[David Frost]

<<<I once read somewhere that a K-9 supervisor was leery of \"dog lovers\" becoming K-9 officers as they might hesitate to let the K-9 do what it was intended to do.>>>

This should be part of the selection procedure, for new handlers. While I can appreciate the bond that grows between a handler and their dog, it's imperitive the dog is used as intended. That doesn't mean the dog is cannon fodder, however there certainly are those occasions where a dog will be put directly into harm's way. The first time I ever saw a handler hesitate deploying a dog due to the possible danger involved, it would be the last time as a handler.

DFrost

 

[David Frost]

Anytime someone has to die a violent death should be disturbing. That doesn't mean it shouldn't have happened. That he had a flip flop in his hand was determined after the fact, not before. From what the officers knew, he had a gun, had stated he would use it, evidently he had convinced the officers he would use it. Which adds to the saying; Never bring a flip flop to a gun fight. That the dog was shot by officers would indicate they may be in need of additional training relative working with a released canine.

DFrost

 

[David Frost]

A dog in a combat zone is a different animal, by design, than one we would use on the streets of the US in a law enforcement capacity.

DFrost

 

[David Frost]

Don't be confused. When I speak of the MWD, I'm mostly referring to their use as drug detectors, explosives detectors and patrol doing law enforcement work. In combat the roles are quite a bit different. Working base patrol I may release my dog on a person fleeing from a breaking and entering. In a combat zone, I'm not going to release my dog on a sapper team. Combat is nothing like law enforcement. My answer to the question of "raising dogs" does not change. The training however may well change depending on the circumstancses.

DFrost

 

[David Frost]

No not a different animal, a different approach to training.

DFrost