Police dog Finn.

[cee-dee]

Police dog Finn was stabbed by a 16 year-old, He's now recovering but a petition has been started calling for Police Dogs and Horses to be given the same status as Police Officers. Fancy signing the petition?:-

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/168678/signatures/new

Here's the info (The number of signatures is out of date, it's over 31,000 now) :-

http://www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/news/crime/finn-s-law-petition-calling-for-attack-on-police-dog-to-be...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-37621671

[upthecreekyetagain]

I agree but not particularly brave - it had no cognition that a man with a knife could hurt him and as soon as he did he retreated.

Bravery will I’ll be displayed if the next time he faces someone with a knife he doesn’t back off.

[cee-dee]

So you think he should have hung on, got knifed again and probably killed?

[cee-dee]

This is the attacker who stabbed Canto and the amazing outcome:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-42920583

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

wrote:

So you think he should have hung on, got knifed again and probably killed?

---

If if he had then the term ‘brave’ would certainly have been appropriate.

As it is I can’t see any justification for applying the label ‘brave’ to him.

[cee-dee]

The dog was brave to go for the bloke and bravely pulled through after he was fixed up by the vet. Then he bravely went back to work doing the same jobs.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Come on!

It wasn’t ‘brave’ to go for the guy - that’s what he had been trained for and up to the point of the injury would never have suffered any harm nor been aware of any danger.

Being treated by a vet and recovering isn’t brave - he had no choice in the matter.

Likewise going back to work - he had no choice in the matter.

’Bravery’, (as much as it can be applied to an animal), will be displayed, or not, the next time he comes up against someone with a knife.

[cee-dee]

The latest on Finn:-

https://news.sky.com/story/finns-law-mps-to-decide-whether-attacking-police-dogs-should-be-criminal-...

[otherego]

CD, I think this quote from your link is significant:

"If we are going to put them in dangerous positions then the least we can do is protect them."

I don't believe service animals deserve any "protection" beyond that afforded any other animal. A dog neither knows nor cares that the person who stabbed it was prosecuted.

A more important question is, are we really entitled to put them in danger? It's all a game for them, until it all goes horribly wrong.

As you probably recall, I'm fond of dogs, especially German Shepherds (there seems to have been at least one in the extended family for most of my life.) I can understand the sentimental desire to see service animals protected, but have to agree with the suggestion that they're not so much brave as simply doing what they're told. Personally, I think one can add to that the fact that we're talking about incredibly loyal and therefore protective creatures - but "brave"? Not so sure about that.

I remember (vaguely) an American dog handler explaining that the dog's real task is to take the bullet for its handler. That might remain the case, but I'm very uncomfortable about the whole thing.

Awards for dogs? Special laws for service dogs? Nah. (IMHO).

Stringing up anyone who deliberately hurts an animal - service animal or not - by a delicate part of his anatomy? I suppose even I might see some merit in that.

[cee-dee]

Well taking your stance about the dogs doing as they're told to others, dog handlers included, they're doing what they're told too?

Anyone doing a job deserves a form of "protection" in that anyone attacking them in any way should face a sanction of some sort. A police officer is doing his job, doing what he's told and protecting himself if he can and anyone attacking his dog or horse deserves a sanction of some sort, after all, the attackers are resisitng arrest and assaulting the animal and officer.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Maybe a petition over the number of armed services ‘attack’ dogs that are killed at the end of their working lives or the thousands of ex-racing dogs and ‘failed’ racing dogs similarly treated would prevent far greater cruelty than the possible deterrence effect of increasing sentences on just those who attack police dogs/horses.

I’m not against increasing the sentence for those who attack police dogs, far from it - I think the sentence for cruelty to any animal should be increased.  

Why should someone who is deliberately cruel to an animal be treated more leniently than someone who may harm an animal whilst trying to escape?

[cee-dee]

I think it's going to be down to "Where do you draw the line"? Is there a line to be drawn?

If you really went down to activist level, humans having anything to do with animals could be construed as "cruelty". Are people who ride horses being cruel? So many questions, no clear answers.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Horse riding is considered ‘cruel’ by some and can in some situations be so in my opinion.

The question I was posing though is what justification is there to treat someone who deliberately sets out to be cruel to an animal more leniently in the eyes’ of the law than someone who harms an animal whilst attempting to escape. 

Personally I consider the former more culpable than the latter.

[cee-dee]

Again is there a line to be drawn on the level of the (perceived?) cruelty?

I think any "working" animal should have some level of legal "protection".

[upthecreekyetagain]

Again you have not addressed the real question.

Why should someone who is deliberately cruel to an animal be treated more leniently than someone who hurts an animal whilst trying to escape?

The intent in the former case is to be cruel, in the latter to escape.

[cee-dee]

That's daft. The would-be escapee is deliberately trying to severely harm the dog whilst trying to prevent aprehension to escape arrest and can (and do) use potentially lethal force. The dog isn't trying to kill the would-be escapee, it's only trying to cause a delay while the handler catches up, the would-be escapee is trying to maim or kill the dog.

[upthecreekyetagain]

You still haven’t answered the question though.  I’ll rephrase it.

Why should someone who is deliberately cruel to an animal for their own vicarious pleasure or profit be treated more leniently than someone who deliberately harms an animal whilst trying to escape?

[upthecreekyetagain]

Should someone who hits a horse with a piece of 4x2 so hard they break its jaw, then leaves it in a field with barbed wire wrapped around its feet so it can’t reach any grass even if it could graze despite its broken jaw face a lesser sentence than the scroat who stabbed police dog Finn?

[cee-dee]

No.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Well that would be the outcome if ‘special’ protection were given to police dogs in terms of a longer sentence for offenders.

As as I posted earlier, I’m all in favour of more severe penalties but protection for all animals not just certain ones. 

[cee-dee]

The thing is, with Law, the effect can be the same for different Laws.