Judy I think what you want is completely plausible I just don't think it will work in the real world. What I mean is if you are simply teaching your dog to bark on command or at sketchy individuals I think you are inviting an untrusting dog. On the other hand if that's all you do you will not produce a dog that will be much of a deterrant IMO. You have to put pressure on the dog (building over time) for them to really have an aggressive bark (making them "scary" to a stranger) and in doing so you may be lighting a fuse that you can't extinguish if you don't continue with the training. I would just start with your program and as you see how it progresses and you learn more, you, as the owner of the dog, with the guidance of knowldgeable people that you trust will be able to determine what is right and wrong for your particular animal and circumstances. Keep in mind all dogs bite, teaching the correct time and technique may keep that dog from indiscriminate or unwarranted bites.

Luke makes good points.

And then there's the magic "on & off switch" that owners always ask for - that pretty much flies in the face of realism.

Look, you can make a dog bark for a treat. Will that type of bark repel a threatening person? Likely, no.
However, if you train a dog to bark as Luke described as above, the dog is motivated to drive the threat away.
Now if you think that you're going to be able to turn that bark off with the threat still in plain view of the dog, it's going to take a significant amount of training to do so , plus that very training will weaken the dog's bark as the dog will become more concerned about the compulsion that's going to come from you to stop his barking versus the low level of threat from the helper ( as the dog never gets a bite in your style of training.

Ever watch the TV show "Cops"? Notice what the average K9 handler's is doing with his dog after the dog engages a perp? The dog is ususally being led away while strongly trying to re-engage the perp.
Ask yourself, if there was a magic "on & off" switch, why are those Police patrol dogs ( usually a lot better trained than the average ppd ) still focused on the perp instead of happily wagging their tails and leaving the scene in a perfect heel next to their handlers?

Totally agree with Luke. I think you're asking for an unsure dog: What if he gets in a situation where he's barking aggressively, and the guy doesn't run? What does he do next? He doesn't KNOW. He hasn't been taught! I know everyone knows someone with some miracle story of the dog with no training who saved the day/life, but if it were my life, I'd train the damn dog. I don't think it's fair to start a dog like this, begin to bring out this aggression, and then stop. If you bring that out, you need to be able to control it, and if you've done no bitework/control work, he may bite anyway, but he may not. And if he does, you could be in a lot of trouble. If he's trained, YOU can and should decide if he bites or not-not the dog. JMO.

You, Will and Luke all made great points but aren't you all the ones (not you specifically, it was other Leerburg board memebes) who told me my dog is from American (& German) showlines and due to this he wouldn't bite if I spent $1,000,000,000 on training AND his life depended on it?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> I think Ed wrote something like using my dog to go in for a bite would be like asking a mule to run in the Kentucky Derby. So, even if I wanted a perfectly trained PPD, I could never, ever get it from a dog with his bloodlines? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Sorry, that was supposed to say "other Leerburg members".

I would still go forward with the training, if it were my dog, but I am by no means an expert. If he won't bite, he won't, but at least you've laid the proper foundation. He could surprise you; while you wouldn't seek a dog from these lines as a PPD, exceptions exist. I was more pointing out another side to the "just bark" theory as it could be applied to ANY dog-not just yours. I wouldn't give the dog any of this type training unless I was prepared to follow through. All dogs bite. I'd rather know when mine was going to.

I just saw that Will responded after Luke, and at the same time as I did. His point about the barking dog scaring a truly threatening person is what I was trying to say, and got sidetracked and forgot <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />. Why have a dog that only repels sane people? An insane person may not care about a barking dog, and most people don't get PPDs to protect them from sane, normal people. They get them because of the nutjobs in the world. Only reasonable, thinking people are deterred by a barking, aggressive posturing dog.

When it comes to PPD's, be it for a civilian or a LEO, here is what it all boils down to, in my opinion:

No matter how good or bad a PPD is, no matter how much of a "man-stopping" dog he may or may not be, a person that puts their life or safety 100% in the ability of their dog to stop a given threat is a FOOL.

The dogs REAL job is to give its handler TIME to either; A) access other force options, B) gain a tactical advantage over the bad guy, C) escape.

In the case of a police officer attempting to affect some type of enforcement action, option C really isn't an option (except in an absolute life-or-death last choice). The LEO MUST take the person into custody. In the case of a civilian however, option C should be the FIRST choice.

If the threat a person faces TRULY requires the type of dog capable of being a "man-stopper", that person should be carrying a gun anyway.

The dogs ONLY job is to buy you enough time to access that gun or to escape, PERIOD. If the dog is able to neutralize the threat on its own, it's just a bonus. By that time, however, the (civilian) handler should be WELL out of the danger zone. Whether or not the dog is able to subdue the bad guy or ends up getting killed by the bad guy is irrelevant.

Did the dog allow you to disengage from the threat and escape, is all that really matters.

 Quote:

Sorry, it's not a joke to me when I've had several clients weeping in fear over the changes that they've had to make to protect themselves from stalkers.

That's fine that you feel that way, but I'm not gonna walk on egg shells because I might offend someone with a joke. Theres 8902 users on this board, how many times have you offended someone with your opinions or jokes. I'm sure there will come a time when I will offend someone again, and when that day comes, I'm sure I'll get jumped on again <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> That's how all message boards work -- put it in writing so everyone can analyze it to death.

Judy I'm glad you found someone who could give you advice, I hope you achieve with your dog everything that you want to achieve and enjoy working with your boy!

Agreed, Scott. I mentioned that earlier, I thought. Maybe in PM? Can't remember, too lazy to go back, so...A dog, IMO, should be just one barrier of defense/protection. I would rather not send my dog into a fight in which he's likely to get killed or seriously injured, so I take all precautions to avoid the situation in the first place. My dog needs to create enough of a distraction that I can dial 911, while getting my a$$ out of harm's way. Then, hopefully, I can get my dog back from a safe distance and proper measurments can be taken against the attacker. I don't think anyone is advocating just having a dog to fight whatever battles come your way. If I'm THAT afraid of someone, why wouldn't I fear for my dog, too? Dogs are a last resort, or an excellent deterrent/distraction-not a license to be negligent in protecting your own safety. I think that's about what Judy's looking for, if I understand correctly.