Is there really a "When Police Dogs Attack" video tape? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I really have been looking for actual footage of K-9 deployments. And that post was well said SP.

Phil, good post thanks for the insight. Regarding the statement about gang activity, with my department, you "CAN NOT" take the K-9 out of the vehicle to deploy the dog without "prior" supervisor approval, unless it's a felony being committed in the deputies presence. That usually means battery against a cop, other than that you are going to have to dance on the carpet if you take the responsibility on yourself. Regarding the K-9 staging for cover, on our current night shift in our city of approximately 90,000 people there are 4 units plus the Sgt, and 2 overlaps (1 traffic and 1 K9) and we are all single person units. Our current "hotstop" (or felony traffic stops) policies dictate a minimum of 3 and preferably 4 units. You usually have 2, maybe 3 show up, never 4 - just don't have it due to staffing. I wonder if someone like DFrost or Kevin (or others who I'm not familiar with) have stats and examples of how different agencies from around the country differ on the K9 deployment policies? As far as where in the country gives the deployment authority to the handler, on what types of calls, etc. Nothing for nothing, I would be interested in hearing them to increase my own awareness and learn from others as well.
Regards,
-------
Brandon

I agree with alot of what everyone has said! Having a K9 at a domestic scene can cause more of a flair up between all parties. I have seen family members not just the people involved in the dispute center their attention directly towards the K9 team just too have a reason to start something. Being an ex-Army Military Police Officer K9 we always had a K9 unit avaliable but we were always taught that our personel communication skills were ou best weapons, neuterlize the situation.
As far as utilizing K9's for gang troubles or wanted fugitives which is my line of work now. I always have my K9 partner right with me, sometimes right with the entry team. It all depends on each case and if it's a high risk situation! but he's still on the scene. Again this is only my opinion! I also find that a lot of our fugitives give up when they see a K9 team at the ready. I find we have more problems with family members than the actual fugitve. God knows my partner has detered a lot of people from getting out of control.
Well, God bless and everyone stay safe!

Lewis and Argo
Special Agent, Fugitive Recovery

Thanks for the kudos everyone.

Dobeonguard - I've been searching for actual footage of dogs getting real bites too. Seems they're few and far between, even on COPS. Only dogs I've seen get bites there were from Washington (state) - Pierce County Sheriffs Dept. and Florida - Jacksonville Sheriffs Dept. If you find any actual tapes, let us know!

BC - I think its kinda messed up that you can't deploy your partner in a gang situation unless you're getting your ass kicked or the Sup. approves - That's messed up! You lose one of your best advantages in that situation. Most of the time, the dogs presence is enough to deter most, if not all, gang activity. They see the dog, they scatter. They simply want no part of 80lbs of pissed off pooch.

Ahh well, life's not perfect eh?
Phil

REAL TV just last night had a good shot of a K9 getting a bad guy out of a car. Car was stopped by cops. Driver was told to leave. Passenger refused to leave car. Dog was sent in from driver side and got a nice full bite on upper arm and DRUG passenger out through driver door. Only problem was getting dog to out. He really wanted to hang on.

oldearthdog

 Quote:

Dog was sent in from driver side and got a nice full bite on upper arm and DRUG passenger out through driver door. Only problem was getting dog to out. He really wanted to hang on.

Butch: This is where we give the public the wrong impression of deploying K-9's. The K-9 not wanting to out was as bad as the deployment, bad HANDLER judgement IMHO.

Butch: So many fantastic K-9 units working the streets and the dog being televised not outing makes all K-9 Units look BAD. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Butch: Wish I could have seen the deployment to see what transpired.

I agree regarding the dog not outing. I my opinion, that is exactly why some depts (mine included) have such strict deployment policies for K9's. For us, they are almost a last resort, you have to be able to justify their use just as you would for any less than lethal device. I'm not a policy maker, just a spoke in the wheel, but I can see where they would be worried about inproper deployment techniques and poor training or handling as well as proofing and problem solving, not to mention the lawsuits. Nevertheless, I enjoy reading and learning about all of the different discussion topics. Thanks Ed for having this forum, and thanks everyone else for having really good ideas and articulating them as well as your great participation.
Regards,
-------
Brandon

It should be noted the USA is one of the most overly policed countries in the world,yet crime is increasing.The deployment of k9's need to be closley monitored.When we have a k9 deployed who can't out when it counts(real life not training)I question it's value.No obedience,no tactics.Who made the k9 handler not only a police officer,a judge & executioner all rolled into one.Surely confrontational policing belongs in yesterdays not on the streets of America today.Litigation involving police k9's allways start after one act 'BITING' never tracking,detection etc Violence starts were knowlegde ends.

BC,
It's an invaluable service the K-9 Units provide.
Like you mentioned;

 Quote:

you have to be able to justify their use just as you would for any less than lethal device. I'm not a policy maker, just a spoke in the wheel.

Butch: BC, remember you are the most important spoke in that wheel along with your K-9 partner.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

For all the reasons previously stated, Canine handlers need to be mature, experienced officers first...then become Canine Team members.

There must be clear, concise policy as to when the dog may, or may not be deployed, and all officers and supervisors must be trained as to what the capabilities of the Canine Team are...and are not. That policy must be implemented from the top down and enforced...up to and including disciplinary action against field supervisors who misuse the dogs.

Along with this must also come the freedom...at least at the supervisory level...to say "No, we do NOT need the dog" and the understanding that this freedom will lead to an occasional wrong judgement on the part of those making the call. (There is a huge difference between an honest mistake and deliberate misuse)

Line officers must be made to understand that this is "their" Canine Unit and that its' primary job is to support them to the best of their ability within the policy guidelines. BUT...as we know...there invariably will be situations that do not fit neatly within any written policy or guideline. These situations will require experience and common sense on the part of officers and supervisors and understanding on the part of administrators.

Tactical deployment of the dog must be left to the Canine handler who must also direct the other officers / assets on scene (air support, perimeter units, etc.) with necessary interaction from supervisors. As you can see this is no job for a rookie. The handler must make judgement calls, and the powers-that-be must have confidance that he/she is able to make the right call most of the time.

As to the dog that did not want to out off of the man inside the car, I would cheerfully invite DrMW or anyone else to rush in and tackle a belligerent, combative opponent inside of a car, fight him for perhaps 30/45 seconds "no holds barred", and then turn off HIS "fight drive" like it was a faucet...righhhhht! Recognize that while the dog must, indeed be under control, "Practice ain't the same as race day"!