# PPD vs. Family Pet Biting Intruder



## Lance Green

We are new to the forum so not sure if this has been asked. So here goes...

We purchased a GSD for PP because of my work hours and my wife and children being home alone. There have been several home invasions in our neighborhood.

We are curious to know if there is an increased liability if a PPD bites an intruder vs a family pet doing the biting. We are unsure about discussing his training with friends/neighbors or posting his training videos on the internet in case an attorney finds the "evidence".

Do those of you with PPD discuss the training with people you know or worry about the videos or isn't it a big deal?

Thanks for your input, 
Lance and Paula


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Not a big deal to me.


----------



## Chris Michalek

Hi Lance,

There have been a few break ins in my neighborhood as well. Both houses on either side of mine have been broken into but mine was left untouched. I think it's obvious why but for which reason I don't know 1) Thieves have seen or have heard my dogs or 2) we've done several home invasion inside and around my house. The neighbors have see this and they've told others that I have dogs that are trained to bite.

I think if you think like a thief, unless you're stupid or wasted, you're going to check out a house first and if you know there is a big dog there then you skip that house. You'd especially skip that house if you know there is a trained rottweiler that bites.

There are some Pets that might bite a man for real but in general a dog is too afraid to bite because they've been conditioned not to since they were a pup. That said you can't trust even a trained dog to bite until he does. 

Is this your only dog? You might want to go with the two dog security system, a little shit terrier that barks at everything and your badass GSD that either looks tough or IS tough. 

You could even give your GSD a vicious sounding dog name - Havok, Killer, Sniper or Howard Gaines III


----------



## Anna Kasho

Chris Michalek said:


> You could even give your GSD a vicious sounding dog name - Havok, Killer, Sniper or Howard Gaines III


Beware, if you do this, you may end up with some of the nicest dogs on the planet. My Cyko and Havoc are anything but. The top three nasty vicious biters I know are named Lovey, Fluffy, and Cuddles.=; :lol:


----------



## David Scholes

Anna Kasho said:


> Beware, if you do this, you may end up with some of the nicest dogs on the planet. My Cyko and Havoc are anything but. The top three nasty vicious biters I know are named Lovey, Fluffy, and Cuddles.=; :lol:


For liability reasons I'd stick with the "fluffy" names especially for the dogs that will bite.


----------



## Anne Vaini

Ooo.... Don't forget "Buttercup," a male Mal that got the name simply because the handler wanted to call out "Halt, or I'll send buttercup!" ROFL :lol:


----------



## Lance Green

Chris,

Our other dog will bark, but if you give him a good neck scratching he would help you carry out the TV!! And he is one of those nasty BULLY BREEDS. Go figure!


----------



## Chris Michalek

Lance Green said:


> Chris,
> 
> Our other dog will bark, but if you give him a good neck scratching he would help you carry out the TV!! And he is one of those nasty BULLY BREEDS. Go figure!



I think my dogs would probably do that too, that why I make myself look tough and do bite work in my front yard. It works.


----------



## Bob Scott

Lance, the insurance thing is often a breed related issue (unfortunately). For all my dogs in bite training and those not, I make sure to get the AKC CGC certificate. It may be a bit lame in the real dog world but it holds a bit of leverage with the law. I get the ATTS TT title also.


----------



## Anne Vaini

Bob Scott said:


> Lance, the insurance thing is often a breed related issue (unfortunately). For all my dogs in bite training and those not, I make sure to get the AKC CGC certificate. It may be a bit lame in the real dog world but it holds a bit of leverage with the law. I get the ATTS TT title also.


Know your laws. I helped put a non-breed-specific dangerous dog law through here (a breed ban was proposed).


> 6.08.045 Dangerous dogs. A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens and visitors of the city of Eau Claire by reasonable regulation of dangerous dogs.
> B. Definitions.
> 1. “City” means the city of Eau Claire, or the official, agent, or employee of the city designated by the city manager.
> 2. “Dangerous dog”, as used in this section, means:
> *a. Any dog which, without provocation, has attacked, bitten, or injured any human being or domestic animal on public or private property; or *
> b. Any dog which, without provocation, behaves in a manner that a reasonable person would believe poses an unjustified imminent threat of serious injury or death to one or more persons or domestic
> animals; or
> c. Any dog which is owned, harbored, or trained primarily or in part for the purpose of dog fighting.
> 3. “Department” means the city of Eau Claire police department.
> 4. “Harbored” means that the dog has been fed or sheltered for 3 or more consecutive 24 hour periods. This definition shall not apply to any veterinary clinic or boarding kennel in the city.
> 5. “Owner” means any person, partnership, corporation, or other legal entity owning, harboring, or keeping any dog, or in the case of a person under the age of 18, that person’s parent or legal guardian.
> C. Prohibitions.
> 1. No person shall own, harbor, keep, or maintain within the city limits any dangerous dog.
> 2. No person shall offer for sale, sell, give away, breed, buy, or attempt to buy any dangerous dog
> within the city.
> *3. No person shall own or harbor any dog for the purpose of dog fighting or use any dog for the purpose of causing or encouraging said dog to attack human beings or domestic animals when not provoked.*
> 4. No person shall bring a dangerous dog onto any off-leash recreation area designated by the city.
> 5. No person shall obstruct, provide false information, or otherwise unreasonably interfere with officers of the department in the enforcement of this section or in the capture of any dog suspected of being dangerous.
> D. Removal. The department, through the chief of police or his or her designee, may impound any dog suspected of being dangerous for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days or may, after considering application of the relevant evidence in subsection B. 2., determine the dog to be a dangerous dog.
> 1. If the dog is determined to be dangerous, the department shall order the dog removed from the city within ten (10) days of the written order of the city.
> 2. If the dog is determined dangerous under subsection B. 2. a., the department may, in addition to the provisions of subsection D. 1., destroy the dog with the consent of the dog owner or commence an action to destroy the dog as provided in s. 174.02(3), Wis. Stats.
> 3. All orders of the city under this subsection shall be in writing and served upon or mailed to the owner of the dangerous dog at the owner’s last known address. The city shall at all times maintain a current list of all
> known dangerous dogs for which orders have been issued.
> 153-1 (Eau Claire 12/2006)
> 6.08.045
> 4. A copy of all orders shall be filed at the time of service or mailing with the city clerk and the city clerk shall retain such orders with the dog license records. If a dangerous dog is unlicensed at the time of issuance
> of any order, the city clerk shall report it to the department.
> 5. The city clerk shall not issue a dog license to the owner of any dog determined to be dangerous under this section, except as authorized under subsection E.
> 6. The owner of any dog determined to be dangerous under this subsection shall be responsible for all costs associated with the impoundment, care or removal of the dog.
> 7. The city shall not assess the owner of a dog not determined to be dangerous any costs of impoundment or care under this subsection.
> E. Duration of dangerous dog status.
> *1. Upon the petition of the owner of a dog that has been previously determined to be dangerous and later removed from the city under subsection D. 1., the city may remove the dog from its list of dangerous dogs
> if:
> a. The owner demonstrates to the department that there have been no additional reported
> instances anywhere of the behavior, as defined in subsection B. 2., within a 36-month period from the date of the order to remove the dog from the city under subsection D. 1.; and
> b. The owner of the dog demonstrates to the department that changes in circumstances or
> measures taken by the owner have mitigated the risk to public safety; and
> c. The owner presents to the department proof from a dog training specialist accredited by
> the American Kennel Club (AKC) that the dog has been certified and passed the AKC canine good citizen program; and
> d. The department concludes from all of the evidence presented that the dog does not present a risk to public safety.
> 2. The provisions of subsection E. 1. shall not apply to:
> a. The owner of a dog that was removed from the city under (D.)(1.), was subsequently removed from the list of dangerous dogs under subsection E. 1., and was then removed from the city under (D.)(1.),
> a second time; or
> b. The owner of a dog removed from the city under subsection D. 1. who is ineligible under subsection E. 2. a.
> 3. The city shall notify the petitioning owner in writing of all decisions under this subsection, and shall file a copy of all orders with the city clerk.
> 4. If a city order removes a dog from the list of dangerous dogs, the city may issue a dog license to the owner of that dog as of the date of the order.*
> F. Penalty. Any person who violates any part of subsection C. shall forfeit for each violation an amount not
> less than $60 nor more than $500, plus the costs of prosecution, including any expert testimony fees necessitated by
> enforcement of this subsection. Every day that any violation of this subsection C. continues shall be deemed a
> separate offense.
> G. Repeat offenders. Any person that repeatedly violates any part of subsection C. shall forfeit an amount
> double the deposit set forth in subsection F. Every day that any violation of this subsection continues shall be
> deemed a separate offense.
> H. Exemptions. The provisions of this section shall not apply to dogs owned by law enforcement agencies
> and used for law enforcement purposes.
> I. Severability. If any part of this section is found to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the
> validity of the remaining parts shall not be affected. (Ord. 6703 §1, 2006.)


So as long as I don't train an FR object guard, I'm good!


----------



## jay lyda

Chris Michalek said:


> You could even give your GSD a vicious sounding dog name - Havok, Killer, Sniper or *Howard Gaines III*


Dude, that was funny!!


----------



## Lance Green

Good suggestion! We were already looking in to that.


----------



## Mike Scheiber

Lance Green said:


> We are new to the forum so not sure if this has been asked. So here goes...
> 
> We purchased a GSD for PP because of my work hours and my wife and children being home alone. There have been several home invasions in our neighborhood.
> 
> We are curious to know if there is an increased liability if a PPD bites an intruder vs a family pet doing the biting. We are unsure about discussing his training with friends/neighbors or posting his training videos on the internet in case an attorney finds the "evidence".
> 
> Do those of you with PPD discuss the training with people you know or worry about the videos or isn't it a big deal?
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> Lance and Paula


Who dose your dog see more intruders or family and friends the one he sees most of are the ones I would worry the most about getting bit.
My neighbors don't have a clue what I do with my dog one of my wife's friend's asked if she thought I was chasing tail instead of training my dog all the time because he doesnt know shit at home he has little if any manners or training carries a kong all the time.
As for video don't care.


----------



## Dan Long

I don't care if my neighbors know. We train at my house sometimes and I hope they see what is going on. A little bitework display goes a long way in having the less savory segment of our population from targeting my house.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I had a neighbor years ago that after a few break ins in the neighborhood would sit on his porch with his shotgun.

The scary part was he was clad in his underwear (tighty witey) and cowboy boots.

Had to admit, he never got broken into.


----------



## Mike Scheiber

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I had a neighbor years ago that after a few break ins in the neighborhood would sit on his porch with his shotgun.
> 
> The scary part was he was clad in his underwear (tighty witey) and cowboy boots.
> 
> Had to admit, he never got broken into.


Problem solved 15 minutes of this once a month all these mofos on here could save a ton of money on dog food for there PPD's 
Since they would be jobless a couple of them look like they could make a decent Schutzhund dogs


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Chris you've hurt my feelings. BoooHooo..

I shoot on my farm and dog train; my neighbor was broken into a few years ago and they did some damage. The advantages of living out and on a farm...you can shoot and do what you please. If folks see you have a dog that is doing bite work the chances of them wanting to mess around become slim.

Break-ins are for one main reason, cash and resale items. Unless you are running a drug house, or you boast about what you have the risk is slim as well. I teach for a living so most crooks will look at me and go, "Poor thing, here take a few bucks!" :lol: 

Like on the other post, if they see working dogs in action, no smart person will want to be remarked by one. I have felt the pearls of K-9 knowledge and don't wish to explore any deeper. Giving your dog a sissy name can also be a strike against you. Folks who wish no ill will against you might get eaten , just because *Fluffy *was fluffy. 

And if you're going to name it after me as Chris put out there, you better make sure your dog is damn good looking. Don't want the image messed with by copycats!!! :mrgreen:


----------



## Bob Scott

Before I moved I made damn sure everyone around me knew the potential of my dogs. 
Where I'm at now I think I would probably have to put one of those cute red scarves around their neck before I did any bite work at home..........maybe use a flexi also. 
:-k ....or would my dogs look better in blue? :-k .......To many decisions!


----------



## ann schnerre

i think red would be the better choice bob.


----------



## Josiah Neuman

Has anyone here ever had to defend themself or the actions of their dog for biting/protecting? If so, did the training ever come into question?

I am pretty sure law enforcement is also held accountable for the training and outcome of a bite on the streets. 

Josiah


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

A better question is how many have had to use their dog. You will find the numbers rediculously low. .05% : )


----------



## Lance Green

Josiah Neuman said:


> Has anyone here ever had to defend themself or the actions of their dog for biting/protecting? If so, did the training ever come into question?
> 
> I am pretty sure law enforcement is also held accountable for the training and outcome of a bite on the streets.
> 
> Josiah


 
Thats what we were wondering. Would it be better if all parties, including Law Enforcement, thought the dog was just a "family Pet" doing the biting.?
Thanks


----------



## Josiah Neuman

If a bite incident occurs and the other party involved decides to take legal action, the training would surface in deposition. Any thoughts from the board on whether or not the prosecuting attorney would enter youtube videos of the PPD involved as evidence? 

Whether or not a pet vs. PPD is more of a liability revolves around the intent of use. I.e. the dog is sent after someone a city block away to "attack" rather than - someone jumps you walking down the sidewalk and your dog on leash protects you.

One case that comes to mind is Diana Whipple / San Francisco - there was a lot of talk about whether or not the dogs were trained to bite, owners responsibility to restrain or prevent them from attacking, etc. I think Marjorie Knoller is still doing prison time....

Josiah


----------



## Mike Scheiber

Josiah Neuman said:


> Has anyone here ever had to defend themself or the actions of their dog for biting/protecting? If so, did the training ever come into question?
> 
> I am pretty sure law enforcement is also held accountable for the training and outcome of a bite on the streets.
> 
> Josiah


Yes my SCH III Rottweiler did bite a drunk who was causing my wife troubles. I'm not going to go through the hole story how ever I did have my day in Dog Cort with Animal Control and some other people who I cant remember who, this was 15yrs ago. 
I went in with signed statements from all my surrounding neighbors also some from friends and family. Though Joker is long dead he may still hold the record for the only dog to deliberately bite someone in the city of Minneapolis and not be deemed a dangerous dog.
Now things could have gone quite a different way had ANT ONE known he was "bite trained" for Schutzhund.
I could have had all sorts of hell to pay that drunk could have ended up living in my house and I could end up on the street if I went around bragging and talking about Schutzhund and that I train with a club that teaches dogs to bite. Shit they could have been dragged in to it.
Our club bylaws are very clear that we don't train street dog's, cop dog's, or PPD dog's.


----------



## Mike Scheiber

I should mention my dog wasn't trained to bite at home or any thing other than a sleeve he took it upon himself.


----------



## Chad Byerly

Thanks for sharing your story, Mike. I now understand the personal nature of your concern regarding PPD training. I'm glad that you (and your dog!) faired well legally, and understand how you feel it could have gone badly. 

Without the whole story, was it a good bite?:wink:


----------



## Mike Scheiber

Chad Byerly said:


> was it a good bite?:wink:


I suppose not, no broken bones but a nice forearm bite :mrgreen: only punctures.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Josiah Neuman said:


> If a bite incident occurs and the other party involved decides to take legal action, the training would surface in deposition. Any thoughts from the board on whether or not the prosecuting attorney would enter youtube videos of the PPD involved as evidence?



And the kicker here is are they 100% accurate videos? The difference between cops and "sport" is easy. Cops MUST certify and recertify with their dogs. The K-9 unit is an extension of the state, hence bigger liability monies. This is also the reason cops can't bring their "family" dog on the job to find drugs or do patrol work. A K-9 training log is always part of the big picture in bite cases. Most likely 85% of the folks on this board don't keep a 100% accurate training log or a log to begin with! You go to training, you flop out on the field, you do a little fun stuff with your dag and then go home. 

How many people ever use the their dog? How many ever use the homeowner's policy, need to shoot a person breaking in, or need to call in CPR after training....damn few. But IF you need it then it's priceless!


----------



## Josiah Neuman

Howard Gaines III said:


> [/color]
> The difference between cops and "sport" is easy. Cops MUST certify and recertify with their dogs.


And do you think the requirements of the K-9 certification are comparable to the bite sports? Easier or harder? If you had to compare it to Sch - would you say the certification is comparable to a I, II, or III?

Josiah


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Can of worms there.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Can of worms there.


LOL and not a Pro fisherman either!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Wicked\\/ \\/ \\/


----------



## David Frost

A favorite term used relative to liability and police working dogs is; held to a higher standard. There are numerous court decisions already in place that control training, utilization and deployment of a PSD. While each case is certainly based on it's own merit, previous court decisions are used extensively as a measurement. In the PSD world it's not a matter of "if" you are going to be sued, it's "when". 

DFrost


----------



## Chris Michalek

David Frost said:


> A favorite term used relative to liability and police working dogs is; held to a higher standard. There are numerous court decisions already in place that control training, utilization and deployment of a PSD. While each case is certainly based on it's own merit, previous court decisions are used extensively as a measurement. In the PSD world it's not a matter of "if" you are going to be sued, it's "when".
> 
> DFrost


speaking of being sued. I up'd my homeowners policy to $1M for only $125 a year. It's worth it to me because I have one bite trained dog, a puppy training to be bite trained and a potential fear aggressive rott.

All it takes is less than a second of irresponsibility and you could be sued.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Chris Michalek said:


> speaking of being sued. I up'd my homeowners policy to $1M for only $125 a year. It's worth it to me because I have one bite trained dog, a puppy training to be bite trained and a potential fear aggressive rott.
> 
> All it takes is less than a second of irresponsibility and you could be sued.


Chris what do they cover with the dog issue? Is it breed related?


----------



## Chris Michalek

Howard Gaines III said:


> Chris what do they cover with the dog issue? Is it breed related?



I just told them I have a mixed breed dog and I wanted protection against being sued. They said I could up the policy to $1M and that should cover medical and potential civil suits for damage. We have Wells Fargo insurance because my wife is an employee.


----------



## will fernandez

Jeff 

I will open your can of worms. Most PSD certificaitions aren't that hard. If you have trained and competed in any of the dog sports you could train for a PSD Cert. However, certification is not real life. It is all the other training that you do that makes a Police Dog. Certification is just a piece of paper that states your dog will track, apprehend, release, search and so forth to a standard.


----------



## David Frost

will fernandez said:


> Jeff
> 
> I will open your can of worms. Most PSD certificaitions aren't that hard. If you have trained and competed in any of the dog sports you could train for a PSD Cert. However, certification is not real life. It is all the other training that you do that makes a Police Dog. Certification is just a piece of paper that states your dog will track, apprehend, release, search and so forth to a standard.


Exactly, which goes back to what I and others have said many times; what we do isn't sport. there are no pretty points. 


DFrost


----------



## Howard Gaines III

David do you guys use the Dutch Shepherd?


----------



## David Frost

I have one Dutchie. Dual purpose patrol/drug. I also have seveal Mals. There are a few other departments in the area that have Dutchies.

DFrost


----------



## Howard Gaines III

How do you like the trainability and how would you rate the breed to the Malinois?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: 
I will open your can of worms. Most PSD certificaitions aren't that hard

I learned that years ago, when just about every dog I had over the age of 6 months could do better work than the PSD's I was working with.

I found it an amazing waste of a phenominal resource. Most of the dogs they had were real nice dogs, just for whatever reason, they did just about **** all with them.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Call the Bug Guy...cricket patrol..........................PPDs.


----------



## David Frost

Howard Gaines III said:


> How do you like the trainability and how would you rate the breed to the Malinois?


I don't see that much difference truthfully. Perhaps a bit calmer than the Mal, just as focused.

DFrost


----------



## David Frost

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:
> I learned that years ago, when just about every dog I had over the age of 6 months could do better work than the PSD's I was working with.
> 
> I found it an amazing waste of a phenominal resource. Most of the dogs they had were real nice dogs, just for whatever reason, they did just about **** all with them.



It's a shame you've never had the opportunity to work with some good PSD's. You should hang around better departments.

DFrost


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Maybe you should have seen what my 6 month old dogs were like. LOL

Howard, do I need to spank you again ?? Beginning trainers need to know their limits. How funny was it, when unsolicited, I had people warn me off of you left and right when I was on the east coast. The only person that I was warned about more was Dominic Donovan. Think about that for a minute, I had no ****ing idea who you were, and good dog trainers were telling me that you were a ****ing nutter.

Weird huh ?? Maybe you should think about that before you post about bugs. Maybe spend some time making a video of this amazing PPD crap you train with a whip. Not like I would take you seriously regardless. Not with that many people telling me your a nutter.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Short on names Jeff and anyone can make that kind of claim. PM the names if you dare! Otherwise, I see NO foundation for your statement, none!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Sure, anyone can, but I am not just anyone. 

Your dog with "live bites" turning out to be training accidents was enough to show me that they were right.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Sure, anyone can, but I am not just anyone.
> 
> Your dog with "live bites" turning out to be training accidents was enough to show me that they were right.


See and I'm vendicated again! When I ask for facts, names, dates, and foundation material to support your"claims," I get a dance partner. Dancing around the topic and spinning broad-brushed BS...Satin's firey darts can't touch this. Jeff, I enjoy folks like you, to a very limited point, when push comes to shove, you guys can't man up and answer for your actions or your positions. 

Nutter? I'm looking at him. When you can man up with names and facts, PM or e-mail me, or put it out there. The problem is nothing can be found against me! If my background was so questionable as you and others spin, the State of Delaware would never reissued me a continuing teaching license, the Department of Justice would never let a CCDW license come my way, NCIC would have flagged me fast, and most of the noted vets and other businessmen in little old Delaware would not highly reccommend me and the working dog group to which I belong for K-9 training/issues. This says nothing of my credit ratings and open ended credit lines 24/7!!!

*Isaiah 54:17 is what you and others now need to read! No weapon formed against me shall prosper...and they don't, blessed to bless.* =; O


----------



## Steve Strom

*vendicated* - 1 definition - being damn selfish or damn wrong.
And you still got a gun huh? And a teacher too huh? Lol.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

See ? A Nutter.


----------



## David Frost

Lance Green said:


> We are new to the forum so not sure if this has been asked. So here goes...
> 
> We purchased a GSD for PP because of my work hours and my wife and children being home alone. There have been several home invasions in our neighborhood.
> 
> We are curious to know if there is an increased liability if a PPD bites an intruder vs a family pet doing the biting. We are unsure about discussing his training with friends/neighbors or posting his training videos on the internet in case an attorney finds the "evidence".
> 
> Do those of you with PPD discuss the training with people you know or worry about the videos or isn't it a big deal?



The orignal poster asked a question. If there are additional responses to that question, please feel free. There will be no more responses of a personal nature. 

DFrost


----------



## Dan Long

Let me preface this by saying this is not a personal attack. I have a question.

How does having a teaching certificate, a CCDW permit, and good credit ratings make you a good trainer? I wouldn't care if my trainer was a convicted felon who lives in a tent, if he helps my dog get better, that's all that matters.


----------



## Emilio Rodriguez

> We are curious to know if there is an increased liability if a PPD bites an intruder vs a family pet doing the biting. We are unsure about discussing his training with friends/neighbors or posting his training videos on the internet in case an attorney finds the "evidence".
> 
> Do those of you with PPD discuss the training with people you know or worry about the videos or isn't it a big deal?


This doesn't answer your question directly but in terms of what would actually happen if someone would break into your house and get bit; it helps you if your state has laws like the castle doctrine that we have here in Florida. The premise is that if someone comes into your house uninvited they are doing so with not good intentions and you have the right to stand your ground as opposed to first look for a way out of the situation. This means if you have definite boundaries to your home and if someone does break in and your dog bites you will be OK in the eyes of the law.

With that said I do worry very much about people knowing I do protection training with my dog. I prefer a sleeper so to speak. That the dog doesn't show his capabilities until the situation calls for it. I'm long past using the dog as a conversation piece and showing it off. It's OK if the dog barks and shows serious intent when someone comes to the door, I'd just rather not anyone see or know that it's been trained. The trick of course is when it's time to do the proofing and some work needs to be done in your house. This is just another buffer in case something were to go down.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Dan Long said:


> Let me preface this by saying this is not a personal attack. I have a question.
> 
> How does having a teaching certificate, a CCDW permit, and good credit ratings make you a good trainer? I wouldn't care if my trainer was a convicted felon who lives in a tent, if he helps my dog get better, that's all that matters.


The difference is a felon IS what it is. I have nothing to do with low life folk! Dedicated to the cause is how I was trained and raised. I would NEVER support a felon even if it were family. Some understand the concept and others don't. TOPIC PLEASE!!!!


----------



## Dan Long

Hey, you were the one who brought up all those off topic items to defend your training ability, not me. 

What if your sister made a mistake and was arrested and convicted of a felony- would you turn your back on her? Where's all that forgiveness you are supposed to have as a man of God?


----------



## Chip Blasiole

Lance,
Can you tell us anything about your GSD, such as what you know about his parents, grandparents, bloodlines, his temperament, etc. that makes you think he is capable of being a PPD?


----------



## Bob Scott

Those that feel the need to insult or attack another person with usless words do it with a pm. NOT this forum!


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Bob Scott said:


> Those that feel the need to insult or attack another person with usless words do it with a pm. NOT this forum!


*Bob and David thank you for those reminding words.* The post of a PPD vs Family Pet Biting, I view it this way; bit is bit and folks will bring a law suit against you for almost any reason. Police officers and departments have the same issues facing them. The difference as I see it, training and record keeping. 

It's tough to fight facts and experience, both showcase well over "mishap bites." If the bad guy breaks in, you hope in all the crazyness that your dog will be focused and your remember how to dial "911." If a weapon or other issue comes up and it is a life or death issue, to take someones life while protecting yours or a family members is something each must make.

If this were viewed as a handgun shooting, how would a "controlled" shooting be viewed against several "bad" aimed shots all over the body?


----------



## David Frost

Howard Gaines III said:


> *
> If this were viewed as a handgun shooting, how would a "controlled" shooting be viewed against several "bad" aimed shots all over the body? *


*


It's been my experience that your qualifications with a weapon can be an issue. However, I've never seen anyone prevail in a law suit because the rounds didn't strike a certain part of a body. Understanding of course that it is only the subject you were shooting at, is the only one hit. An important phrase to remember is; "I continued shooting until the threat ceased." 

DFrost*


----------



## Howard Gaines III

*And not until the gun was empty*, 17 rounds or not. Thanks for that one...


----------



## David Frost

Not that I would have ever said this but the correct answer to I/A's question of; "how many rounds did you fire?" is; The magazines were full and there was one in the tube. How many are left?

DFrost


----------



## Howard Gaines III

I hate trick questions!!![-(


----------



## Jeff smith

Chris Michalek said:


> speaking of being sued. I up'd my homeowners policy to $1M for only $125 a year. It's worth it to me because I have one bite trained dog, a puppy training to be bite trained and a potential fear aggressive rott.
> 
> All it takes is less than a second of irresponsibility and you could be sued.


This is prob/ one of the best things you could have done. As a administrative warden I see dog bite cases each week. and about once every couple months I have to go to court because of law suite cases dealing with dog bites. I can get so disgusted with the courts ruling’s sometimes. A lot of them are that someone decided one night to walk(even go over fences) through someone else’s yard. pass a chained up dog and get bit, or in the case I had two months a ago. A guy broke into a garage and got bit. Almost always the “bad guy” wins and I have seen good people loose their life saving and even homes...its sad how the law reads sometimes.


----------

