CDZ Would Police Dogs be an effective means to neutralize school shooters?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

As I've posted before there is no silver bullet solution to the school shooter problem. It will be like fighting cancer, taking a 'cocktail' of deterrents that all together reduce the threat. Maybe trained dogs and drones will be part of that cocktail, maybe not. The point of a debate thread is to discuss pros and cons not just say "Oh that won't happen because I said so".

Let the teachers carry or have access to weapons in the classroom. Problem solved.

No more discussion needed.

Problem not solved. What happens when the teachers decide they don't want to confront someone cutting loose with an AR-15? You know kind of like what just happened with trained police officers?

They don't have to confront them! When the shooter tries to get through the door the teacher can return fire. I doubt they will try that route even if they survive. hat will allow the teacher to protect themselves and the students.

I would feel sorry for anyone trying to get into my classroom if I was armed. All the advantage is mine!

As for those police officers, I hope they never get a good night's sleep for the rest of their lives!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Only if the dog is outfitted with the most protective and 100% bulletproof vest (also is very important bulletproof protection for the head of the dog) ONLY in that case.

Dogs are not a comodity to do with them as people like. They have a life they love life as much as you and I.

Somebody else watches too much TV!

 

[usmbguest5318]

Expensive, impractical, some kids getting bit.

The key question I am posing is "Would a trained dog be EFFECTIVE" at neutralizing a shooter. Are there specific reasons why that wouldn't work? I thought of one, large dogs have problems running on linoleum type floors typical in a school so their speed is effected.

I thought of one, large dogs have problems running on linoleum type floors typical in a school so their speed is effected.

While a dog's speed may be somewhat diminished by the flooring's relative lack of friction, the greater challenge to the dog will be turns and stopping, although the shooter's body, upon the dog's hitting it, will provide enough resistance to adequately mitigate the stopping problem. Unfortunately, a bullet hitting the dog, regardless of whether it hits the bulletproof vest you suggested or hits the dog's unprotected bits -- particularly the bits that one sees when a dog is running straight on toward one -- will also mitigate the stopping problem, regardless of whether it kills the dog.

Even though wearing body armor may prevent a bullet from penetrating one's skin, one is nonetheless affected by the force of the impact, which is akin to being hit by a club. In other words, the impact alone packs quite a wallop, and that's on a human. The resistive force is even more impactful on a less massive creature. So while there's no guarantee that the shooter's bullets will hit the dog, any one that does will stop the dog's advance.

That said, I think your suggestion has some merit and I acknowledge its tactical value: the shooter must address the threat of the approaching dog before proceeding to shoot more humans. In light of that sending in several attack dogs could well be effective in neutralizing the shooter because unless the shooter is proficient in parrying dog attacks, only one needs to get to the shooter. Also, seeing a phalanx of dogs bearing down, a shooter is very likely to disengage his/her assault on humans, perhaps even taking flight/cover from them and not resuming the attack on people.

The biggest shortcoming with your proposal is that it is reactive rather than proactive. There's no shortage of effective tactical responses to an active shooter; the dog idea is but another, and I suspect it's one that law enforcement professionals consider on a situation-by-situation basis. The problem the country faces is not how to take down an active shooter, but rather (1) how to materially reduce a would-be active shooter's means and opportunity to become an active shooter and (2) how to materially dissuade a would-be active shooter from construing to become an active shooter.

Would security guards (professional ones like the Secret Service or other folks who provide protection for folks paying "big coin" for it) accompanied by a pair of dogs (with or without body armor) may have some deterring impact, though I have no way to quantify that impact or to say for sure that it will. After all, active shooters don't think rationally, other than perhaps with regard to planning their attacks.

 

[K9Buck]

Expensive, impractical, some kids getting bit.

The key question I am posing is "Would a trained dog be EFFECTIVE" at neutralizing a shooter. Are there specific reasons why that wouldn't work? I thought of one, large dogs have problems running on linoleum type floors typical in a school so their speed is effected.

I thought of one, large dogs have problems running on linoleum type floors typical in a school so their speed is effected.

While a dog's speed may be somewhat diminished by the flooring's relative lack of friction, the greater challenge to the dog will be turns and stopping, although the shooter's body, upon the dog's hitting it, will provide enough resistance to adequately mitigate the stopping problem. Unfortunately, a bullet hitting the dog, regardless of whether it hits the bulletproof vest you suggested or hits the dog's unprotected bits -- particularly the bits that one sees when a dog is running straight on toward one -- will also mitigate the stopping problem, regardless of whether it kills the dog.

Even though wearing body armor may prevent a bullet from penetrating one's skin, one is nonetheless affected by the force of the impact, which is akin to being hit by a club. In other words, the impact alone packs quite a wallop, and that's on a human. The resistive force is even more impactful on a less massive creature. So while there's no guarantee that the shooter's bullets will hit the dog, any one that does will stop the dog's advance.

That said, I think your suggestion has some merit and I acknowledge its tactical value: the shooter must address the threat of the approaching dog before proceeding to shoot more humans. In light of that sending in several attack dogs could well be effective in neutralizing the shooter because unless the shooter is proficient in parrying dog attacks, only one needs to get to the shooter. Also, seeing a phalanx of dogs bearing down, a shooter is very likely to disengage his/her assault on humans, perhaps even taking flight/cover from them and not resuming the attack on people.

The biggest shortcoming with your proposal is that it is reactive rather than proactive. There's no shortage of effective tactical responses to an active shooter; the dog idea is but another, and I suspect it's one that law enforcement professionals consider on a situation-by-situation basis. The problem the country faces is not how to take down an active shooter, but rather (1) how to materially reduce a would-be active shooter's means and opportunity to become an active shooter and (2) how to materially dissuade a would-be active shooter from construing to become an active shooter.

Would security guards (professional ones like the Secret Service or other folks who provide protection for folks paying "big coin" for it) accompanied by a pair of dogs (with or without body armor) may have some deterring impact, though I have no way to quantify that impact or to say for sure that it will. After all, active shooters don't think rationally, other than perhaps with regard to planning their attacks.

You said it far more eloquently than me. Thanks.

 

[K9Buck]

Another high probability issue with sending a dog onto a shooter is that, if there are kids and teachers running and screaming for their lives, it's always a possibility that the dog could actually attack one of them. My guess is a majority of PSD's WOULD correctly target and attack the shooter. But, you might be surprised at what a lot of good dogs will do in that type of an environment.

The dog going onto the shooter is very likely a suicide mission for the dog. I think a lot of handlers would be hesitant to send their partner and best friend to their death, but some handlers have had to do so. It goes with the territory.

 

[strollingbones]

for someone like me...seeing a dog killed would be just as traumatic as seeing a person killed....very few dogs deserve to be killed....cant say that for people

 

[usmbguest5318]

Thanks.

YW

 

[strollingbones]

the slick floor is an issue....my dobies always had trouble on tile and slick floors.....one would just lay down and stop...i just do not like the idea of having to have dogs killed due to the inability of this culture to lay down guns

 

[K9Buck]

I just do not like the idea of having to have dogs killed due to the inability of this culture to obey the law.

I fixed it for you.

 

[strollingbones]

good point.....if the gun laws on the book were enforced ....it would help....i am a gun owner....i do not want to ban guns but damn there is a point where the killing is getting outta hand....in inner cities and high schools....co has been arming teachers who volunteered....i have all kinds of issues with that but i would rather see teachers armed than dogs being used..

interesting local story....barnett guns had fire in their range..

Tracer round ignites fire at Hampton indoor gun range

now the owner has made a private range on his property and the neighbors are not happy

Concerns grow in Carter County community after neighbor builds outdoor gun range

 

[K9Buck]

i would rather see teachers armed than dogs being used.

I'm with you there.

 

[usmbguest5318]

for someone like me...seeing a dog killed would be just as traumatic as seeing a person killed....very few dogs deserve to be killed....cant say that for people

Well, I respect that you're entitled to feel that way. For my part, well, I don't value a canine's life nearly as much as I do a person's life. On a species level, I might be of a different mind, but obviously that consideration isn't in play for the situation under discussion; no last dog of a given species or subspecies is going to be trained, much less deployed, to parry a shooter.

 

[usmbguest5318]

i would rather see teachers armed than dogs being used.

I'm with you there.

As goes the dogs and the armed teachers I'm reminded of an axiom that I have found to be universally true: The better of two bad ideas is still a bad idea.

 

[debbiedowner]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Big dogs in schools alone might work.....and a calming influence on students too.

I was just thinking this in bigger schools maybe 4 or 5 smaller schools a couple get to know the kids and more likely attack anyone trying to do harm or trained by whistle commands.

 

[evenflow1969]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Can not see how it would hurt! Likely cut down on drugs in school too!

 

[MarathonMike]

I see the use of trained dogs as one of several options to reduce the threat of a shooter in a school. I never said at any point that trained dogs are the end all solution. Patrol officers with or without trained dogs, armed staff, surveillance cameras and in the future min-drones, robots etc. could all be school protection options.

The first step is of course removing the gun-free zone designation and the second is taking steps at every school to reduce the threat, whatever is most practical to implement at that school. What works for a school of three hundred kids might not work as well for a school with three thousand kids. Like I've said there is no one stop solution and there is no way, no matter how much you spend to completely eliminate the threat. But we can do a lot better than we have done up until this point which is nothing.

 

[martybegan]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Big dogs in schools alone might work.....and a calming influence on students too.

The type of dogs you train to charge after a person with a gun are not the type of dogs you have in contact with the general population.

true...but the mere presence of big dogs would be a deterrent, imo.

Only if the bad guys were aware of it, and a person willing to shoot dozens of their own classmates may not have a soft spot for a dog either.

 

[MarathonMike]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Big dogs in schools alone might work.....and a calming influence on students too.

The type of dogs you train to charge after a person with a gun are not the type of dogs you have in contact with the general population.

true...but the mere presence of big dogs would be a deterrent, imo.

Only if the bad guys were aware of it, and a person willing to shoot dozens of their own classmates may not have a soft spot for a dog either.

Well, I think the deterrent of large trained dogs wouldn't be necessarily having a soft spot for them but rather the prospect of being mauled if the shooter happens to miss.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Can not see how it would hurt! Likely cut down on drugs in school too!

Likely cut down on drugs in school too!

Drug detection is certainly a good supplemental use to which the dogs may be put seeing as they'd be there.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Given that most of the shooting in a school attack happens without warning and is over within a few minutes, rapid response is essential. Would a Police Dog under the control of a patrolling officer be effective against a shooter? I believe it would. The dog could also be outfitted with a bullet proof vest to increase it's chances of surviving. What do you think?

Can not see how it would hurt! Likely cut down on drugs in school too!

Likely cut down on drugs in school too!

Drug detection is certainly a good supplemental use to which the dogs may be put seeing as they'd be there.

You do understand that many drug detection dogs are NOT used for taking down armed suspects. There are multi-purpose dogs, but not all of them can do it all.