Soft dogs.....enduring the fight? - Page 1

So I've talked to others in the past who mentioned of dogs they had (the dogs were DDR lines) who were soft dogs......or they mentioned of dogs they had who were handler sensitiive, etc etc.   One said their dog ran out on the field and tripped on their leash correcting itself and the dog booked it off the field because of that.  My question though, can some dogs who are really soft do police work? Would "soft" be the correct term for this? Would a soft dog still be able to endure the fight with a suspect they've apprehended? Or would a hit from the criminal make the dog retreat from holding/fighting the suspect?  Does anyone on here have experience with dogs like this in that type of work?

Oxymoron 

No, a soft dog cannot do police work.  They can go through the motions but where are they when they are needed?  You want a dog you can count on.  You have to have a hard, driven dog that doesn't know the meaning of quit.  A soft dog would be better suited for drug/bomb detection for police work. 

There is a difference between "handler sensitive" and soft.  To answer your question, no.  The dog you are describing would not be a suitable patrol dog.  Handler sensitive is a completely different issue and there are dogs that may be handler sensitive but not "soft" when dealing with suspects.  A dog that trips on it's leash and "booked it off the field" as you describe has far more problems than just being soft. 

Everyone needs to get on the same page with what "soft" means truly before this discussion has any point at all. 

Thanks debisue and slamdunc.   Maybe I should have referred more so to handler sensitive dogs then.   How would you define a "soft" dog though.

I am going to add my definition to Wikipedia so mine is correct and accepted as the definitive explanantion.  Better yet I am going to do a youtube video and then people can reference it like it Gospel on the OT section.  If there is a video or Wiki has it it must be well researched and vetted. 

I think if the OP asked himself the same questions he posted he would have found his answer. 

Just curious, why the "Wikipedia" reference/Gospel OT?  I don't read too many of the OT things so I don't know what people use as their source; I've post a few things myself on OT, but never from Wikipedia or youtube as acclaimed facts.

GSDguy08,
The OT youtube and Wikipedia references were not directed at you. 

I don't get the reference, either. Who or what is it directed at or doesn't that have any bearing on the thread?