By Bruce Alexander
You never know when the next personal protection specialist you run into might show you their teeth. Just hope its not a personal protection dog. This Miami Herald article on personal protection dogs brings an interesting perspective to Executive Protection. You can, and should, read the article yourself. I’m not adding any value by repeating the contents. However I will offer a few observations.
There’s no doubt a dog can serve as a means of personal protection but there’s a limit to what you can expect from a dog. A dog would certainly deter an attacker who was looking for a target of opportunity or keep paparazzi at arm’s length, but for a committed attacker, particularly one who has prepared a pre-attack plan, and performed even rudimentary surveillance on the target, a dog is nothing more than a minor nuisance who will be quickly dispatched at the start of the attack.
Arguably the same could be said for a close protection specialist operating alone however a trained and alert close protection specialist will prevent or avoid situations that are potentially threatening. A dog on the other hand is purely reactionary.
Unlike a dog, an Executive Protection specialist is trained to anticipate threats and respond with a variety of options when necessary whereas a dog is trained to react and sometimes only on command. An Executive Protection specialist doesn’t need commands from the principal before acting and will continue to act if the principal is injured or otherwise incapacitated.
There’s also the protective services aspect that an Executive Protection specialist provides, which a dog never will (except maybe fetching the newspaper or slippers). While you might not need a weapons permit to cross an international border with a personal protection dog, that dog is not going to arrange for your baggage to be picked up and delivered, expedite your arrival through customs and immigration, arrange transportation, get you to your meetings on time, or wake you up in the morning, all while protecting your life.
Allow me to also enlighten the person who said dogs “are perfect for clients who want to `cross international borders without the hassle of weapons permits”.’ Try stepping off a plane in a foreign country with Fido or Fifi at your side and see what happens. Guess what, Fido and Fifi are going right to the dog pound and I don’t mean Snoop Dog’s house.
I mean quarantine, in many cases. Need another example? Watch the reaction when you try to walk downtown Riyadh with a dog, if you ever make it that far. All of this will take place, after you’re done waiting for your dog to be delivered from the cargo hold, by the way.
Don’t get me wrong. Unlike Michael Vick, I actually like dogs and happen to think dogs play an important role in security and law enforcement. Dogs can be good personal security options under the right circumstances. I would however caution that a dog, even the best trained dog, is no substitute for a good Executive Protection specialist. Relying on a dog exclusively for personal protection creates a false sense of security.
If someone thinks that their personal security situation warrants a $50K dog, my advice is to review your threat profile before you plunk down your cash. Ask yourself why you think you need a dog in response to your personal security considerations, then consult with a reputable Executive Protection specialist to discuss concerns, and protective options.
Thanks Bruce, another great article. I couldn’t agree with you more, coming from a background of handling, decoying for, and assisting in the training of canines used for police work. I see a lot of K-9 websites who advertise the perfect bodyguard dog at astronomical prices. A $50K dog better be trained to drive the protectee too, because that’s an outrageous price. A K-9 is nothing more than a tool which has its place. I have used explosive detection K-9’s, when available, in protection situations, to sweep locations, vehicles, and packages. They are a great way to add a layer of security to your protectee.
I have seen K-9’s used in “sentry” work in the military and feel they are a great deterrent, if worked by a competent Handler. The same philosophy applies for protectee’s carrying firearms as they do in handling a dog trained to protect its handler, I advise against it. The protective strategy to using a K-9 doesn’t have to be for the direct protection of the protectee. A K-9 may also be used as a visual, audible, and early warning deterrence from unlawful entry by nefarious individuals. The K-9 doesn’t have to be a 100 pound Rottweiler.
People have asked me if they should get a gun or a dog for protection of their property and their families, I say get both, just kidding. But seriously, some people are more comfortable with a dog in their house as are some with a gun in their house. I say go with what’s comfortable and what you’re willing to use. No reason to have a 50k super high speed dog that you’re going to keep locked in the garage because you don’t want it around the protectee’s children.
Also, I would be very cautious in using a private security K-9’s to do crowd control or to do any bite work. First, the liability insurance is through the roof (in California at least). Second, when a private security K-9 bites someone they will be taken from the Handler and quarantined by Animal Control until they are deemed not a threat or to have Rabies. This could take months and that would make their further deployment difficult. Everything Six said was right on, just wanted to throw out some words of caution.
Not to beat the point to death but, K-9’s are a great tool when used appropriately. We have a saying in law enforcement about our K-9 partners: “If they taught them how to drive, cops would be out of a job.” I guess the same could go for EP Specialists 🙂
Although I agree with the issues with dogs in EP, the implication that a dog will be sent to quarantinw when arriving in a country os not nearly as likely as implied. Sure in Saudi it will happen but there are far less countries which require quarantine then those who have no issue.
As far as spending 50k on a dog, that is a joke. The high cost is actually a marketing ploy. That is way over what the dog should cost. 15 k should be considered the upper level with ten the bottom.
I don’t think anyone is advocating replacing a close protection specialist for a dog, but I would say don’t over simplify the role of a true well trained protection dog. I know a Malinois named Castor that I would take with me anytime anywhere under just about any conditions, and yes his empty hand skills are better than 90% of the protection specialist in the business, whether they be armed or unarmed.
While it is obvious a well trained dog, can be a deterant to the paparazzi, they can also be a great asset when it comes to crowd control making space to move your client, as well as sniff for explosives or detect planted drugs. Their hearing is far superior to ours and can serve as an early warning device in the event of a potential intruder (I don’t mean by barking but through visual cues of a potential threat), in alerting the EP agent. As you monitor the inside of the house, they can be sent outside to monitor the outside. Well trained dogs can serve as a force multiplier for small details and become a necessary part of the rotation particularly when it is time for the EP agents to get a little rest.
Protection dogs should be seen as a compliment to the protection specialist, the team and the client and not a replacement.