"Cops" show last night - Page 1

Last night while watching the show "Cops" and reading this quarter's WDA newsletter, the sound of a barking dog peaked my interest to the TV. I turned up the volume and watched closely....only to be horribly disappointed at watching this police dog sent to apprehend a fleeing criminal. He was pretty much running along with the guy, while super-imposed barking sound affects were obviously added in later. The guy was so busy paying attention to the dog running with him that he ran smack into a police car that cut in front of him...also comming dangerously close to hitting the dog. What did the dog do when the criminal fell to the ground??? He walked away looking a bit confused. They need to send that dog back to school or hand him his pink slip! lol.

HAHAH!!! Yeah I saw that one a few nights ago. I was wondering what was going on. At first they were like, "Little did the criminal know is that the police officer following him was a K-9 unit. Watch as he releases 85 pounds of German Shepherd". I was like "OH YEAH!", but then as you said, he didnt do anything. A complete disappointment.

Unfortunately this is not an unfamiliar event. I'm in law enforcement in the northeast and saw a similiar event in person. My partner and I were conducting an investigation and observed and unrelated foot chase in our area. The K-9 was relaesed and when it got to the suspect the dog just ran along side the suspect. THe k-9 nipped the suspect in the arm and released. The suspect went down to the ground on orders from the handler. Not because of the grip from the K-9. What a dissappointment. Kyle

well gee... could it be that this is because "some" Law enforcement agency's say and I quote, "we won't take anything past a Sch 1, if the dog goes past sch 1 they are just too controled and won't bite" could that be the problem ? They don't want fully trained dogs they want a crazed maniac of a dog, But could be that dog has not worked enough to be "confident" ? just my thoughts on it.

I know that K-9 training has changed over the years; I suppose because of lawsuits originating due to unwarranted bites on non-offending civilians. Essentially, many of the dogs are not as "hard" as they used to be due to more obedience training. I remember training days of the past when there was NO RECALL of a dispatched dog, and there was NO OUT once the takedown started. The out consisted of the K-9 officer and others having to lay on hands and physically remove the dog from the suspect. I think that we still see some hard dogs selected for the work, but nowadays obedience is imprinted on the dog to the end that he is under more control. Essentially, a nice civil-drive dog is detuned to the level of a sport dog. Is this a good thing? I really don't think so, but it is not my decision to make. If I was a K-9 officer I would want the most civil and level-headed dog possible since he has to protect my life. Bob-O

I had friends over one night recently who told me a hilarious similar true story. Their house had been used as a surveillance for a house across the road. Police and they stood watch in the bedroom, and at one point, a police dog was sent in for a search as gun-fire was heard. The gun fire was nothing to do with the house, it turned out, and from my friends bedroom window they were treated to a wonderful sight. The police dog entered the bedroom of the house being watched, proceeded to sniff around, then jump on the bed and tear to pieces the big fluffy teddy that lay on the bed. The cop arrived after the dog,looked very embarrassed, walloped the dog around the ear off the bed, and very hurridly hid the pieces of teddy inside his uniform and arranged the rest of the teddy back on the bed...and the pair left looking quite sensible, but no assailant was found - Mo Lakin Mascani

Didn't see the show but I am a retired cop from Cleveland. I worked narcotics most of my career and had close relationships with the departments canine units. Especially because of my interests in the dogs and having been a dog trainer in the USMC previously. I saw this first hand. The department had 7 dogs most of the time and NONE of them were worth a hill of beans when it came to police work. They were wonderful pets and great for public appearances though :) In fairness, the department had strick rules about using dogs to apprehend suspects or sniff people for drugs, it simply was not allowed. The real reason for it is usually not discussed. It had to do with the city being a majority African/American (funny story about that. I was met a white male who was born in Africa and he claimed African/American status to get extra points trying to become a officer for the department. He was turned down for the points :) Anyway, I digress. The reason was the way dogs were used during the 60's against the black community and no one wanted to remind anyone of that time period. I have no problem with that aspect as it is a political decision and I understand their thinking on that issue. What ticked me off was the udder uselessness of all the dogs for drug work, bomb work and tracking. Whenever we really needed drugs located, we did not call for one of our seven dogs, we called the local DEA canine officer who had an irish setter named "Red" (of course) and he was good. The problem with the departments canine dogs was the handlers, not the dogs, in my opinion. The handlers were not trained or experienced enough to keep their dogs sharp after the dogs were purchased. Part of that problem was that the department routinely used the canine officers for stupid things like "booking officers" or "report taking officers" and the like. The thinking was that these guys were not being used much at all (because of the political decisions) and so "let's find something else for them to do". This, of course caused the canine officers to get attitudes and not take the periodic training of thier dogs very serious. Another factor in the uselessness of the dogs was that the city wanted the most bang for thier bucks so they got dogs that did not specialize in anything but were "trained in everything", which made them look good on paper but not good in practical application. I don't know what other department/cities around the country do with their canine units, but in Cleveland, it was a joke (I retired two years ago).

Some departments are now moving to bark and hold only, no bite. Too much liability and having to pay the bad guys for dog bites. Doesn't make sense to me but that's how it is.

I train police dogs and can tell you that I see this too often also. I can tell you this is not all police dogs. When I worked the streets, I had a dual purpose dog, patrol narcotics with tracking. My first year was getting use to the dog, second we seized over 1 million dollars worth of narcotics. Tracking he was amazing, he could track for hours to the point one night my backup officers were like are you sure he is on the track, as we came over the next hill you could see the suspects foot prints going across a field that had fresh frost on it. His bite work was good, he had no problem biteing the suspect, usually where he wanted to, leg, groin ect. How did the dog get this way, a hell of alot of training, mostly on my own time. Dog was also very social, could go into schools and play with the kids. With departments and budgets the first place that is usually cut is the K-9 units. One of the other areas you see a problem in is training. Lack of good decoys and the most important thing is lack of use of hidden sleeves. I had someone come to me about his K-9 not engageing a suspect but running along side the suspect. Dog was looking for the sleeve. Tried the dog on a hidden sleeve, would not engage. After working with the dog we turned this around. Saw the pictures of the next deployment (suspect) and the dog definetly engaged. I trained with another departments k-9 unit. They had money, and trained weekly and properly. This department also trains with one of the local SChutzhund guys. One of there dogs engaged a suspect that was shooting at a backup officer, dog got shot but continued to take the suspect down and disarmed him probably saving the officers life as he was caught out in the open. So just like the disappointing show on military dogs, don't judge them all by this. There are ggod dogs out there with good trainers and good dogs with not so good trainers.

Realisticly hardly any police officers handle "man eaters". These days departments are getting away from these laibilities. It's pretty sad that a criminal can sue our police force, for trying to uphold the law but thats the way it is. I personaly think if you want to run from the cops, you should get a bite or two. Rediculous is, the assailants having almost more rights than their victims. The reason departments don't have the dogs they need, is lack of funding and training for K-9 officers in most cases. These guys get paid more than their non K-9 counterparts so many take the job for that aspect, even if they have no prior training or background with dogs. Just because a person is a K-9 officer doesn't mean they know how to handle a dog, far less read a dog, or train a dog. You don't get the job by what you know, it's how long you have been in line. Some departments leave it up to the handler to buy the dog, others provide one. It's always a different story with each police force, their are no set guidlines or rules of how things get done from state to state. Lawsuits are so feared, many forces don't have dogs at all, or only narcotic and bomb sniffing dogs. No bite trained dogs. America has kind of shot itself in the foot when it comes to "our" rights. Criminals should lose some of their rights, not just to freedom, when they break the law. I hate that I have no medical insurance now, but I sure pay taxes so the guys on death row can get cancer treatments and heartbi-passes to leangthen their lives. Absolute assenine backwards ways. I want to know why criminals that fail to yeild to the police, can then turn around and sue when they are bit? These men have driven wreckless, endagered countless lives, brandished weapons and such yet they have rights? What about the rights of the kids they gunned down or ran over? The Police should have the harder dogs, these dogs have to take tremendous pressure and go into the line of fire, when men can't or won't. On the other hand our Officers need the training to handle these kinds of dogs. $ and politics seem get in the way more often than not. Sorry for ranting but the Officers shouldn't take all of the finger pointing when it comes to bad dogs. Their hands are tied and it's rather frusterating to watch our law inforcement lose an invaluable tool, "Dogs" because they aren't equipt with what they need and have to make do with what they have.