Police dogs are in fact officers, and have ranks. Often dogs outrank their handlers.
Under the law? I have no doubt they have ceremonial rank, but I can’t see a dog with higher rank ordering the human handler to perform a task.
“Human, I order you to commander that food truck… woof woof” 
1 Like
Yeah. Under the law. You should just look it up instead of asking us the same questions over and over hoping for different answers.
2 Likes
Dogs were used to track fleeing persons for centuries before than the American slave trade. The practice probably existed in Sumer and Babylon. Not that it was ever a good thing, but it’s been around in a larger arena than American slavery.
No. You misunderstood. I’m talking about when everyone had a chance. Back before Patrol dogs Sentry dogs were the thing. They roamed behind fences that had clear signs on them that said lethal force will be used if you pass this barrier. They did not have handlers other than escorts and feeders.
A dog with a competent handler would never go for the throat.
The handlers go for the throat sometimes. Why would you say that they would stop their dogs from doing so?!?
#ICan’tBreathe
11 Likes
but not COMPETENT ones /s
#NoTrueScotsman
10 Likes
The best trained police dog with the best trained handler in the world can’t pin a person’s arms behind their back and slap on a pair of handcuffs. A dog has but one tool for physically apprehending a suspect: its big sharp teeth.
Enlisting an animal to attack a human being in the name of law and order is inherently cruel to the suspect and the animal alike.
8 Likes
When I was in the USAF part of our training was being bitten by dogs. We started with burlap sleeves that allowed the dogs to chew away. Then advanced to leather sleeves. Once you’ve been bitten through burlap you begin to respect a dog’s bite. The leather sleeve hurts.
If a handler cannot keep a dog away from a throat he’s/she’s a fake. It’s not like we just let them go. They’re on a leash.
Your experience in the armed forces is irrelevant to how police handle and use dogs to savage people
11 Likes
I can agree with that. Who is training dogs for such violence if not the military?
1 Like
Imagine a world in which cops were routinely issued some kind of flesh-puncturing harpoon for apprehending and immobilizing suspects.
Predictably, this leads to a whole lot of injured civilians. Some are sent to the hospital with relatively minor puncture wounds to the legs and calves. Others are horrifically maimed or killed, with incidents including faces and scrotums torn from bodies.
Then when any member of the public questions whether police have demonstrated the need or responsibility to be issued flesh-puncturing harpoons, apologists for the practice respond with "Don’t blame the tool! A properly trained harpoonist would never aim for the scrotum!"
That’s what the apologists for use of police dogs sound like right now.
11 Likes
But I don’t feel bad for the harpoon.
1 Like
If it helps with the metaphor then substitute the flesh harpoon with some kind of porcupine launcher.
4 Likes
MWD does not ÷ Mass Weapon of Destruction .
Dogs are basically chill. The handler sets the tone.
but but responsible X owners!
it’s the same tired and counterfactual arguments as gun use. a dog who is trained to attack and kill is similar to a gun.
cops shouldn’t be toting guns around on the regular, nor should they be bringing attack dogs around either. only the rare or fantasy scenario exists where the insert death weapon of choice here saves the day. in fact the death weapons cause much more harm than help, but all the harm is written off as user error.
fing who cares why the harm has happened. it’s a clear fact these “tools” aren’t helping.
the main difference between responsible dog handling and responsible gun handling, is that dogs can be retrained for actually useful purposes in law enforcement. the guns can only be melted down.
4 Likes
Tools amplify human intent. They can make things better for society, or they can make things worse. In the case of police dogs, the small benefits afforded by police dogs when their handlers have societally beneficial intentions can be weighed against the additional utility afforded by a police dog to a person intent on making things worse. And I think police dogs fail this test.
1 Like
i guess i would say…
tools amplify specific kinds of human intent. whether it’s a trained attack dog, a gun, or a quisinart we choose specific tools to accomplish specific outcomes. otherwise every tool would be equally good for every situation.
and yeah not every tool has a societally beneficial outcome when used in everyday situations.
1 Like
The only time cop is trained to pull a gun is when he plans to shot. You release your dog to subdue.
