and disrespect their badge and that is pretty good for any profession.
> 
> What you describe as "common enough" is not my experience working with Handlers and doing the job every day. I would say it is the exception.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Also...not to drag poor Lou into this too much...but I think one of the reasons he tends to see things differently is he works with depts across the country, often trying to help them correct these sort of issues. And kudos to those depts too! 

So his exposure is different and it kept him employed until he decided to retire.

Further I don't see these systemic problems being borne of some sort of malice, it really boils down to what most organizations deal with (private and public), money, training, ego (of the higher ups), politics and plain old human nature.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Hope I'm not annoying you too much Jim.

You've got one of the toughest jobs that are out there. I really appreciate what you do.

But...I'm a logical sort of gal and it took quite a bit of time, reading (here mostly) AND having friends who work the work tell me what they see going on in their depts.

It took a while and I've slowly come to the conclusions there are some issues that show through these incidents that do get reported and the many that do not....it gets to the point where a person cannot ignore the inconsistencies. 

One of our local depts got so fed up with the problems of dogs, handlers, expense the higher ups decided it wasn't worth it and they ditched their K9 dept completely.


----------



## Slamdunc

Your not annoying me at all. I really am not sure how to respond other than what I have already said. I don't see all the problems that you do and I regularly work and train with some other large departments. 

No offense intended at all, but I am not big on speculation or coming to conclusions from things I read on forums, the internet or in the newspaper. I have been around long enough to believe little of what I hear or read from others or in the paper. I am also very logical and pragmatic.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Yes and what Carmen posted was internet information, a good bit of what I have learned comes from eyewitnesses, decoys who work the dogs and police officers that I know personally.

Ultimately if there isn't any type of consistent monitoring that is reported, by an independent agency then we are both speculating.

You didn't know about the incident that happened with my neighbor's department, I am guessing (correct me if I am wrong) you didn't know about the incident in Las Vegas either. So how many others are there that didn't get reported we don't know about? Since we know that happens it's reasonable to conclude that more are happening and not reported rather then a few being blown out of proportion. It goes both ways.

The other issue is, due to the serious nature of police work and the authority police have over citizens there's a higher bar, especially when the mishaps involve some sort of bodily injury.

How many excessive force use of dogs is acceptable?

Really, in principle, zero. 

I said in principle meaning that should be the goal but of course we don't live in a perfect world, I accept that, but really that should be the guiding principle. I don't think it is in 'all' departments.

The police aren't like the military with consistent sets of guidelines, training, bench marks to be met that are the same from base to base, division to division. David Winners talked about how many handlers he would wash out based on the rigorous evaluation and testing they enforce, it was the majority.

With the police it's the inconsistency. It varies from state to state, jurisdiction to jurisdiction, dept. to dept. I believe you when you say there are many excellent police dogs and handlers out there but that's not the case across the board. 

So the question is how many bad handlers, poorly trained dogs or dogs that just aren't cut out for police work are acceptable?

Btw again, it's police officers like you who should be Monday Quarterbacking. With your back ground in dogs, obedience training and real life street work your knowledge gives you that right to examine an incident determine what went wrong. This reluctance IMHO is part of the problem. It's like a line that sometimes needs to be crossed.......



Slamdunc said:


> Your not annoying me at all. I really am not sure how to respond other than what I have already said. I don't see all the problems that you do and I regularly work and train with some other large departments.
> 
> No offense intended at all, but I am not big on speculation or coming to conclusions from things I read on forums, the internet or in the newspaper. I have been around long enough to believe little of what I hear or read from others or in the paper. I am also very logical and pragmatic.


----------



## carmspack

I'm not sure I understand this "Yes and what Carmen posted was internet information, a good bit of what I have learned comes from eyewitnesses, decoys who work the dogs and police officers that I know personally"

because one report is an agency that trains and certifies dogs for departments , many of them being my breeding.
I also have operational manuals from departments - 
I have direct contact with training certifying departments . 
Not speculation.

USPCA trials -- call off . Recertification requirement , call off.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Something like that would lead one to believe there is only one certifying body, consistency in method and application and accountability under the same body, but that's not true.

Further I could post up news accounts, eyewitness accounts, videos (which has already been done by others and you've critiqued some of them yourself) to show that there are issues with control of police dogs which can and have lead to what some would call "excessive force". It would be dismissed as "internet expert". 

Unless you're here training and certifying and reading reports you and I are in the same boat because you cannot vouch with absolute authority that you know how every department in the U.S. trains and certifies it's dogs. Actually no one can, partly because of the inconsistencies and lack of reporting that I've mentioned already.

You're in Canada. Tell me how police dogs are certified there and by which organization(s), I'm genuinely curious.




carmspack said:


> I'm not sure I understand this "Yes and what Carmen posted was internet information, a good bit of what I have learned comes from eyewitnesses, decoys who work the dogs and police officers that I know personally"
> 
> because one report is an agency that trains and certifies dogs for departments , many of them being my breeding.
> I also have operational manuals from departments -
> I have direct contact with training certifying departments .
> Not speculation.
> 
> USPCA trials -- call off . Recertification requirement , call off.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

One other thought, in general:

Since police are in the position of authority and the citizens in the position of trust, the perception of "how much is too much" when it comes to problems like dogs not being able to out is going to be very different.


----------



## Slamdunc

carmspack said:


> I'm not sure I understand this "Yes and what Carmen posted was internet information, a good bit of what I have learned comes from eyewitnesses, decoys who work the dogs and police officers that I know personally"
> 
> because one report is an agency that trains and certifies dogs for departments , many of them being my breeding.
> I also have operational manuals from departments -
> I have direct contact with training certifying departments .
> Not speculation.
> 
> USPCA trials -- call off . Recertification requirement , call off.


Carmspack,
I would like to thank you for your posts and attention to detail. I really enjoy your posts.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I enjoy her posts too.

Carmen is a person who believes in principle and walks the walk.

She projects that outwards, but she cannot vouch for every incident, handler, dept. in the U.S.

Nor can you and you know it.

When I talk to an active duty police officer in person and he tells me the reason they don't teach an out is because they don't want the suspects learning the commands and control on the dog ... Then what?

They choke the dogs off and sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.

So how long should we ignore things like this? How many incidents as those that have been mentioned here and in the past are acceptable before we acknowledge that maybe this is a problem more common then we realize?

I'm not questioning the tactics, that is an area I know to stay out of. I can however discern that what comes out on paper, manuals, or on the net are in conflict with what I'm learning over time in real life....




Slamdunc said:


> Carmspack,
> I would like to thank you for your posts and attention to detail. I really enjoy your posts.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

P.s. I often get PMs further validating my points too....they don't want to say anything out in the open....because of "argument to authority".

I'm the :crazy: one. 

Ah well.... :wild:


----------



## carmspack

copied excerpt from one Certification / Operational manual

 
9.5.4. Use of force - Chase and Detain, Chase and Stand Off, Chase and recall, Weapon​ Attack/Attack on Handler​ Deployment to pursue and detain fleeing suspect by biting him/her or by keeping​ them under surveillance dependent on his/her actions and to assist in arrest and​ provide support and safety for operational officers​ Deployment to detain armed/violent offender in line with the conflict​ management model and to provide security/support for operational officers

much further along in the Manual "
managers should also consider whether any deployment was reasonable,​ necessary and proportionate. Dog bite incidents should not only be looked at in​ isolation and the dog bite history for the team should be considered to identify​ any traits or patterns which may indicate that additional training is required for​ the police dog and/or handler. A “Bite Register” will assist in assessing such​ trends."

This removes a bite-happy "dirty" dog , or a hot headed handler .

 17.4.8. Positive Reinforcement – Out/Leave and Call Off
 Positive reinforcement to enhance motivational Out/Leave​ Positive reinforcement to enhance motivational Call off troubleshooting

 6.4.​​​​*Recall from Chase*:​
The handler will patrol a designated area. The suspect will come within sight and then will​ run from the handler. Following a clear challenge the handler will command the dog to​ stop the suspect. The dog will be released and will carry out a determined pursuit of the​ suspect. At the discretion of the assessor the handler will recall the dog. The dog is to​ return to the handler and be placed under control. If the dog fails to recall and continues​ the pursuit of the suspect the exercise will be classed as failed.​ 6.5.​​​​*Chase, suspect stops and surrenders: (Stand Off)*​*
* The handler will patrol a designated area. The suspect will come within sight and will run​ from the handler. Following a clear challenge the handler will command the dog to stop​ the suspect. The dog will be released and make a determined pursuit of the suspect.​ When the suspect stops, surrenders and faces the dog, the dog is to guard the suspect​ without biting. The handler may give a verbal command to the dog prior to reaching the​ suspect. If the dog bites the suspect, the exercise is failed

 The dog, having located a suspect, should be able to be called back to its handler and be​ placed in a control position to allow a safe arrest/search/identification of the person​ located​ The dog must be able to protect itself or its handler if attacked by a suspect

 5.7.2.​​​​*Dog issues*​*
* Lack of interest in undertaking the search​ Finding the person and failing to indicate​ Failure to give a vocal indication upon locating the suspect​ Ranging too far from the handler​ Working too close to the handler​ Biting the suspect without justification


----------



## carmspack

knowing the requirements and use of dogs in service allows me to make good breeding decisions .

The dogs need to work with mental and physical energy , day in and day out , all conditions and environments and situations. The dogs need to make good decisions independent of handler and the dogs need to be responsive to the handler , showing self control and handler control.


----------



## Nigel

On the video, dog 2 takes the suspect down, and I'm guessing sometime during the dog/suspect hitting the ground, the dog releases or looses its grip? Trying to envision how the suspect was able to go from"take down" to being able to lift the dog up by the neck so quickly? Just a fluke perhaps?


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Understood and that is very logical. You are also very careful where your working dogs are placed as well....

Which, speaking of breeding, btw, brings up another aspect to this I was pondering. Seems like the problems tend to be more often with the malis......




carmspack said:


> knowing the requirements and use of dogs in service allows me to make good breeding decisions .
> 
> The dogs need to work with mental and physical energy , day in and day out , all conditions and environments and situations. The dogs need to make good decisions independent of handler and the dogs need to be responsive to the handler , showing self control and handler control.


----------



## Slamdunc

*When I talk to an active duty police officer in person and he tells me the reason they don't teach an out is because they don't want the suspects learning the commands and control on the dog ... Then what?*

Then they need better training and learn how a Police K-9 actually works. We speak to our dogs in German, Dutch, Czech, which is the language of the country the dog came from. My dog is trained in both English and German. All of my work related commands are in German. The reason is to separate what WE tell the dog from what WE command the suspect to do. I may want my dog to "down" and the suspect to remain standing, so I will tell my dog "PLATZ." I can assure that even knowing our commands my dog will not take commands from anyone but me. 

A funny thing about the dogs is that they are the only tool that can not be used against the handler in a fight, unlike an Officer's gun, OC, baton or Taser. It is also the only tool that can be called back after deployment, unlike a bullet, Taser, OC or Baton. 

I don't know where the active duty Police Officer heard this, but I can assure you that he is mistaken. Our dogs are trained to NOT take commands from suspects or citizens. To even say that a Police Dept has a Patrol dog that is trained in apprehension work and not trained to out is erroneous. The dogs have to be able to "out" for certification. Now, in a real bite a dog may not be verbally outed and may be lifted off a suspect. There are a few reasons for this, which I am not going to get in to. 

I do not know how to say it any differently, Patrol dogs trained in apprehension work MUST be taught to call off and out a bite. There is no way around it. The out has to be trained or the liability would be extremely high, there would be excessive force issues and both civil and criminal liability. Please refer any "active duty Officers" that you meet who tell you this to me so I can discuss this with them directly and hopefully set them straight.


----------



## Slamdunc

Nigel said:


> On the video, dog 2 takes the suspect down, and I'm guessing sometime during the dog/suspect hitting the ground, the dog releases or looses its grip? Trying to envision how the suspect was able to go from"take down" to being able to lift the dog up by the neck so quickly? Just a fluke perhaps?


Nigel,
It looked to me liked the dog was still attached to the suspect when he stood up and then began to strike the dog. A dog is really no match for a determined crazy suspect like this. 

The reality is that most dogs are not a good match against a determined and crazed opponent. That guy had a 100 lbs on the dog and wanted to fight. I would bet the suspect had MMA training, was in shape and could clearly fight. He was not afraid of the dogs and was clearly ready and prepared to take them on. The second dog took a considerable beating and still hung in the fight. 

If your not afraid to take a bite, you can sling a dog around pretty easily. Especially, if you are in shape, know how to fight and are committed to the fight.


----------



## mycobraracr

Slamdunc said:


> *When I talk to an active duty police officer in person and he tells me the reason they don't teach an out is because they don't want the suspects learning the commands and control on the dog ... Then what?*
> 
> Then they need better training and learn how a Police K-9 actually works. We speak to our dogs in German, Dutch, Czech, which is the language of the country the dog came from. My dog is trained in both English and German. All of my work related commands are in German. The reason is to separate what WE tell the dog from what WE command the suspect to do. I may want my dog to "down" and the suspect to remain standing, so I will tell my dog "PLATZ." I can assure that even knowing our commands my dog will not take commands from anyone but me.
> 
> A funny thing about the dogs is that they are the only tool that can not be used against the handler in a fight, unlike an Officer's gun, OC, baton or Taser. It is also the only tool that can be called back after deployment, unlike a bullet, Taser, OC or Baton.
> 
> I don't know where the active duty Police Officer heard this, but I can assure you that he is mistaken. Our dogs are trained to NOT take commands from suspects or citizens. To even say that a Police Dept has a Patrol dog that is trained in apprehension work and not trained to out is erroneous. The dogs have to be able to "out" for certification. Now, in a real bite a dog may not be verbally outed and may be lifted off a suspect. There are a few reasons for this, which I am not going to get in to.
> 
> I do not know how to say it any differently, Patrol dogs trained in apprehension work MUST be taught to call off and out a bite. There is no way around it. The out has to be trained or the liability would be extremely high, there would be excessive force issues and both civil and criminal liability. Please refer any "active duty Officers" that you meet who tell you this to me so I can discuss this with them directly and hopefully set them straight.



:thumbup: Pretty much exactly what I said.

As for a suspect learning commands and what not. As Jim said, that's a training issue. Heck, even sport dogs don't generally listen to other people. Otherwise it would make obedience routines very funny to watch as the dog doing the down stay starts doing what the other handler on the field is saying. Also in some sports the decoy even say's the dogs name and tells it "no", "out" and whatever else he can think of. The dogs don't listen.


----------



## Nigel

Slamdunc said:


> Nigel,
> It looked to me liked the dog was still attached to the suspect when he stood up and then began to strike the dog. A dog is really no match for a determined crazy suspect like this.
> 
> The reality is that most dogs are not a good match against a determined and crazed opponent. That guy had a 100 lbs on the dog and wanted to fight. I would bet the suspect had MMA training, was in shape and could clearly fight. He was not afraid of the dogs and was clearly ready and prepared to take them on. The second dog took a considerable beating and still hung in the fight.
> 
> If your not afraid to take a bite, you can sling a dog around pretty easily. Especially, if you are in shape, know how to fight and are committed to the fight.


Thanks for answering, the guy was ramped up for sure and without a doubt dog 2 was equally determined to fight, despite the size disadvantage. 

I've only seen one take down involving a police K9 and the officers were on the guy quick, no chance for him to fight back, (if he even would have) I'm guessing some suspects do, however the White House incident the SS just kept their distance, did the guy return to his feet too quickly? Or different protocol? I would have a hard time standing by like that.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

He was talking about the dogs in his department.

That's what I'm getting at Jim, I keep using the word inconsistent for that reason. That's also why I said guys like you should be Monday quarterbacking.

The fact of the matter is not all depts adhere to the same standards or training protocols.

I'm glad to read that tactically speaking that excuse is baloney. 

I didn't question him because A. I like to stay quiet and listen B. Since I am not a police officer I don't argue specific tactics. C. How do you think a police officer will take it when little ole me talks them they are wrong and to contact you? LOL!! They'll do the same you are doing to me, tell me I don't know what I'm talking about and dismiss my comments. Ironically.

However that doesn't change the *reality* that there are depts out there that disagree with you or just are sloppy in their training.




Slamdunc said:


> *When I talk to an active duty police officer in person and he tells me the reason they don't teach an out is because they don't want the suspects learning the commands and control on the dog ... Then what?*
> 
> Then they need better training and learn how a Police K-9 actually works. We speak to our dogs in German, Dutch, Czech, which is the language of the country the dog came from. My dog is trained in both English and German. All of my work related commands are in German. The reason is to separate what WE tell the dog from what WE command the suspect to do. I may want my dog to "down" and the suspect to remain standing, so I will tell my dog "PLATZ." I can assure that even knowing our commands my dog will not take commands from anyone but me.
> 
> A funny thing about the dogs is that they are the only tool that can not be used against the handler in a fight, unlike an Officer's gun, OC, baton or Taser. It is also the only tool that can be called back after deployment, unlike a bullet, Taser, OC or Baton.
> 
> I don't know where the active duty Police Officer heard this, but I can assure you that he is mistaken. Our dogs are trained to NOT take commands from suspects or citizens. To even say that a Police Dept has a Patrol dog that is trained in apprehension work and not trained to out is erroneous. The dogs have to be able to "out" for certification. Now, in a real bite a dog may not be verbally outed and may be lifted off a suspect. There are a few reasons for this, which I am not going to get in to.
> 
> I do not know how to say it any differently, Patrol dogs trained in apprehension work MUST be taught to call off and out a bite. There is no way around it. The out has to be trained or the liability would be extremely high, there would be excessive force issues and both civil and criminal liability. Please refer any "active duty Officers" that you meet who tell you this to me so I can discuss this with them directly and hopefully set them straight.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Well you also know all depts aren't created equal based on our past convos. Right? 

That's what I thought btw regarding the commands.

Even Ilda who obviously is not a police dog will not respond to commands from a stranger. (My other dogs will though).

I didn't question the police officer though. It would be a waste of time to do so for the reasons I mentioned earlier. I don't argue with police officers, except Jim on the internet. 

A trainer I know personally stopped decoying for one of our local depts because the dogs wouldn't out.

I shared that story with you remember?

Anyways, not to put you on the spot, I know people like you and Jim are doing good work. 

It's just that I'm not going to ignore the reality that is not always the case.

(In edit, even if it is annoying.... . )





mycobraracr said:


> :thumbup: Pretty much exactly what I said.
> 
> As for a suspect learning commands and what not. As Jim said, that's a training issue. Heck, even sport dogs don't generally listen to other people. Otherwise it would make obedience routines very funny to watch as the dog doing the down stay starts doing what the other handler on the field is saying. Also in some sports the decoy even say's the dogs name and tells it "no", "out" and whatever else he can think of. The dogs don't listen.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Also, just to clarify my neighbor who I mentioned earlier is *not* the police officer who said that about dogs not outing. He is not K9 handler. He did witness incident with the Mali they had to use a break stick to get off another officer's leg though.

That was not the first time that dog had bit an officer. They are thinking about replacing the dog....now....

I don't know why these guys tell me these things either. I had the perception that Jim is writing of. I really did. I don't walk up to trainers or police officers and ask "so have you been training an out on your police K9s?" 

I also didn't pay much mind when I first started hearing about dogs that don't out on command. We do not live in a perfect world so it's going to happen, but should be kept to an absolute minimum.

The problem is when these scenarios are repeated from different sources, including my interactions IRL that conflict with what I had understood to be the normal practice.

That's life though, there's principle and there are a lot of police officers who believe in and operate on the best principles. Then there's what happens in practice from little small town sheriff depts to large urban police forces.

The problem is with great authority comes great responsibility and therefore the tolerance levels for sloppy training, incorrect protocols, dogs with the wrong temperament for the work should be very, very low.


----------



## Slamdunc

http://youtu.be/lnyQxHrQXHM?list=UUemnJZMRBzCTddcOzyuubSg

I don't know what else to say, our dogs are trained to out on command. If I can post these videos, you can see it for your self.


----------



## Slamdunc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1J0fRJL568&list=UUemnJZMRBzCTddcOzyuubSg&index=5

Here is my own dog doing some training, he's gassed at this point but he will still out. It is really not that hard, no yelling, no screaming, no corrections. Just a simple verbal command.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Yup. _Your_ dogs are and a sincere thank you for the good work you do.



Slam dunk said:


> K 9 Roscoe hose training 872013 002 - YouTube
> 
> I don't know what else to say, our dogs are trained to out on command. If I can post these videos, you can see it for your self.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Btw... IMHO (of course) Boomer probably would have done a better job subduing the White House fence jumper guy then those skinny little malis. Just sayin. 

And Boomer...that's one fine dog. :wub:


----------



## Jax08

Slamdunc said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1J0fRJL568&list=UUemnJZMRBzCTddcOzyuubSg&index=5
> 
> Here is my own dog doing some training, he's gassed at this point but he will still out. It is really not that hard, no yelling, no screaming, no corrections. Just a simple verbal command.



Those are some FINE genetics.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Handler/trainer isn't too shabby either.


----------



## Nickyb

They should've sent dog 1 back in there immediately after dog 2 flanked him. If they had done that, dog 2 wouldn't have gotten a beaten. 


Also, when the attacker proceeded to throw multiple punches, SS should've tazed/shot him. 

I'm amazed at how this went down.


----------



## Nickyb

After looking at it again, it's clear that dog 1 was a decoy that got a little to close. No trained Mali would enter a bite that slow, regardless if it might get kicked or not.


----------



## Slamdunc

GwenHwyfair and Jax,
Thanks for the kind words!


----------



## Jax08

Slamdunc said:


> GwenHwyfair and Jax,
> Thanks for the kind words!


Not kind. LOL Completely biased!


----------



## Slamdunc

Nickyb said:


> After looking at it again, it's clear that dog 1 was a decoy that got a little to close. No trained Mali would enter a bite that slow, regardless if it might get kicked or not.


I don't think they use dogs as decoys… You can't always predict what a dog will do, especially if this was it's first real deployment. A new dog getting kicked like that might have second thoughts about engaging. I've seen it with Malinois, GSD's and other breeds. There are plenty of "trained Malinois" that don't engage with blazing speed, bite that well or work that well. 

I believe Mike Tyson was quoted earlier in this thread and it is very appropriate; "everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth."


----------



## pets4life

second dog looks like he tore up the guy bad, PCP can totally kill pain for a person until they bleed out and die? A lot of these perps who kick ass and take all this pain I imagine are on some kind of drug.


----------

