No more pointy ears for tsa - Page 15

Hunhmddre, our LE don't use the prick eared dogs because they are prick eared...they use them because they are excellent at the job.
However, the drop eared dogs at tsa are being selected because they are drop eared. See the difference?


Dogs didn't stop thousands at our border...our border patrol did, because they were given permission to do their jobs.

Duke, surely people coming in, carrying explosives OR stashing those explosives OFF their bodies, lay scent trails at ALL levels ? I have already said that it seems to me there's not a lot of difference in the abilities of the different breeds to actually do the job / FIND things. I was just reacting to the points about Bloodhounds, not whether TSA would be right to select Bloodhounds over spaniels etc (IF it even has).[ Its possible some explosives show up in foot sweat, too, if someone has handled them - just like drugs often do.]

Joan: I refuse to argue further with the certifiably paranoic; I'm merely pointing out that some bad 'uns will always make it past whatever security measures are in place anywhere, and pricked ears have not STOPPED that happening entirely, in the past;
nor would they in the future. Whether those were some of the dogs accompanying guards which stopped those who WERE caught, or not. Do you honestly think if someone is so obsessed with blowing people & places up (for whatever reason), they will let the looks of a pointy ear dog stop them ? This stuff is about not panicking the majority and children around them, arriving - as they no doubt often do - as part of a crowd.

Dr hund, I said pointy ears have nothing to do with the selection of LE dogs except for tsa, now. The " pointy ears" are coincidental...again for your bennefit; the dogs are selected for excellent work, not because they have " pointy ears"...the TSA, now however, is selecting dogs BECAUSE they have drop ears, and not because they have excellent work ethics.
Why can't you understand that....you keep twisting and turning what I have said in an attempt ( failed) to meet your preconceived diagnosis of me.

The known terrorists apprehended at the border tried to blend with the CA coming in and were id' d by the agents...dogs had nothing to do with that.
And no, to answer your silly question, the terrorists won't be intimidated by a dog, pointy ears or not. But the dog's job is not to intimidate the terrorists at airports. His job is to detect explosives where present.

Why is it, when you run out of argument, you resort to insults?

Hundmutter
This stuff is about not panicking the majority and children around them, arriving - as they no doubt often do - as part of a crowd.

i wonder if there are statistical study about amount of "panicking" vs. "not panicking".
quite doubtful TSA ever did it.

typically "majority" in many similar issues just a small but noisy group of mentally unstable folk.

The dogs pass along the hundreds of people standing in line, a dog on either side, between lines at a rapid rate..it's very doubtful that any unstable "majorities" with their delicate childrens even notice the dogs moving along the lines of passengers.
Unless of course, a parent has strapped a sui cide vest on their beloved child...in which case the dogs would stop and let their handler know that this is a hit! So that would be a case of panic over very different reason than "pointy" ears.

my guess is that, if someone is afraid of dogs, they are afraid of all dogs no matter what ears they have, I was working on Prague airport with customs some time ago with a currency detectiondog, and have seen fear reactions of people when approached by a small mali female that was used, and seriously doubt the reaction would be much different with a pointer or labrador, as allways its something coming from people who are not active on the workingfloor themselves

Probably people who should b afraid, lol.

Some people have an innate, irrational fear of things - dogs, heights, whatever. Also, in some cultures, dogs are seen as 'evil', dirty, as food, etc. but not as we see them - companion animals. Regardless, it should not matter what the perception is of the [travelling] public when it comes to using the ability of dogs to keep people safe. In going through San Francisco airport recently, the line for security screening went past a black lab dog, almost unnoticeably standing at the start of the line, yet giving everyone a quick sniff. I didn't see any poor reactions of the people to the dog, and if a person was afraid it would be of any dog, no matter what type of ears.

ValK, point is, it doesn't matter how few and how 'mad' people are that start off a piece of hysteria (over dogs or anything else) - what matters is the effect it could have, and how many others of the crowds of people present could get caught up in it. Officers working on policing Borders, civil servants who are Border Patrol guards, whoever - don't you think they have a difficult enough job to do anyway, without having to deal with mass outbreaks of civil unrest at their port / airfield ??? Travellers are frequently loud, rude and obnoxious towards them; and would often seem to welcome involving everyone around them because they feel they are being unfairly treated (not withstanding that most of the time the dogs and their handlers and customs officers do get it right, and despite denials they are carrying stuff they should not be !) If the Border authorities are saying it helps them to avoid upsetting the mass of people coming through as little as possible (and obviously they are still going to have to deal with upsetting some, who do prove to be terrorists or smugglers), should we not be listening to their needs ? Rather than defending a type of dog which we know works well, but do not know works better, and using that to persue some agenda against 'types' of people ( eg those who are 'PC', or those who wear robes) which is a personal view rather than objective concern ?

hund, its simple, you can drag in all you want, the new choice has nothing to do with workingqualities from either group of dogs period