David,
I recently did a PR event where there were MWD's and they were saying the same thing (rules being different).

Could this possibly be as simple as the fact that civilian LE takes their dogs home with them at night and the MWD's stay in kennels and change handlers more frequently?

It would be nice to have the correct reasons why some think there is a difference......just so I can be correct if I am ever need to be.....

 Quote: david c.frost

I did read it. To be honest I felt it was a bit on the improbable side.
I was going to make a comment, but i've been experiencing some computer problems. Since I'm nearly computer illiterate, I had to wait for some teenager to come fix it. At any rate, I think, properly trained, a good law enforcement dog, including a good military dog, is not going to "attack" when the words "get 'em" are spoken in a normal tone. Secondly, somewhere in the thread it was said the rules of engagement are different. While that may be true in a war zone, generally the rules of engagement are still pretty much the same as in civilian law enforcement. Having spent a good number of years in both, including combat zones, as far as police work itself, relative the canine, there isn't that much different in the rules of engagement.

DFrost

Sorry, i am not trying to train my dog to attack when i give him commands in a normal voice.

I want him to act and not react. I want him to attack on my command alone rather then needing to see the decoy or a person aggressions.

 Quote: carol boche

David,
I recently did a PR event where there were MWD's and they were saying the same thing (rules being different).

Could this possibly be as simple as the fact that civilian LE takes their dogs home with them at night and the MWD's stay in kennels and change handlers more frequently?

It would be nice to have the correct reasons why some think there is a difference......just so I can be correct if I am ever need to be.....

Carol,

Hey there, While yes that is one of the biggest differences i know of that wasn't one of the differences i was talking about. For a MWD handler the only thing that needs to happen is the Handler giving a lawful order and the person not do it. From that point all i have to do is say "Halt, Halt, Halt, I will release my dog" And from there it is fair game. Of course it has to be a lawful order in the line of duty, the handler cant tell people to do random things. I will admit that i do not know exactly what the procedure is on the civilian side but i have been told that there is a big difference.

But once again this is about finding out how to get your dog to act and not react. Not the tones in the command.

Carol, no I don't particularly think where the dog is housed makes all that much difference. There are police dogs that live in kennels, there are police dogs that live in a kennel at the handlers house, there are dogs that live in the house. It's a matter of control and maintaining whatever standard the dog is trained to attain.

I said, there are differences in rules of engagement in a combat zone. Even that would depend on where was one assigned in a combat zone. There are also restricted areas, clearly marked that have different rules for the protection of whatever asset may be in such area. Beyond that, there are a lot of MWD's that are not assigned to combat zones. They patrol housing areas, base assets, business areas just like a civilian counterpart would do. Many civilian departments have adopted a policy of not using a dog to apprehend for misdemeanors. Things certainly could have changed since my 23 years in the MWD program, however, except for a combat situation, or a restricted area, simply failure to stop when told was not cause to release a dog on a person.

As for wanting the dog to act instead of react, how could I not agree. It's one of the reasons I'm opposed to bark and hold. I tell the dog to attack, he attacks, I tell him to stop, he stops. I don't want him reacting to anything. Which brings me to my original comment. I find it improbable a well trained dog, without provocation, is going to bite the first person in reach when the words "get 'em" are spoken in general conversation. Maybe the military doesn't practice "false runs" any more. I know they've changed a lot. In a false run, even with provocation, the dog was not allowed to bite, without being commanded.

DFrost

 Quote: michael west

So the other handler when ahead and told him "No we tell them "Get Em"" And on that note the dog came up leash and right for my chest. luckily my reflexes have gotten a lot faster after decoying for this dog

Does the the dog's reaction have anything to do with him being conditioned to bite you during training?

I think that's a good observation, Debbie; I was wondering when that was going to come up. Reading the thread it sounds to me like this dog is highly conditioned to respond to the attack command; and in fact is merely reacting and not acting like you would believe and are seeking to train for.

David, what is a "false run"?

 Quote: Michael West

But once again this is about finding out how to get your dog to act and not react. Not the tones in the command.

Sorry, it is a bit off topic. I was just interested in what the differences were.

David...thanks.

David wrote: Many civilian departments have adopted a policy of not using a dog to apprehend for misdemeanors.

This is 100% correct in any department that I have trained with. True, there are certain situation where the use of an apprehension dog could be used for a misdemeanor, but it would be rare.

As far as when to send a dog via: military send command versus a civilian command, I dont see much difference. Micheal stated that all he has to do is give a halt command to a suspect. That works the same for a fleeing felon, passive felon sitting on a park bench,etc. in the civilian world.

When to send the dog depends on the situation.....Sorry this is off topic from the original question.

 Quote: brad . martin

what is a "false run"?

Its exactly as it sounds. In training, the decoy will run from the team after he may have, or has not agitated the dog. The dog is forbidden to chase the decoy without command from the handler. Its an example of the dog not REACTING to the stimulus of the decoy, but ACTING on the command of the handler to apprehend.

Howard

Brad, what Howard said. In addition, I'd add, we would allow the decoy to approach the dog handler, he could be yelling, waving arms, even threatening, as in lunging, or exaggerated arm and body movements. The decoy was NOT allowed to touch the dog or the handler. During all this nonsense, the dog was not allowed to break position. I've seen them tremble, bark, lower their head between their shoulders and look like a vulture, but they could not break position. This exercise was not always awarded with a bite. It may be archiac, ancient, old time etc, methods of training, but I still use it. Howard really summed it up well with his description of the dog NOT reacting to the stimulus but acting to the handler's command.

DFrost