JN-Sorry, never seen someone flee or attack without movement . I will be more specific next time.

JR-Just don't want to give the impression that anything less than a deliberate effort will provoke a bite response.

JN-Jon wrote:

" In the situation described, what if the two subjects were not who we were looking for? No liability issues? "

More scenerios I see (hmmmm). My answer "YES there are liability issues." for both Bite and Hold and Bark and Hold . Why ? Both dogs BITE. Not all people will sit still when a dog comes running up to them . Some innocent people may flee(fight or flight). What if these 2 subjects who were not the ones you were looking for , fled and your Bark & Hold K9 bit them? No liability issues?

JR-Sorry if you don't like me supporting my statements with examples. Let me try to be more clear about the liability issue. I don't think that F/B dogs create any significant additional liability if they're handled properly (as no doubt you and our counterparts do). We have put the issue under a microscope and it seems clear to me that some added liability results when the dog bites who he finds regardless of the passive conduct of the target. In our work there are always liability issues even absent misconduct. I think that detaining dogs tip the scales in the favor of reduced exposure.


JN-Innocent people being bitten is never a good thing. But neither is violent criminals getting away to victimize other innocent people or Law Enforcement Officers getting hurt or killed because they were so concerned about Liability that they choose to go to a method (Bark & Hold) they didn't have the resourses to train properly for or they were so concerned that they choose not to have a K9 unit at all.

JR-Amen brother. I would rather have a properly trained F/B dog than an improperly trained detaining dog any day, regardless of the reason.

JN-There are requirements for having a properly trained Bark & Hold K9 that some agencies don't have and can't meet.

(material deleted)

I'm not saying that Bite & Hold requires no time off the street for training (just less) or an unskilled decoy (just one that needs less training and practice to get there). Some agencies may feel they have the resources to meet the needs of having a properly trained Bite & Hold K9 but don't have the resources for a Bark & Hold(Detaining)K9 and believe that they can deal(through training and proper deployment with the slightly higher liability issues.

JR-No argument here.


JN-Jon,

Some communities , law enforcement agencies and local governments feel even the Bark & Hold(Detaining)method is too much of a liability because innocent people still get bit and in there minds once is too much. Even at the risk of an innocent person being victimized(robbed, killed,hurt , burglarized , etc,)later because the criminal got away and a K9 could have caught him. What would you say to those people?

JR-I have given presentations to ACLU lawyers on numerous occasions (I think that they would be the quickest to eliminate police K9 if they could). First I explain that our dogs are primarily search tools, not weapons. Then I explain that criminals don't want to be found and will sometimes make very bad decisions when they are. I cover B/H training and show them that the injury looks like a snake bite, not a bear attack. Then I explain that resistance to the application of a dog will create the likelyhood of more serious injury (bandit's decision) and I show those photos. Then I cover our detaining philosophy to show that we're making every effort to function safely, to give criminals every opportunity to surrender and to use only necessary force. I demonstrate everything to them with K9 teams and, yes, I even give scenario examples. Bottom line, they are shown that we do use force and that sometimes our dogs precude a higher level of force.

JN-Jon asked:

"Is it our responsiblity to use minimal force to effect the arrest?"


Yes, both Bark and Hold(Detaining) and Bite and Hold do that, even concerning still suspects. I don't like the term "passive suspect" because it infers this suspect is not a threat and this is not the case. They are often times concealed and/or wanted for a crime that involves the use of a K9 to locate them and take them into custody because they pose a significant risk to officers and the public and could successfully assault you before you have a chance to react. Reguardless of what method you are using. I think it's up to the communities , agencies and local goverments to descide which of these issues are more important to them and descide if they want a certain method or no K9 at all. I will refer you to your own statement related to this.

Jon stated;

" The courts will never choose a training/deployment method for us. They will look at the case and decide whether or not the deployment (use of force) was reasonable and justified. "

JR--By passive, I mean cooperative, following direction etc. My threshold is this: if the dog finds a felon or other person posing a significant threat (where deployment is justified by policy), I will have the dog extract immediately (F/B style). It's often the safest method. When I do give a suspect an opportunity to surrender, the opportunity has to be taken immediately, or the dog will extract. Standoffs are dangerous and unjustifiable in felony situations.


JN-And they(the courts) have looked at both Bark & Hold(Detaining) and Bite & Hold cases and found them reasonable and justified. Will they continue to do this? I'm not so sure. But if they do choose a method I'm sure it's going to be a knee jerk uninformed descision .

JR-I hope I haven't said anything to imply that F/B K9 teams are ever unreasonable or unjustified. I don't believe that at all. I don't think that we have much influence with the courts either but we have to stack the deck in our favor wherever possible.


JN-Bite and Hold is the best method for my department because it just as effective as Bark and Hold ,is easier to train and maintain for both trainers and handlers , requires less time off the streets for training, leaving us out there more often to catch the badguys. I feel the handlers have a better chance of maintaining and having a properly trained K9 in a method that is just as effective as Bark & Hold. I also feel the K9 going in for the bite when he's able is safer for the officer. Just my opinion and one to be argued forever. We deploy on violent felons and deploy in a manner taking the safety of the public ,officer and rights of the suspect into account. In doing so we have very few innocent people being bit and catch lots of badguys taking them into custody in away that's safest for us and them. But this doesn't make Bite & Hold the best answer to everyone elses problems just our own.

JR-That's why I said that any discussion about this does not have to be antagonistic. I think that as professional K9 handlers we have an obligation to be introspective. My handlers search for both felony and misd. suspects. If a person needs to be found for whatever reason (even lost persons), our dogs deploy. Our primary function is to search. We tracked down two beer theft suspects last night (sorry, I know I'm doing it again). Both were wanted on unrelated felonies. I think that makes the community a safer place!

HK-John,
I really dont want to fall into this pit of what-if scenarios concerning f/b versus b/h but, if your dog wont bite unless the suspect is fleeing what will happen if the hidden suspect casually draw a gun. Will the dog bite or will he alert you to the presence of a bad guy who will shoot you and the dog as soon as you come to his aid. Food for thought.
I know your reply will be that he can shoot a f/b dog as well but at leaast there is a chance the shock of the bite may thwart the attempt, or the dog grabs the gun arm etc., at least the suspect is going to pay the price in pain and the handler may get an early warning that the bad guy is waiting in ambush. More food for thought and no more what-ifs.
I refer to my prior post. "cant we all just get along"........Howard

JR-Howard, I agree that it could be most advantageous to have the dog engage immediately here!! Based on the existing intel, I can override my dog even before he has shown detaining behavior. Consider a search for a man with a gun where the dog shows body language as he approaches bushes or whatever. I can either call the dog back and deal with it as I would as a patrol officer or I can simply give the dog a bite command and he will immediately engage the motionless person.

Get along? Nothing but love here Howard!! We've got the best jobs in L.E. and we're all on the same team in my book.

I'm new here. It seems that we should start a new thread if there is further discussion. It takes my old computer a long time to find the bottom of this one.

I agree with Jon.
The thread is a bit cumbersom so I'll close it and let ya'all start fresh.