A PPD Question - Page 1

Not intending to start a flame war - just an observation and would like to know other people's thoughts.  Check out this web page and in particular the picture at the bottom of the page http://www.eisenfaustkennels.com/3.html . perhaps someone with better computer skills than I could load it to this thread so we all know what the discussion is about.

First question/observation. If you scroll thru the site you will notice that most if not all of the shots of the "real"  working dogs show the bad guy on the ground with the dog on top of him. Now I'm sure much of this is a marketing ploy to make people think that these are bad ass dogs that will "take down" the bad guy. Since we only see a still picture no way of knowing that. My question is this since so much emphasis seems to be on this position - is not working the dog in this position easier for the dog - i.e. can give confidence to a dog that is less confident etc. Me I would want the dog to have a high level of fight with an upright helper since lets face it that's the way bad guys are going to come at you. Which leads us to the second question/observation and the photo mentioned above plus the one right above it.

I will confess my bias right up front. I look with askance at much of the PPD world since there seems to be a lot of hype, no standardization about what constitutes training and/or a trained dog, inflated prices and world view. To me reality is you want a dog to bark and warn and yes in some situations probably bite. But you have to know that if someone is really serious that they will have a gun or a knife and there is a good chance the dog is toast . The dog will merely give you time to get out of dodge or get your own gun ( please note legally in most jurisdictions in the U.S.  you are required to leave if it was at all possible to avoid criminal prosecution for injury to the intruder)

Which leads us to the photo mentioned above. What pray tell if this were a REAL situation would prevent the "bad guy" from turing the gun and shooting the dog? Should not the dog be taught to target the hand with the weapon?  If you look at the photo right above the last one, it appears to me that  the left arm has a hidden sleeve under the jacket while it does not appear quite so obvious that that is true of the right arm - the gun holding one.  Now the photos are not clear enough to really tell but IF that is the case then it would appear to me that what we have here is a dog that is equipment oriented.  Thoughts?  I'll run for cover now.

Good questions.  I reserve my answer until later..........

i trained my girl to go for the arm that the gun is in...has anyone else done this???

i try not to let my dogs get sleeve happy but it can be a problem but two years ago she proved her worth as a pp dog when she nailed some drunk guy who was being  aggressive towards me and she was excellent she did a perfect stand off then when he lunged at me she bit and released on command.

lol i don't know who was more surprised me or her. i hate to think what would have happened if she had not been with me.

I'd say it's unfair to judge a dog, handler, or both the training to conclude any "assumptions" by ways of a photograph.  I personally like to see video rather than pictures and even video doesn't tell the whole story but it's better than just a picture.

"What pray tell if this were a REAL situation would prevent the "bad guy" from turing the gun and shooting the dog?"

There is nothing to prevent anyone in any situation from turning the gun and shooting the dog.  There's nothing to prevent a bad guy from turning the gun and shooting the person either-with or without the dog.  A PPD gives added protection IMO, has the ABILITY and COURAGE to do what he's gotta do to protect the handler in situations that a "non trained" dog would not know how to react to.

We had a local K9 handler not far from my area who had his dog shot and killed while the dog was off duty in the back yard.  Whoever killed the dog had gutts IMO to enter the officers personal residence and shoot his dog.  How could that have been prevented??  If a "bad guy" is crazy enough and have the balls to pull a trigger and kill anyone person or dog IMO both would be "toast".  The dog if trained properly will at best assist in attempting to regulate the situation be it disarm the bad guy or cause enough of a diversion that the handler can get to safety or their own gun. 

From the photo you've pointed out I wouldn't necessarily say the dog is "equipment oriented".  How could you tell that in just a milli second snap shot???  To test your theory I'd say put the sleeve in front of the dog, toss the sleeve and see if the dog goes for the sleeve or stays focused on the man.  If the dog is more interested in getting that sleeve then chances are yes it's equipment oriented, if the dog could care less where the sleeve is and is focussed on the "bad guy" then it's fair to say the dog is not equipment oriented.

Agar - Yes a guy with a gun can shoot anyone , the handler OR the dog which is in part my point . But specifically in terms of THIS photo all the guy had to do was turn the gun 30 degrees and goodbye dog. Why not  train the dog to go for the hand with the weapon?

Vicki-  I did not see the photo before I posted.  Now that I see the picture you are directing your question to I agree that IMO if this were my dog I was training I would have wanted the dog to bite the arm the weapon was in definately.  Because I have to agree with you that from that particular picture if this were a REAL attack the bad guy still has that arm free with the gun in it so most certainly this situation would have likely ended with the dog being shot.  That's why I feel it's important when training a PPD to learn to hit various parts of the body not just the arm.  If the dog knows to attack the arm/hand that the weapon is held in it has a much better chance to distract the bady guy with pain from the bite and he'd likely drop the gun.  That's probably the only way one would have a slight chance of the dog/handler not getting shot.

The idea of "teaching the dog to target a weapon" is old school, thought. Bill Koehler used to preach this. Like everything ideas and mindsets evolve (or should evolve).

You never, eve, ever, ever, teach a dog to attack or "cue" on anything other than the man or the handler command. Never.

If you teach the dog to attack on the cue of a weapon or "go after the weapon" you are training the dog to engage an object. When a dog is taught to engage an object, they do not have the ability to reason that the object is a weapon or not, or the bad guy is really a bad guy or not.

I teach my "personal protection" dog to attack a gun. My personal protection dog who is supposed to be out with my family protecting them. So my dog is trained to attack when a gun is pointed at me, well what happenes when my neighbor kid runs through my yard and squirts me with a squirt gun?

How is a dog supposed to recognize what consitutes a weapon? Is a knife a weapon? What happens to my friend who is helping me cut vegetables for my salad, turns and walks toward me with a knife?  how about a stun gun? What about a wallet? Does a dog know the difference between a wallet and a stun gun? How is the dog supposed to know the difference between a bad guy trying to hit me with a shovel and my neighbor doing yard work?

Once you train a dog to attack on a cue like that, they ahve no way to reason or differentiate the good from the bad. They have been trained to a conditioned response.

You should never do this. Anyone who does, is asking for trouble........

GARD, thanks for responding, I was hoping you would.  Question for you.   In general, is an 18 - 24 month old dog capable of being a solid "level 3" PPD?  I know even I hate to generalize but..........

Well a "level 3 PPD" can be pretty much whatever someone wants it to be, I guess