Does anyone train their dogs to apprehend once the dog is sent and the suspect surrenders. (i.e. suspect runs then stands still hands in the air or prones out on the ground )? As compared with a Bark and Hold( if suspect has surrendered)I have my own opinion and I do not want to start a war , but will voice my thoughts on this issue . I hope to learn something on this topic

Jim Maynard

What is you're definition of a dog apprehending a man who has surrendered? As you describe the situation you have a man running (CAUSING A DOG TO CHASE) and then he stops and puts his hands in the air. In you're opinion what is the dog to do when he gets to the man? APPREHEND him how? Are you saying that the dog should take the man out even though he has become a passive subject before the dog catches him? Just curious.

Glen:
I think if the suspect surrenders the dog should do a bark and hold. We have an agency (nearby) that refuses to have their dogs do anything but apprehend ( Bite & Hold) once they have sent their dogs

I have problems with this ideology


Jim

The action of the dog in such a circumstance is pretty irrelevant. In this situation the handler must make a choice as to how to take the suspect into cutody. This is purely obedience.
A bark and hold is not used to maintain/control a suspect who has shown he/she is willing to be taken into cutody. It is for locating a suspect whose intent is to evade & elude apprehension and convey that location to a handler/search team.
Once a subject wishes to be taken into custody the can be placed in a stable position or recalled.
Since the B&H has not been established into case law as a necessary component of police dog training it is difficult to say that it is more proper that a dog that does engage upon contact with a suspect.
What does have to happen is that a handler must be able to understand under what circumstances to deploy a dog and to what extent case law authorizes that use and to have the necessary control to manipulate the dog throughout any deployment and capture.
Just my $0.02

JM,
When you say "Send" the dog...do you mean on a apprehension of a fleeing suspect in sight? Or using the dog on a search for a hidden suspect away from the handler?
A recall would be a good option in both cases, should the handler decide to stop the apprehension/search.
The ability to recall the dog always seems to get lost when the endless debates about Bark/Bite start.

When a fleeing suspect that that dog has been cued in on decides it's time to call it quits and stands still with hands in the air or prones out on the ground . Is the dog allowed to apprehend ?

Jim

JM,
I will try to answer your question in the hypothetical, without knowing how the dogs in your area are trained or thier work policies.
I can tell you that I'm dead set against any type of pattern training. Which is why I would say that I would rather have the handler make the decision to have the dog Recall/Guard the suspect. Standing still, raising your hands, going to the ground is a long way from being hundcuffed in the back of a patrol car.
There may be units that pattern train the dog to react to the suspect regardless of the command initially given to the dog. I think they are setting themselves up for failure JMO
Again, just my opinion...I think the dog reacting to only the commands of the handler is safer for dog and handler.
I feel like Kevin stated, that the handler should be aware of the proper use of force for a given situation.
Jim, is your outrage in the use of these dogs based on any working dog/LE experience, or just an interested observer?.

As I understand this question it has to do with sending a dog on a fleeing suspect. In the UK it’s mandatory that a dog go into a bark, they call it a “stand off,” if a suspect surrenders and puts his hands up.

I think this is a horrible way to deploy and have told quite a few UK K-9 handlers on various subscription lists, making me popular the world over. LOL. Actually they have no say in the matter as the “Home Office” makes such decisions and the handlers have no say in the matter.

This isn’t a case of a dog “making decisions” it’s a dog recognizing a situation and responding to it as he’s been trained. It’s similar to a dog responding to a handler attack and biting without a command. The dog sees cues and responds to them as he’s been trained.

There are many problems with this method of deployment among them, from the dog’s angle of view, a suspect pointing a gun at the handler looks very much like a person with his hands straight up, in a surrendering position. In that situation we’d want the dog to take the suspect down.

I think that dogs should follow the last command of their handler and not respond to anything the suspect does. If I want a suspect bitten I’ll give that command. If I decided that I don’t want the suspect bitten I can stop the dog with another command. If I want the dog to bark at him, I’ll give another command. It’s my decision, based on what the suspect is doing at the moment, not the dog’s.

In having this discussion with handlers from the UK they frequently use the argument that more US crooks have guns than in the UK. This is a silly argument, at best. You don’t know if the crook you’re looking at has a gun or not, until he’s been searched, no matter what country you’re in. In fact if you take a look at the latest stats, armed crime in the UK has skyrocketed since the complete banning of firearms. Go figure!

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
(UnclLou@aol.com)

from the dog’s angle of view, a suspect pointing a gun at the handler looks very much like a person with his hands straight up, in a surrendering position. In that situation we’d want the dog to take the suspect down.

Thanks Lou , I never thought of that

not respond to anything the suspect does. If I want a suspect bitten I’ll give that command. If I decided that I don’t want the suspect bitten I can stop the dog with another command. If I want the dog to bark at him, I’ll give another command. It’s my decision, based on what the suspect is doing

Jack: My concern was excessive force ,and the possibility of it having a negative effect on all K9 handlers , Lou has brought forward some valid points

Thanks Again
Jim

Has anyone read this newspaper article?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40046-2001Dec29.html