Did anyone think of this?

[bigdog]

Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.

Just wondering.

[Fred Brown]

"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:69056b38-6fd2-490d...@googlegroups.com...

Depends on where he was hit and how badly he was bleeding. He seems to have
covered
quite a distance from the shooting site and didn't they carjack a SUV?

[deep]

"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"

[bigdog]

Yeah, they did carjack an SUV but the bullet riddled SUV was recovered. That would have been a good place to track the blood trail from. He was discovered in part because the homeowner saw blood in the garage so that tells me he was bleeding signficantly and that was before the exchange of gunfire that occurred after he was found.

[Padraigh ProAmerica]

Re: Did anyone think of this?

Group: talk.politics.guns Date: Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 12:08pm (EDT-2) From:
deep

===================

DooDoo has finally gone around the bend.

--
"Remember, there is a fine line between activism and just being a pain
in the
ass."--
Dennis Miller--

[deep]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:19:26 -0400, ogr...@webtv.net (Padraigh
ProAmerica) wrote:

>
>Re: Did anyone think of this?
>
>Group: talk.politics.guns Date: Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 12:08pm (EDT-2) From:
>deep
>On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 09:28:37 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
><jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last
>night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting
>at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a
>mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A
>good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>Just wondering.
>"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers, if I only had a
>braaaaaaaaain"
>===================
>
>DooDoo has finally gone around the bend.

Oh look Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Better stick with, "Deep Dudu: An Autobiography."

The one you want is way too long and there may be copyright issues.

[Scout]

"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:69056b38-6fd2-490d...@googlegroups.com...

Hell, it wouldn't have even taken a good one. Even a mediocre one should
have had to problems with that trail..

Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.

From her observations, most law enforcement departments are at best highly
reluctant to down right hostile to the idea that a civilian trained and
handled tracking dog could be of any real value. Most departments either try
it because they have tried everything else, or they are talked into it by
departments that have personal experience with a particular trainer-handler
and their dog(s). Recommendations written by departments are the only real
credentials they have, and even then those are often considered only with
some reluctance.

Oh, and takes these for whatever you want to make of them, but her oldest
track was that of a murder victim 56 days and 2 rain storms after his death.
Her track with the least amount of 'evidence' was the scent that an unknown
shooter left on a bullet recovered from the victim in an apartment complex
shooting, and she managed to track the shooter to his apartment. Granted
both of these were "Hail Mary" plays with neither the department or her sure
of any possibility of success, but she managed to pull them off by her skill
in training, the ability of her dog, circumstances and a bit of luck.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:9am5n858r6a7ott5u...@4ax.com...

Dudu finally tells us something true about himself.

[bigdog]

I've got a couple year old beagles and it amazes me how fast they can move while keeping their noses to the ground and on the trail. Yesterday they chased a rabbit through my radio fence and even though I saw them bolt and where they were headed, I lost them. They were gone for over 24 hours but I was lucky that somebody who read my fliers spotted them and I got them back around noon today.
I figured they would move down stream once they got to the ravine and I concentrated my efforts there and that's where they were spotted. On the edge of town about two miles from my house.

[bigdog]

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 6:18:04 PM UTC-4, Scout wrote:
> "deep" wrote in message news:9am5n858r6a7ott5u...@4ax.com...
>

> > "I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
> > if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"
>
> Dudu finally tells us something true about himself.

Damn. You mean dudu just broke his perfect record of never being right. Well I guess even Cal Ripken's streak had to eventually come to an end.

[Scout]

"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:9f308b40-4bc7-42fb...@googlegroups.com...

I'm sure it was purely accidental.

[JohnJohnsn]

Well, BD, since we're "Monday morning quarterbacking" here, I'd point
put that both Boston and Watertown are very urban areas, and I'd find
it unlikely that many (any?) of the officers there are hunters, and
even less likely there was even a thought about using bloodhounds in
the search.

But that notwitstanding, it is an interesting question. :)

[Ron M]

On Apr 20, 1:08 pm, deep wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 09:28:37 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
>

> <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>
> >Just wondering.
>
> "I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
> if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"

Sounds about right for you only you don't have one. Thanks for keeping
us entertained though.

[bigdog]

FWIW, Judge Jeanine just asked the same question during Fox News 9:00pm segment. The guest danced around the question by pointing out the homeowner used the blood trail to find Tsarnaev without ever answering why the cops didn't do the same thing earlier.

I don't want to seem overly critical because I think overall, they did a good job of hunting these guys down, but I wonder if the manhunt might have ended sooner if somebody had looked to see if there was a traceable blood trail leading away from the bullet riddled SUV.

I mentioned earlier I have a couple of beagles and I am fascinated the way they can track an animal just from the scent it leaves behind. That's why I believe if he there was a trail of blood drops, blood hounds could have led them right to Tsarnaev in no time at all.

[deep]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:17:13 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:69056b38-6fd2-490d...@googlegroups.com...
>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last
>> night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting at
>> the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a mortally
>> wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A good blood
>> hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>>
>> Just wondering.
>
>Hell, it wouldn't have even taken a good one. Even a mediocre one should
>have had to problems with that trail..

I guess we can add dog tracking to the massive list of shit you know
shit about. This is not chasing a rabbit through a field, idiot.
There's a reason tracking in an urban environment with thousands of
people around is difficult if not impossible. Bet you can't figure
out what it is.

Go ahead and try, make my day...

>
>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.

HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
right?

snicker.....

<child-like babbling snipped>

[deep]

Once again you demonstrate your appalling ignorance. Maybe you should
find someone to read to you about tracking dogs before you embarrass
yourself any more.

Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job. Maybe you might
want to consider issues with tracking in busy urban areas. Think
reawwy, reawwy hawd, Elmer.

"Hey ! I'm huntin wabbits !"

[JohnJohnsn]

No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally
trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
Service.

She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains
are trained in Deutsch.]

>
> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>

Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]

"About 7:50 p.m., police set off two rounds of flash-bang grenades,
used to stun a suspect, according to witnesses and the police scanner.
Anxious residents gathered on a church lawn near Franklin Street."

"Six doors from the Henneberry house, at 8:40, police dogs began
barking and officers shouted for residents to move back “NOW”!''

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-20/fresh-blood-on-boat-leads-resident-to-uncover-tsarnaev-s-refuge.html

>
> Maybe you might want to consider issues with tracking in busy urban areas.
>

Maybe you might want to consider knowing about that what you
propagandize, Scheißekopf!

>
> Think reawwy, reawwy hawd, Elmer.
>
> "Hey ! I'm huntin wabbits !"
>

"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"
--Scheißekopf Tiefe Scheiße, Apr 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>No need, Schei�ekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>Service.
>

Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.

>She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains
>are trained in Deutsch.]

People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.

>>
>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>
>Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>

There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around with all
the guys in body armor with assault rifles.

But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:11:54 -0600, deep wrote:

>People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.

Some do. Mostly when the dogs are raised in Europe.

Don't even TRY to respond with your bullshit.

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>> Service.
>
> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>

We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"
hereScheißekopf. <chuckle> ;)
>
>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains

> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>
> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>

She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
cornered.

On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.

>
>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>
>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>
> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>

Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.

Got any YouTube to back up your claim?

Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were
trained to do, Scheißekopf?

Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
dogs?

Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.

>
> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>

I don't have Bloodhounds, Scheißekopf; but mine would be great at
tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
weasels. <chuckle> ;)

And you're the one "in the fields", Scheißekopf:

[Gray Guest]

deep wrote in news:qgu7n8l4icnnlpb2e...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:17:13 -0400, "Scout"
><me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:69056b38-6fd2-490d...@googlegroups.com...
>>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last
>>> night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail
>>> starting at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that
>>> routinely as a mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before
>>> collapsing. A good blood hound would have had no trouble following
>>> that trail.
>>>
>>> Just wondering.
>>
>>Hell, it wouldn't have even taken a good one. Even a mediocre one should
>>have had to problems with that trail..
>
> I guess we can add dog tracking to the massive list of shit you know
> shit about. This is not chasing a rabbit through a field, idiot.
> There's a reason tracking in an urban environment with thousands of
> people around is difficult if not impossible. Bet you can't figure
> out what it is.
>
> Go ahead and try, make my day...

How I would love to.

Did you call the ATF yet on your gun runner neighbor?

>>
>>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
> right?
>
> snicker.....
>
><child-like babbling snipped>

--
Refusenik #1

Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.

Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 11:14 am, Klaus Schadenfreude

<klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:11:54 -0600, deep wrote:
>
> >People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>
> Some do. Mostly when the dogs are raised in Europe.
>

Nancy trains her dogs in German no matter where they are from.

She says it's to avoid "outside command influence": few "perps" know
German, let alone know the dogs only respond to commands in German.

>
> Don't even TRY to respond with your bullshit.
>

Don't worry: he will.

After all, who's better bovine excrement than Scheißekopf? <g> ;)

BTW, Klaus; when I get my new desktop computer up and the old files
loaded, I'll send you a full sized photo of Nancy and her dog
"sniffing out" the "Marine One" helicopter there at Connally Field in
Waco for George W's Secret Service detail.

Until then:

http://tinyurl.com/Beaux-und-Nancy

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:36:50 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Schei�e <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>

>>> No need, Schei�ekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>> Service.
>>
>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>
>We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

>hereSchei�ekopf. <chuckle> ;)
>>
What, I have to try to educate you AGAIN? I'm going to start billing
you people for private tutoring services.

I'll give you a few hints and then there will be a pop quiz:

one is cross tracks
the other is the lack of a scent priming article. (something that
smells like the person/creature you want to track
the other is about broken vegetation which greatly augments a dogs
ability to detect a trail

>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains

>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>
>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>
>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>cornered.
>

The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
adequately.

>On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>

True. Some bloodhounds are phenominal in their scent detection
abilities. They probably are easily the top breed in that area. Scent
tracking however, is very, very problematic in urban areas.

>
>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>
>>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>
>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
>> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>>
>Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
>forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
>showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.
>
>Got any YouTube to back up your claim?
>
>Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were

>trained to do, Schei�ekopf?

>
>Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
>dogs?
>
>Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>>

This part is exactly right. Dogs are almost never cross trained. They
don't perform nearly as well. The five main categories are cadaver,
bomb, drug, scent tracking, and perp take-down ("attack") dogs.
Probably most cop dogs are take-down dogs. If they need a scent dog
they bring in a contractor specialist.

>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>>

>I don't have Bloodhounds, Schei�ekopf; but mine would be great at

>tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>

>And you're the one "in the fields", Schei�ekopf:
>
Unlike you I actually learned something from being around people who
trained TD/UDT dogs.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:qgu7n8l4icnnlpb2e...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:17:13 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:69056b38-6fd2-490d...@googlegroups.com...
>>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last
>>> night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting
>>> at
>>> the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a
>>> mortally
>>> wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A good blood
>>> hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>>>
>>> Just wondering.
>>
>>Hell, it wouldn't have even taken a good one. Even a mediocre one should
>>have had to problems with that trail..
>
> I guess we can add dog tracking to the massive list of shit you know
> shit about. This is not chasing a rabbit through a field, idiot.
> There's a reason tracking in an urban environment with thousands of
> people around is difficult if not impossible. Bet you can't figure
> out what it is.
>
> Go ahead and try, make my day...

Sorry, Dudu but I do have some knowledge of the issue, and no an urban
environment and thousands of other people around is NOT an issue.

>>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
> right?

So what personal experience/knowledge do you have?

I will just note that as usual you will attack anyone even when you know
nothing about the subject.

[deep]

Bullshit. AGAIN. Go ahead, describe a few. I already gave Tiny
Johnson all the hints you should need.

>>>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>>>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.
>>
>> HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
>> right?
>
>So what personal experience/knowledge do you have?
>

My mom raised German Shepherds when I was a kid and she trained
tracking dogs (TD/TDX) and utility dogs (UDT) for years. It's what
she talked about all the time. Unlike you boneheads I actually
learned something along the way.

>I will just note that as usual you will attack anyone even when you know
>nothing about the subject.
>

Which is exactly what you did and I called you on it. Obviously I
know a hundred times more about it than you do, again.

You're good at nothing but being a clueless armchair quarterback doing
nothing but criticizing your betters.
>

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 12:15:29 -0600, deep wrote:

>My mom raised German Shepherds when I was a kid and she trained
>tracking dogs (TD/TDX) and utility dogs (UDT) for years.

Sure. We believe you. [snicker]

>It's what
>she talked about all the time. Unlike you boneheads I actually
>learned something along the way.

Rolling
On
Floor
Laughing
My
Ass
Off

MATH
"You ALWAYS start counting with zero."
-Deep "Euclid" Dudu, 8/11/2012

LANGUAGES
"Can you read moron?"
- Exotic Language Expert Deep Dudu
Message-ID: <jarke79r8c7jesu3r...@4ax.com>

GEOGRAPHY
"The French are MUCH MUCH closer to Libya than anyone."
Geography Expert Deep Dudu
Message-ID: <41m9o6taveo9s4ocq...@4ax.com>

LOGIC
" If you deny being a Republican then you are a Republican liar.
Simple."
-Deep Dudu, King of Logic.
Message-ID: <4gh3685gu519iuuri...@4ax.com>

HISTORY
"You can't counter facts in propaganda because there aren't any."
-Deep Dudu, September 21, 2012
ECONOMICS
"Services provided by the government are BY DEFINITION socialism."
-Deep Dudu
POLITICS
"Socialism IS our form of government, idiot. "
-Dudu
Message-ID: <6iann6dreo7rouhnm...@4ax.com>

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:nk38n851nfusnp582...@4ax.com...

Not many real problems, more of a matter of keeping the people at a moderate
distance so the dog can work, but that's not difficult given that the
streets were basically cleared and you had plenty of police around to make
that happen if necessary. They had a good scent source, they had an
exemplar from the dead brother and the scent trail was extremely fresh.

>>She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains
>>are trained in Deutsch.]
>
> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.

No, police dogs are often trained in a foreign language to help prevent
anyone but the handler giving orders to the dog.

>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>>
>>Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>
> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around with all
> the guys in body armor with assault rifles.

Yea, but police dogs (other than the drug & bomb sniffing dogs) are not
trained for tracking. They are trained to subdue a dangerous suspect so that
risk to human life is minimized.

> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.

Actually, it is and I'm not sure how busy you think a residential area
usually is, but given the area was in lock down and they were actively
keeping people off the streets, your 'excuse' doesn't apply. She has tracked
in busy urban environments, and normally the only issue was the ability of
the police officers to keep up with her. Sorry, but I don't doubt that my
sister and her dogs could have found him within 30-60 minutes of arriving on
scene, and possibly far less than that. Sorry Dudu, but you frankly have no
idea of what you're talking about. You're simply flapping your lips to hear
the noise.

[deep]

You're a fucking clueless moron once again. Try again dipshit.

>
>>>She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains
>>>are trained in Deutsch.]
>>
>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>
>No, police dogs are often trained in a foreign language to help prevent
>anyone but the handler giving orders to the dog.
>

Bullshit ! If a perp can call off your dog you shouldn't be training
dogs.

>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>>>
>>>Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>>
>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around with all
>> the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>
>Yea, but police dogs (other than the drug & bomb sniffing dogs) are not
>trained for tracking. They are trained to subdue a dangerous suspect so that
>risk to human life is minimized.
>

No shit doofus. You're the one who thought it was so easy to just
send a pack of bloodhounds after the guy. I tried to explain why the
issue is very highly problematic.

And no, the brother would not provide a usable scent source. At the
time they had no clue who the guy was and what his connections were.
Or which way he went, or even if he was on foot or carjacked a
vehicle. They had nowhere to start a track, no reliable scent
articles, in an urban paved environment (highly problematic) with by
that time a thousand cross-tracks (makes it almost impossible).

>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>
>Actually, it is and I'm not sure how busy you think a residential area
>usually is, but given the area was in lock down and they were actively
>keeping people off the streets, your 'excuse' doesn't apply. She has tracked
>in busy urban environments, and normally the only issue was the ability of
>the police officers to keep up with her. Sorry, but I don't doubt that my
>sister and her dogs could have found him within 30-60 minutes of arriving on
>scene, and possibly far less than that. Sorry Dudu, but you frankly have no
>idea of what you're talking about. You're simply flapping your lips to hear
>the noise.
>

HAHAHAHAHA. You think it was so easy to just turn a pack of
bloodhounds loose on his track and you're accusing others of not
knowing what they are talking about? I gave you all the reasons it is
nearly impossible, but you refuse to think once again. Maybe you
should think about if it was so easy, why didn't they do it? I'm sure
the Boston police have lots of contacts for certified Urban Tracking
Dogs. Maybe you should think about reasons why they didn't do that.

once again, your ignorance and ability to attempt to lie your away
around it is hilarious. Highly entertaining.

[Scout]

"JohnJohnsn" <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:794e3819-34a2-4a99...@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Schei�e <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>

>>> No need, Schei�ekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>> Service.
>>
>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>
> We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

> hereSchei�ekopf. <chuckle> ;)
>>
>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains

>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>
>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>
> She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
> days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
> avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
> cornered.
>
> On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
> blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.

Actually, they are generally considered best if you're training for ground
scent. My sister has had excellent results using german shorthairs trained
for air scent. Apparently air scent allows a quicker and broader 'search'
pattern with less false leads and interruptions in the track.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 12:33:33 -0600, deep wrote:

>>Not many real problems, more of a matter of keeping the people at a moderate
>>distance so the dog can work, but that's not difficult given that the
>>streets were basically cleared and you had plenty of police around to make
>>that happen if necessary. They had a good scent source, they had an
>>exemplar from the dead brother and the scent trail was extremely fresh.
>>
>You're a fucking clueless moron once again. Try again dipshit.

Standard Dudu response.

Fact-less.
Logic-less.
Worth-less.

[chuckle]


http://klaus.webege.com/dudu/dudu.htm
Deep Dudu's FORTRESS OF LIES
Now With Over 350 Documented
Lies, Falsehoods, Fabrications, Distortions, and Deceptions!

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:34:02 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"JohnJohnsn" <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:794e3819-34a2-4a99...@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

>>>> No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>>> Service.
>>>
>>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>>
>> We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

>> hereScheißekopf. <chuckle> ;)
>>>
>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains

>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>
>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>
>> She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>> days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>> avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>> cornered.
>>
>> On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>> blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>
>Actually, they are generally considered best if you're training for ground
>scent. My sister has had excellent results using german shorthairs trained
>for air scent. Apparently air scent allows a quicker and broader 'search'
>pattern with less false leads and interruptions in the track.
>
>

As long as you're downwind from your prey. In the country most scent
is lifted off vegetation along the track. Mostly clothing rubs on
tall grass and brush along the way, but broken vegetation greatly
augments a dog's ability to follow a track. One main reason urban
tracking dogs (UTD) are trained and certified seperately.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:he78n8d6nkt4k8tp8...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:36:50 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
> <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>>>> No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>>> Service.
>>>
>>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>>
>>We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

>>hereScheißekopf. <chuckle> ;)

>>>
> What, I have to try to educate you AGAIN? I'm going to start billing
> you people for private tutoring services.
>
> I'll give you a few hints and then there will be a pop quiz:
>
> one is cross tracks

No impact on dogs trained for air scent. Don't know about ground trackers.

> the other is the lack of a scent priming article.

Actually they had one. The interior of the vehicle they were shot in. Prime
the dog with that, give him an exemplar of the dead brother....and you're
rocking n' rolling. But hey, let's say we had to make it hard....I suppose
the police could have simply gotten a scent sample from the boy's home.
After all, they KNEW where he lived at this point.

Oh, and FYI, this one alone proves you have NO idea of what you're talking
about.

> (something that
> smells like the person/creature you want to track
> the other is about broken vegetation which greatly augments a dogs
> ability to detect a trail

Again, that might apply only if you're using a dog trained in ground scent.
An air scent trained dog, could care less.

Really Dudu, this is the point you should stop embarrassing yourself by
trying to pretend you have knowledge about something you don't.


>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains

>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>
>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>
>>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>cornered.
>>
> The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
> than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
> adequately.

Not necessarily, since police dogs are often not trained to obey only a
specific person. Unless the officer who is going to run the dog is going to
do all the training, then trying to obtain voice specific is all but
impossible. They are trained to obey specific commands. They do so.

>>On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>>blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>>
> True. Some bloodhounds are phenominal in their scent detection
> abilities. They probably are easily the top breed in that area. Scent
> tracking however, is very, very problematic in urban areas.

Not really.

>>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>>
>>>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>>
>>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
>>> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>>>
>>Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
>>forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
>>showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.
>>
>>Got any YouTube to back up your claim?
>>
>>Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were

>>trained to do, Scheißekopf?

>>
>>Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
>>dogs?
>>
>>Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>>>
> This part is exactly right. Dogs are almost never cross trained. They
> don't perform nearly as well. The five main categories are cadaver,
> bomb, drug, scent tracking, and perp take-down ("attack") dogs.
> Probably most cop dogs are take-down dogs. If they need a scent dog
> they bring in a contractor specialist.

So, when you saw all those police dogs.....by your own admission they
weren't tracking dogs.

You should have known that before you even threw out that red herring. I
have to say, I bet your goggle searches are going like crazy. But it's a bit
too late to cover up the ignorance you have already shown.

>>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>>>

>>I don't have Bloodhounds, Scheißekopf; but mine would be great at

>>tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>>weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>>

>>And you're the one "in the fields", Scheißekopf:

>>
> Unlike you I actually learned something from being around people who
> trained TD/UDT dogs.

Apparently not.

Tell us again about how the police dogs were going to track the suspect.....
That was pretty funny.

[deep]

Yea, right. And YOU know SO MUCH MORE about tracking dogs than all
those dog professionals in the entire Boston metropolitan area.

Yea, sure you do.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

fuck, you are one crazy assed motherfucker. Too funny.

So according to you, not only do I not know anything about tracking
dogs, ALL those police professionals and private dog training
contractors don't know what they are talking about either. Everybody
in the entire world but you are idiots, right? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

>
>> (something that
>> smells like the person/creature you want to track
>> the other is about broken vegetation which greatly augments a dogs
>> ability to detect a trail
>
>Again, that might apply only if you're using a dog trained in ground scent.
>An air scent trained dog, could care less.

Actually, air scent dogs are more useful in an urban environment than
a country one. Country trained dogs are more ground tracking which
doesn't work as well in urban environments with nothing but blacktop
and concrete. Air scent dogs work better in urban areas because
buildings tend to funnel wind therefore a dog could pick up an air
scent blowing down the street. In such a case they would take their
dog around to area intersections (if they had a reliable scent
article) and let the dog wander around until it picked up a scent then
they follow in that direction. If no alerts they just continue to
drive around to key intersections in the area hoping the dog will
alert on a scent. In the entire Boston area you can bet your ass they
had scent dogs and did the exact thing. Clearly, because it didn't
lead to a collar it didn't work. Clearly you fail to realize in order
for air scent tracking to work they have to have a starting point. No
starting point, no track.

>
>Really Dudu, this is the point you should stop embarrassing yourself by
>trying to pretend you have knowledge about something you don't.
>

Once again clearly I know an infinite amount more about the subject
than you do.

>
>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains
>>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>>
>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>>
>>>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>>cornered.
>>>
>> The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
>> than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
>> adequately.
>
>Not necessarily, since police dogs are often not trained to obey only a
>specific person. Unless the officer who is going to run the dog is going to
>do all the training, then trying to obtain voice specific is all but
>impossible. They are trained to obey specific commands. They do so.
>

They always team a training/handling officer with a dog. They never
expect a dog to work under several handlers. In that situation they
prove very unreliable, no matter what language you train them in.

Once again you know nothing about dogs.

I'm sure they had all of the above deployed. Including bomb dogs.

>You should have known that before you even threw out that red herring. I
>have to say, I bet your goggle searches are going like crazy. But it's a bit
>too late to cover up the ignorance you have already shown.
>
>
>>>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>>>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>>>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>>>>
>>>I don't have Bloodhounds, Scheißekopf; but mine would be great at
>>>tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>>>weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>>>
>>>And you're the one "in the fields", Scheißekopf:
>>>
>> Unlike you I actually learned something from being around people who
>> trained TD/UDT dogs.
>
>Apparently not.
>
>Tell us again about how the police dogs were going to track the suspect.....
>That was pretty funny.
>

What? I was telling you WHY the police dogs were NOT going to track
the subject. Not my fault once again you don't get it.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:3ta8n81sojnjfug6v...@4ax.com...

Yea, and not one of them applied.

Sorry Dudu, but a urban environment doesn't stop a good tracking dog.

>>>>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>>>>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.
>>>
>>> HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
>>> right?
>>
>>So what personal experience/knowledge do you have?
>>
> My mom raised German Shepherds when I was a kid and she trained
> tracking dogs (TD/TDX) and utility dogs (UDT) for years. It's what
> she talked about all the time. Unlike you boneheads I actually
> learned something along the way.

Well, either she wasn't a very good trainer, or you didn't really pay
attention.

Dogs can and do track in urban environments. Maybe it wasn't that way when
you were a kid, but today, it's regularly done. Welcome to the present.

>>I will just note that as usual you will attack anyone even when you know
>>nothing about the subject.
>>
> Which is exactly what you did and I called you on it. Obviously I
> know a hundred times more about it than you do, again.

Not really, and I'm not even an expert. If I can spot your errors, then
clearly you know massively less than I do. See....your 'experience' dates
back 40-50 years ago. Mine dates back to, well, NOW.

> You're good at nothing but being a clueless armchair quarterback doing
> nothing but criticizing your betters.

Not at all. Simply pointing out that a tracking dog could have significantly
reduced the time and trouble it took to find the second brother.

You want to contest that, then you're going to need to start bringing some
facts to the table about the current state of the art when it comes to
tracking dogs.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:7lb8n819immuvp5t4...@4ax.com...

>>>>No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>>>trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>>>Service.
>>>>
>>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>
>>Not many real problems, more of a matter of keeping the people at a
>>moderate
>>distance so the dog can work, but that's not difficult given that the
>>streets were basically cleared and you had plenty of police around to make
>>that happen if necessary. They had a good scent source, they had an
>>exemplar from the dead brother and the scent trail was extremely fresh.
>>
> You're a fucking clueless moron once again. Try again dipshit.

IOW, you can't contest the facts presented.


>>>>She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains

>>>>are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>
>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>
>>No, police dogs are often trained in a foreign language to help prevent
>>anyone but the handler giving orders to the dog.
>>
> Bullshit ! If a perp can call off your dog you shouldn't be training
> dogs.

So.....each police officer would have to train their own dog and if
something happened to them in the field and they couldn't call off the dog,
then no other officer could even be instructed on how to get the dog off the
suspect or from doing whatever was the last command given?

Yea, like that's going to happen.

We have professional trainers because that's their job and what they were
trained to do. Then we have police officers, some of whom have been trained
to HANDLE a trained dog. Not a dog they trained, but one that is already
trained and ready for the field.

Sheese.....you really have no idea on how these things work do you?

>>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>>>>
>>>>Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>>>
>>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around with all
>>> the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>>
>>Yea, but police dogs (other than the drug & bomb sniffing dogs) are not
>>trained for tracking. They are trained to subdue a dangerous suspect so
>>that
>>risk to human life is minimized.
>>
> No shit doofus. You're the one who thought it was so easy to just
> send a pack of bloodhounds after the guy. I tried to explain why the
> issue is very highly problematic.

Na, one air scent trained dog would probably have been all you needed. No
need for a pack, and blood hounds aren't really the best breed for air scent
training.

> And no, the brother would not provide a usable scent source.

Didn't say he would. Clearly you don't know what an exemplar is or why it's
used.

So you really didn't pay much attention to your mother's training, did you?

> At the
> time they had no clue who the guy was and what his connections were.

Really? At the time they shot up the SUV and killed one brother, they didn't
know who the other brother was? Even though they had been hunting for them
both for several hours?

ROTFLMAO.....

> Or which way he went, or even if he was on foot or carjacked a
> vehicle.

Well, finding out which way he went is what a tracking dog will usually tell
you. If he's on foot then that means the dog usually track him to his
current location. That is after all what tracking dogs are trained to do.
Even if he carjacked someone, then the trail would end at that point and you
would then almost certainly know that he got into a vehicle and would then
know to expand your search since the suspect is no longer on foot.

So Dudu, do you just sort of spout this crap out and hope that no one will
know that you don't have a clue of what you're talking about?

> They had nowhere to start a track,

They have the SUV which is the last place he was known to be. That's what's
usually known as a starting point.

>no reliable scent
> articles,

The interior of the vehicle itself would have been enough, but by this time
they had already been identified and authorities were almost certainly
engaged in searching his residence.

So what more do you think is needed? Does he need to pee in a cup, or come
back and hold his hand under the dog's nose? What more of a sample do you
feel is needed?

We had his scent in the car, we had his personal effects, clothing, sheets,
etc from his home. If that's not enough for a reliable scent sample...then
tell me, what exactly do you claim would be required?

> in an urban paved environment (highly problematic) with by
> that time a thousand cross-tracks (makes it almost impossible).

Actually, given it was a residental area maybe a dozen or so, but with air
scent trained dogs, cross tracks mean nothing.

>>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>>
>>Actually, it is and I'm not sure how busy you think a residential area
>>usually is, but given the area was in lock down and they were actively
>>keeping people off the streets, your 'excuse' doesn't apply. She has
>>tracked
>>in busy urban environments, and normally the only issue was the ability of
>>the police officers to keep up with her. Sorry, but I don't doubt that my
>>sister and her dogs could have found him within 30-60 minutes of arriving
>>on
>>scene, and possibly far less than that. Sorry Dudu, but you frankly have
>>no
>>idea of what you're talking about. You're simply flapping your lips to
>>hear
>>the noise.
>>
> HAHAHAHAHA. You think it was so easy to just turn a pack of
> bloodhounds loose on his track and you're accusing others of not
> knowing what they are talking about? I gave you all the reasons it is
> nearly impossible, but you refuse to think once again. Maybe you
> should think about if it was so easy, why didn't they do it? I'm sure
> the Boston police have lots of contacts for certified Urban Tracking
> Dogs. Maybe you should think about reasons why they didn't do that.

Poor Dudu, He can't pay attention to what I'm saying so he has to invent
crap to knock down.

> once again, your ignorance and ability to attempt to lie your away
> around it is hilarious. Highly entertaining.

As usual your rant is simply a projection of your own failings.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:28:42 -0400, "Scout"

Clearly it did. But somehow you think you know much more about
tracking dogs than all the dog professionals, police and civilian
alike, in the entire Boston and surrounding areas. Amazing. We
should be hearing about you on the news if any of what you say is
true.

>
>>>>>Some of the documented and factually supported tracks my sister has done
>>>>>with her dogs are what you might expect to see on Ripley's.
>>>>
>>>> HAHAHAHAHAHA. Gee, I guess they should have called your sister,
>>>> right?
>>>
>>>So what personal experience/knowledge do you have?
>>>
>> My mom raised German Shepherds when I was a kid and she trained
>> tracking dogs (TD/TDX) and utility dogs (UDT) for years. It's what
>> she talked about all the time. Unlike you boneheads I actually
>> learned something along the way.
>
>Well, either she wasn't a very good trainer, or you didn't really pay
>attention.
>
>Dogs can and do track in urban environments. Maybe it wasn't that way when
>you were a kid, but today, it's regularly done. Welcome to the present.
>

But you clearly have no idea how or why they can't under many
circumstances.

YOU were the one envisioning a pack of bloodhounds taking off on the
trail of the guy through the city like they were chasing a wabbit
across a field. Absolutely hilarious. You are such a hoot it's hard
to imagine you actually believe any of what you say.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

>
>>>I will just note that as usual you will attack anyone even when you know
>>>nothing about the subject.
>>>
>> Which is exactly what you did and I called you on it. Obviously I
>> know a hundred times more about it than you do, again.
>
>Not really, and I'm not even an expert. If I can spot your errors, then
>clearly you know massively less than I do. See....your 'experience' dates
>back 40-50 years ago. Mine dates back to, well, NOW.
>

You can spot my errors? But you can't say what any are, or explain
anything about dog tracking. Just insist you know more than anybody
on the planet. That's all you can do, is insist you know so much
more than anybody else, but you can never say why. You think you know
everything about dog tracking because your sister saw a dog once.

>
>> You're good at nothing but being a clueless armchair quarterback doing
>> nothing but criticizing your betters.
>
>Not at all. Simply pointing out that a tracking dog could have significantly
>reduced the time and trouble it took to find the second brother.
>

Yea, right. But nobody in all of the Boston metropolitan area ever
thought of that.

Fuck me, you are a hoot.

>You want to contest that, then you're going to need to start bringing some
>facts to the table about the current state of the art when it comes to
>tracking dogs.

First of all you have to explain why you think nobody in all of Boston
(one of the most educated areas in the country) thought of using dogs
to try to isolate their search patterns to certain areas. That and
why you think all they had to do is let the dogs out and follow them
as they chase the perp out across the metropolitan area.

woof !

snicker....

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:9tc8n8lbnpg7krju8...@4ax.com...

No, as long as you are downwind from their path.

> In the country most scent
> is lifted off vegetation along the track.

If you're talking ground tracking. We're not so that's irrelevant.

> Mostly clothing rubs on
> tall grass and brush along the way, but broken vegetation greatly
> augments a dog's ability to follow a track. One main reason urban
> tracking dogs (UTD) are trained and certified seperately.

Oh, so now you admit that you can track in urban environments.

Man, you must be burning up Goggle trying to educate yourself enough to come
up to speed.

Sadly that comes too late to prevent you from showing your ignorance and
making a fool of yourself.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:45:39 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>> HAHAHAHAHA. You think it was so easy to just turn a pack of
>> bloodhounds loose on his track and you're accusing others of not
>> knowing what they are talking about? I gave you all the reasons it is
>> nearly impossible, but you refuse to think once again. Maybe you
>> should think about if it was so easy, why didn't they do it? I'm sure
>> the Boston police have lots of contacts for certified Urban Tracking
>> Dogs. Maybe you should think about reasons why they didn't do that.
>
>Poor Dudu, He can't pay attention to what I'm saying so he has to invent
>crap to knock down.
>
>
>> once again, your ignorance and ability to attempt to lie your away
>> around it is hilarious. Highly entertaining.
>
>As usual your rant is simply a projection of your own failings.
>

Yet you think that there is nobody in all of the Boston metropolitan
area who knows anywhere near as much about tracking dogs as you do.
Even though you have never trained one. Thread called "Did anyone
think of this" and all you can do is criticize about why didn't
anybody do this when it was SO simple.

I know you can't grasp it but once again you prove you are nothing but
a raving idiot who thinks everybody is so stupid. You're the only one
who knows anything about everything. Nobody in all of Boston thought
of taking a scent dog around the city. Yea right. You truly are
fucking insane if you believe that. Give it up. You've made enough
of a fool out of yourself.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:vpd8n893vueocv1b1...@4ax.com...

No, but I know a heck of a lot more than you do, and enough to know that the
question put out was entirely reasonable for asking why search dogs weren't
brought in.

> fuck, you are one crazy assed motherfucker. Too funny.
>
> So according to you, not only do I not know anything about tracking
> dogs,

That certainly seems to be the case.

> ALL those police professionals and private dog training
> contractors don't know what they are talking about either. Everybody
> in the entire world but you are idiots, right? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

Well, I do know the police professionals don't seem to have brought in
tracking dogs, and I'm sure the 'contractors' would have told them they
could have helped if they weren't already on the phone volunteering.

So why weren't they brought in?

It's a perfectly valid question, and all your thrashing around hasn't
altered that.

>>> (something that
>>> smells like the person/creature you want to track
>>> the other is about broken vegetation which greatly augments a dogs
>>> ability to detect a trail
>>
>>Again, that might apply only if you're using a dog trained in ground
>>scent.
>>An air scent trained dog, could care less.
>
> Actually, air scent dogs are more useful in an urban environment than
> a country one.

No, actually they are very useful in both. In fact most of the training
these days is strictly air training.

>Country trained dogs are more ground tracking which
> doesn't work as well in urban environments with nothing but blacktop
> and concrete.

Keep working on that Goggle Dudu, you're slowing getting there. Problem is,
I already knew it and you're playing catch-up.

However, at this point, by your own admission, I've proven my point.
Tracking dogs could have been used and used successfully.

So why weren't any called in?

<snip>

I would correct some of your other misconceptions, but that's not relevant
to the point being made. Which point, you initially denied and claimed that
tracking in an urban environment was impossible, you now admit can and does
occur.

But feel free to continue to educate yourself. It's nice to see that you can
do so when you really desire to do so.

Of course, it makes me wonder about why you chose to remain ignorant on some
many other topics.

>>Really Dudu, this is the point you should stop embarrassing yourself by
>>trying to pretend you have knowledge about something you don't.
>>
> Once again clearly I know an infinite amount more about the subject
> than you do.

And yet, you just confirmed that I was right all along, even while you were
telling me I was wrong.

So who knew more?

>>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she
>>>>>> trains
>>>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>>>
>>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>>>
>>>>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>>>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>>>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>>>cornered.
>>>>
>>> The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
>>> than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
>>> adequately.
>>
>>Not necessarily, since police dogs are often not trained to obey only a
>>specific person. Unless the officer who is going to run the dog is going
>>to
>>do all the training, then trying to obtain voice specific is all but
>>impossible. They are trained to obey specific commands. They do so.
>>
> They always team a training/handling officer with a dog. They never
> expect a dog to work under several handlers. In that situation they
> prove very unreliable, no matter what language you train them in.

This is getting away from the issue I was commenting on, but while they do
engage the officer in direct training in the final stages, much of the
training has already been completed before the dog is even determined to be
suitable for final training as a police dog. Nor does this final stage of
training suddenly overcome the prior training and make the dog responsive
ONLY to his handler's voice.

I'm not going to go any further on this, since I've proven my point that the
question ask about bringing in tracking dogs was a perfectly valid question
and it's an issue that they didn't do so sooner. But feel free to continue
to wear out Google in an attempt to educate yourself. If you keep it up in
10-20 years you might actually have learned what most of the rest of us
already know.

[deep]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 09:28:37 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
<jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing. A good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>
>Just wondering.

Yes, they thought of it dumbass. For many reasons you and Scout can't
comprehend it didn't work.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:h0g8n8tv2b1f0b0sq...@4ax.com...

Ok, Cite that one or more tracking dogs were brought in an failed.

Oh, and don't even claim the police dogs because you're already on record as
agreeing that police dogs aren't trackers.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

How do you know they tried it?

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:vpd8n893vueocv1b1...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:49:54 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>Again, that might apply only if you're using a dog trained in ground
>>scent.
>>An air scent trained dog, could care less.
>
> Actually, air scent dogs are more useful in an urban environment than
> a country one.

<snip>

Klaus, you might want to take this, and go back for Dudu's prior claim that
you can't use a dog to track in an urban environment and all his denials
and later admissions I was right all along, and post them as one or more
lies on your site.

Either he lied about what he knew, or he lied about knowing, but either way,
there are a number of lies in this whole thread, which have now all been
exposed by Dudu's final admission above that I was right, and have been from
the start.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:09:50 -0400, "Scout"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

Nobody in all of the Boston area knows anything at all about tracking
dogs. They would have succeeded fabulously if the only knew to try.

Too funny.

fucking hilarious.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:09:50 -0400, "Scout"

Cite that they succeeded if you think it is SO EASY !

>Oh, and don't even claim the police dogs because you're already on record as
>agreeing that police dogs aren't trackers.
>

Not all of them are as I explained. Dogs are usually not cross
trained as I explained. They have bomb dogs, and cadaver dogs, and
drug dogs, and tracking dogs, and take-down dogs. I'm sure the city
of Boston has all of the above, and most likely all were deployed
along with everybody and everything else. Didn't work though did it?

[stooges@bass.gov Mike Watt]

"deep" wrote in message news:2gi8n8dgs0gd725b2...@4ax.com...

####
Now THAT'S another hoot from the RETARD known as " Deep DooDoo!" <--- a
girls name!
A BIG lie if you will!

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oG7icKTHRRqyMAjI1XNyoA?p=Tracking%20Dogs%2C%20Boston&fr2=sb-top&fr=yfp-t-900-1

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:g9h8n8lni9tjde34v...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:45:39 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>> HAHAHAHAHA. You think it was so easy to just turn a pack of
>>> bloodhounds loose on his track and you're accusing others of not
>>> knowing what they are talking about? I gave you all the reasons it is
>>> nearly impossible, but you refuse to think once again. Maybe you
>>> should think about if it was so easy, why didn't they do it? I'm sure
>>> the Boston police have lots of contacts for certified Urban Tracking
>>> Dogs. Maybe you should think about reasons why they didn't do that.
>>
>>Poor Dudu, He can't pay attention to what I'm saying so he has to invent
>>crap to knock down.
>>
>>
>>> once again, your ignorance and ability to attempt to lie your away
>>> around it is hilarious. Highly entertaining.
>>
>>As usual your rant is simply a projection of your own failings.
>>
> Yet you think that there is nobody in all of the Boston metropolitan
> area who knows anywhere near as much about tracking dogs as you do.

Your straw man.

> Even though you have never trained one.

True, but knowing about tracking dogs and what they can do, doesn't mean you
had to train one.

Hell. Look at you. You claim to be an 'expert' and all you did, by your own
admission, was watch your mother when you were a CHILD.

If my knowledge is invalid, then yours is even more so.

> Thread called "Did anyone
> think of this" and all you can do is criticize about why didn't
> anybody do this when it was SO simple.

That is why the question was asked. I note you haven't answered the
question.

I will note that my response included a comment about why law enforcement
agencies often fail to imply tracking dogs even when they could be of great
service, but you seem to have ignored that along with so much other
information I've given you.

> I know you can't grasp it but once again you prove you are nothing but
> a raving idiot who thinks everybody is so stupid.

Says the person who claimed you couldn't track with a dog in an urban
environment.

> You're the only one
> who knows anything about everything. Nobody in all of Boston thought
> of taking a scent dog around the city. Yea right. You truly are
> fucking insane if you believe that. Give it up. You've made enough
> of a fool out of yourself.

<yap yap yap>

All I see here is that you're pissed because I was right, you were wrong,
and it got to the point that even you finally admitted the truth of my
statement.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:2gi8n8dgs0gd725b2...@4ax.com...

That does seem to be the case.

> Too funny.
>
> fucking hilarious.

So you think their inaction in failing to use a valid tool to track down the
suspect sooner is a matter of humor?

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:cnh8n8dcq50hfbtpi...@4ax.com...

Incompetence?

Ineptitude?

Ignorance?

What other reasons were there?

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 2:16 pm, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:49:54 -0400, "Scout"

> <me4g...@verizon,net> wrote:
>
>>"Tiefe Scheiße" wrote in message

>> news:he78n8d6nkt4k8tp8...@4ax.com...
>
>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:36:50 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>>>>On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Scheiße <d...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>>>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>>>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>>>>>>On Apr 21, 10:24 am, Tiefe Scheiße <d...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:56:36 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
>>>>>>> <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:59:39 PM UTC-4, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:28 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in
>>>>>>>>>> last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting

>>>>>>>>>> at the point the SUV was found. Deer hunters do that routinely as a

>>>> here Scheißekopf. <chuckle> ;)

>
>>> What, I have to try to educate you AGAIN? I'm going to start billing
>>> you people for private tutoring services.
>
>>> I'll give you a few hints and then there will be a pop quiz:
>
>>> one is cross tracks
>
>> No impact on dogs trained for air scent. Don't know about ground trackers.
>
>>> the other is the lack of a scent priming article.
>
>> Actually they had one. The interior of the vehicle they were shot in. Prime
>> the dog with that, give him an exemplar of the dead brother....and you're
>> rocking n' rolling. But hey, let's say we had to make it hard....I suppose
>> the police could have simply gotten a scent sample from the boy's home.
>> After all, they KNEW where he lived at this point.
>
>> Oh, and FYI, this one alone proves you have NO idea of what you're talking
>> about.
>
> Yea, right. And YOU know SO MUCH MORE about tracking dogs than all
> those dog professionals in the entire Boston metropolitan area.
>
> Yea, sure you do.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA
>
> fuck, you are one crazy assed motherfucker. Too funny.
>
> So according to you, not only do I not know anything about tracking
> dogs, ALL those police professionals and private dog training
> contractors don't know what they are talking about either. Everybody
> in the entire world but you are idiots, right? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
>

He's not talking about all the other idiots "in the entire world,"
Scheißekopf; just you.

>
>>> (something that smells like the person/creature you want to track
>>> the other is about broken vegetation which greatly augments a dogs
>>> ability to detect a trail
>
>> Again, that might apply only if you're using a dog trained in ground scent.
>> An air scent trained dog, could care less.
>
> Actually, air scent dogs are more useful in an urban environment than
> a country one. Country trained dogs are more ground tracking which
> doesn't work as well in urban environments with nothing but blacktop
> and concrete. Air scent dogs work better in urban areas because
> buildings tend to funnel wind therefore a dog could pick up an air
> scent blowing down the street. In such a case they would take their
> dog around to area intersections (if they had a reliable scent
> article) and let the dog wander around until it picked up a scent then
> they follow in that direction. If no alerts they just continue to
> drive around to key intersections in the area hoping the dog will
> alert on a scent. In the entire Boston area you can bet your ass they
> had scent dogs and did the exact thing. Clearly, because it didn't
> lead to a collar it didn't work. Clearly you fail to realize in order
> for air scent tracking to work they have to have a starting point. No
> starting point, no track.
>
>> Really Dudu, this is the point you should stop embarrassing yourself by
>> trying to pretend you have knowledge about something you don't.
>
> Once again clearly I know an infinite amount more about the subject
> than you do.
>

Yea, Scheißekopf, we know: "Google is YOUR friend." <chuckle> ;)

>
>>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains
>>>>>>are trained in Deutsch.]
>
>>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>
>>>> She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>>> days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>>> avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>>> cornered.
>
>>> The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
>>> than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
>>> adequately.
>
>> Not necessarily, since police dogs are often not trained to obey only a
>> specific person. Unless the officer who is going to run the dog is going to
>> do all the training, then trying to obtain voice specific is all but
>> impossible. They are trained to obey specific commands. They do so.
>
> They always team a training/handling officer with a dog.
>

You have mixed your adjectives here, Scheißekopf.

Trainers do not necessarily handle dogs in actual in-the-field ops
(although Nancy makes BIG bucks when she goes out as a contractor for
PDs and SOs which don;t have their own dogs).

>
> They never expect a dog to work under several handlers.
>

The proof of the falsity of that assertion is self-evident,
Scheißekopf: the dogs are already trained to follow commands by the
trainer BEFORE the handler is trained in commanding the dog.

Under your claim, the trainer could never command the dog again: and
that's a whole pile of your scheiß!

>
> In that situation they prove very unreliable, no matter what
> language you train them in.
>

> Once again I know nothing about dogs.
>
Ya got that one right, Scheißkopf! <chuckle> ;)

>
>>>> On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific"
>>>> (such as blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>
>>> True. Some bloodhounds are phenominal in their scent detection
>>> abilities. They probably are easily the top breed in that area. Scent
>>> tracking however, is very, very problematic in urban areas.
>
>> Not really.
>
>>>>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>
>>>>>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>
>>>>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
>>>>> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>
>>>> Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
>>>> forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
>>>> showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.
>
>>>> Got any YouTube to back up your claim?
>

No response from Scheißkopf.

>
>>>> Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were
>>>> trained to do, Scheißekopf?
>
>>>> Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
>>>> dogs?
>
>>>> Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>
>>> This part is exactly right. Dogs are almost never cross trained. They
>>> don't perform nearly as well. The five main categories are cadaver,
>>> bomb, drug, scent tracking, and perp take-down ("attack") dogs.
>>> Probably most cop dogs are take-down dogs. If they need a scent
>>> dog they bring in a contractor specialist.
>

Like my friend, Nancy. :)

>
>> So, when you saw all those police dogs.....by your own admission they
>> weren't tracking dogs.
>
> I'm sure they had all of the above deployed. Including bomb dogs.
>
>> You should have known that before you even threw out that red herring.
>> I have to say, I bet your goggle searches are going like crazy. But it's a bit
>> too late to cover up the ignorance you have already shown.
>
>>>>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>>>>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>>>>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>
>>>> I don't have Bloodhounds, Scheißekopf; but mine would be great at
>>>> tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>>>> weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>
>>>> And you're the one "in the fields", Scheißekopf:
>>>>

>>>> "I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
>>>> if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"
>>>> --Scheißekopf Tiefe Scheiße, Apr 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

>>>
>>> Unlike you I actually learned something from being around people
>>> who trained TD/UDT dogs.
>

Actually, when we are "around" each other, it's not "dog training"
that routinely "comes up." ;)

Moreover, the specific dog BigDog brought up in the first place is a
UDVST (Utility Dog title with a Variable Surface Tracking title -
AKC). ["Google is MY friend, too!"<g> :) ]

>
>> Apparently not.
>
>> Tell us again about how the police dogs were going to track the suspect.....
>> That was pretty funny.
>
> What? I was telling you WHY the police dogs were NOT going
> to track the subject. Not my fault once again you don't get it.
>

We already "get it," Scheißekopf: they weren't "track-trained."

But the question was "Why weren't UDVST `track-trained' dogs used
here?"

Do try to keep up. <chuckle> ;)

"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"
--Scheißekopf Tiefe Scheiße, Apr 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

ps: Maybe Klaus needs a Lie Recognition-trained "BC" to help him keep
all your lies "rounded up." <chuckle> ;)

[deep]

For you? All of the above, adding in pathological sociopathy,
probably paranoid schizophrenia, originating in poor genetics and a
virtually non-existent public education.

that about sums you up.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:32:50 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"deep" wrote in message news:g9h8n8lni9tjde34v...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:45:39 -0400, "Scout"
>> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> HAHAHAHAHA. You think it was so easy to just turn a pack of
>>>> bloodhounds loose on his track and you're accusing others of not
>>>> knowing what they are talking about? I gave you all the reasons it is
>>>> nearly impossible, but you refuse to think once again. Maybe you
>>>> should think about if it was so easy, why didn't they do it? I'm sure
>>>> the Boston police have lots of contacts for certified Urban Tracking
>>>> Dogs. Maybe you should think about reasons why they didn't do that.
>>>
>>>Poor Dudu, He can't pay attention to what I'm saying so he has to invent
>>>crap to knock down.
>>>
>>>
>>>> once again, your ignorance and ability to attempt to lie your away
>>>> around it is hilarious. Highly entertaining.
>>>
>>>As usual your rant is simply a projection of your own failings.
>>>
>> Yet you think that there is nobody in all of the Boston metropolitan
>> area who knows anywhere near as much about tracking dogs as you do.
>
>Your straw man.
>

Nope. You said even "mediocre" dog would have been wonderfully
successful if only they had thought of it

Scout wrote:
"Hell, it wouldn't have even taken a good one. Even a mediocre one
should "have had to problems with that trail."

"wouldn't even have taken a good one"

so what you are claiming is there isn't one single good tracking dog
in all of eastern Massachussetts. A population of how many millions
and not one good or even mediocre tracking dog.

Yea, right.

>> Even though you have never trained one.
>
>True, but knowing about tracking dogs and what they can do, doesn't mean you
>had to train one.
>

But you clearly know nothing about what they can do or how.

>Hell. Look at you. You claim to be an 'expert' and all you did, by your own
>admission, was watch your mother when you were a CHILD.
>

She trained dogs until I was well into my thirties. I heard about her
tracking dogs all the freeking time. She didn't talk about anything
else for years.

>If my knowledge is invalid, then yours is even more so.
>

All those dog professionals in eastern Massachussetts are more
knowledgeable than you. You can count on it. You're the one who
thinks everybody in Boston is stupid and you know so much more than
anybody somehow.

>> Thread called "Did anyone
>> think of this" and all you can do is criticize about why didn't
>> anybody do this when it was SO simple.
>
>That is why the question was asked. I note you haven't answered the
>question.
>

uh, yes I did. I explained to you that they thought of it but why it
didn't work.

>I will note that my response included a comment about why law enforcement
>agencies often fail to imply tracking dogs even when they could be of great
>service, but you seem to have ignored that along with so much other
>information I've given you.
>

I think it's a good bet that during the biggest man-hunt in recent US
history, that somebody in all of Boston thought of taking their
tracking dogs out of the kennel.

>> I know you can't grasp it but once again you prove you are nothing but
>> a raving idiot who thinks everybody is so stupid.
>
>Says the person who claimed you couldn't track with a dog in an urban
>environment.
>

Liar. I didn't say you couldn't. I said "very highly problematic"
and "near impossible". I never said it was impossible. So stop lying
once again.

>> You're the only one
>> who knows anything about everything. Nobody in all of Boston thought
>> of taking a scent dog around the city. Yea right. You truly are
>> fucking insane if you believe that. Give it up. You've made enough
>> of a fool out of yourself.
>
><yap yap yap>
>
>All I see here is that you're pissed because I was right, you were wrong,
>and it got to the point that even you finally admitted the truth of my
>statement.
>

You were right but everybody in all of Boston was wrong. Yea right.
Nobody thought of it and not even one single "good one"even a
"mediocre" dog in all of Boston. But if you were there with one of
those dogs you never trained would have saved the day. Just like if
you were a school teacher with a gun you would have saved everybody by
gunning down the perp. Yea right. You're a legend in your own mind.

Yea, right. Give it up loser boy. You failed miserably again.

Don't forget you can't be a school teacher in your armed fantasies.
You never even graduated from high school let alone teachers' college.

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 2:45 pm, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon,net> wrote:
>
>
> "Tiefe Scheiße" wrote in message
> news:7lb8n819immuvp5t4...@4ax.com...
>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:17:55 -0400, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon,net> wrote:
>
>>>"Tiefe Scheiße" wrote in message

>>> news:nk38n851nfusnp582...@4ax.com...
>
>>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

>>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>>>>> On Apr 21, 10:24 am, Tiefe Scheiße <d...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Once again you demonstrate your appalling ignorance. Maybe you should
>>>>>> find someone to read to you about tracking dogs before you embarrass
>>>>>> yourself any more.
>
>>>>> No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally
>>>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>>>> Service.
>

>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains
>>>>> are trained in Deutsch.]
>
>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>
>>> No, police dogs are often trained in a foreign language to help prevent
>>> anyone but the handler giving orders to the dog.
>
>> Bullshit ! If a perp can call off your dog you shouldn't be training
>> dogs.
>
> So.....each police officer would have to train their own dog and if
> something happened to them in the field and they couldn't call off the dog,
> then no other officer could even be instructed on how to get the dog off the
> suspect or from doing whatever was the last command given?
>
> Yea, like that's going to happen.
>
> We have professional trainers because that's their job and what they were
> trained to do. Then we have police officers, some of whom have been trained
> to HANDLE a trained dog. Not a dog they trained, but one that is already
> trained and ready for the field.
>
> Sheese.....you really have no idea on how these things work do you?
>

You ought to hear some of the stories Nancy tells about some of the
cops she has to train as K-9 Officers. <chuckle> ;)

Since a large percentage of officers she has to train are from Texas
and are often "multi-language" (English & Spanish), one problem she
constantly runs into is the officer's difficulty learning all the
necessary commands in German: "Verfolgen, y'all." <chuckle> ;)

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:34:42 -0400, "Scout"

No it doesn't you idiot. What is the case once again you are a
clueless wonder who has yourself convinced that everybody else is
stupid.

>> Too funny.
>>
>> fucking hilarious.
>
>So you think their inaction in failing to use a valid tool to track down the
>suspect sooner is a matter of humor?
>

Cite that they failed to deploy dogs after the Boston bombing. YOU
are the one claiming it would have worked if they only tried it, but
clearly know nothing about the subject.

try googling 'boston bombing k-9 units' if you want to see some
pictures.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:46:24 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>But the question was "Why weren't UDVST `track-trained' dogs used
>here?"

Why do you assume they weren't? You don't think Boston had Urban
Tracking Dogs, or that they didn't think of deploying them in the
middle of the biggest man-hunt in recent US history? Are you claiming
that all the cops in Boston are as stupid as you?

And if google is your friend, why don't you trying looking for Boston
bombing k-9 units? They got lots and lots of nice pictures of
doggies.

woof !

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 4:42 pm, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:46:24 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> But the question was "Why weren't UDVST `track-trained' dogs used
>> here?"
>
> Why do you assume they weren't?
>

I haven't ASSumed anything, Scheißekopf; merely pointed out that you
have provided ZERO evidence that "blood-tracking trained" dogs _were
used.

>
> You don't think Boston had Urban Tracking Dogs, or that they
> didn't think of deploying them in the middle of the biggest man-hunt
> in recent US history?
>

Argumentum ad verecundiam

>
> Are you claiming that all the cops in Boston are as stupid as you?
>

Argumentum ad hominem

>
> And if google is your friend, why don't you trying looking for Boston
> bombing k-9 units? They got lots and lots of nice pictures of
> doggies.
>

http://dmn.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Boston-Marathon-Bombing-K9-Unit-600x450.jpg

Petty Officer 2nd Class Nicholas Heinen (right), his K-9 Camilla and
Lt. Ray Jackson, from Maritime Safety and Security Team (MSST) 91106,
in New York, scan passenger's bags prior to boarding the ferry in
Boston, Mass., April 16, 2013. The MSST is providing additional
screening and security in Boston Harbor.
U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Rob Simpson

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/boston-marathon-bombing-response/

Petty Officer 2nd Class Nicholas Heinen, a canine handler from
Maritime Safety and Security Team (MSST) New York, and canine Camilla
search a ferry in Boston Harbor, April 16, 2013, for possible
explosives following the explosions at the Boston Marathon. The Coast
Guard works every day with port partners to maintain the safety and
security within the maritime community.
U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class MyeongHi Clegg

http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2013-04-19T141534Z_405158649_GM1E94J1PS201_RTRMADP_3_USA-EXPLOSIONS-BOSTON.JPG

Law enforcement officials depart with their K-9 units during the
search for a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing in Watertown,
Massachusetts April 19, 2013.

OK, Scheißekopf: where's your evidence these dog; or ANY of the dogs
used in Boston or Watertown, were "blood-tracking trained" dogs?
>
> woof !
>
MRROWW! PFFT! PFFT!

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:26:36 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 21, 4:42 pm, Tiefe Schei�e <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:46:24 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But the question was "Why weren't UDVST `track-trained' dogs used
>>> here?"
>>
>> Why do you assume they weren't?
>>

>I haven't ASSumed anything, Schei�ekopf; merely pointed out that you

>have provided ZERO evidence that "blood-tracking trained" dogs _were
>used.

I never made any claims whatsoever about "blood-tracking trained
dogs". I merely responded to Scout's absurd claims about any
"mediocre" dog could have easily found the perp "no problem". I
merely tried to explain to you armchair warriors that running tracking
dogs under such circumstances is extremely difficult and rarely as
successful as you might dream. I explained that it wasn't as easy as
turning lose the dogs and running like hell to keep up as the bolt
across a field howling after an escaped convict. You've all seen way
too many escaped convict movies.

>>
>> You don't think Boston had Urban Tracking Dogs, or that they
>> didn't think of deploying them in the middle of the biggest man-hunt
>> in recent US history?
>>
>Argumentum ad verecundiam

google Boston k-9 units if you really think they didn't get out their
dogs. Police everywhere use k-9 units now. I think Boston has a few.

>>
>> Are you claiming that all the cops in Boston are as stupid as you?
>>
>Argumentum ad hominem
>>

Apparently you are.

>> And if google is your friend, why don't you trying looking for Boston
>> bombing k-9 units? They got lots and lots of nice pictures of
>> doggies.
>>
>http://dmn.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Boston-Marathon-Bombing-K9-Unit-600x450.jpg
>
>Petty Officer 2nd Class Nicholas Heinen (right), his K-9 Camilla and
>Lt. Ray Jackson, from Maritime Safety and Security Team (MSST) 91106,
>in New York, scan passenger's bags prior to boarding the ferry in
>Boston, Mass., April 16, 2013. The MSST is providing additional
>screening and security in Boston Harbor.
>U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Rob Simpson
>
>http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/boston-marathon-bombing-response/
>
>Petty Officer 2nd Class Nicholas Heinen, a canine handler from
>Maritime Safety and Security Team (MSST) New York, and canine Camilla
>search a ferry in Boston Harbor, April 16, 2013, for possible
>explosives following the explosions at the Boston Marathon. The Coast
>Guard works every day with port partners to maintain the safety and
>security within the maritime community.
>U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class MyeongHi Clegg
>
>http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2013-04-19T141534Z_405158649_GM1E94J1PS201_RTRMADP_3_USA-EXPLOSIONS-BOSTON.JPG
>
>Law enforcement officials depart with their K-9 units during the
>search for a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing in Watertown,
>Massachusetts April 19, 2013.
>

>OK, Schei�ekopf: where's your evidence these dog; or ANY of the dogs

>used in Boston or Watertown, were "blood-tracking trained" dogs?

Show me where I said that you lying ass. It was scout who thought it
would have been trivial for them to follow a blood trail. Maybe you
better find a volunteer in your nursing home to read it to you because
I never once used that term.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:32:49 -0400, "Mike Watt" <The sto...@bass.gov>

LOL!

Sorry, the lies and retardedness are entirely yours again.

http://www.vosizneias.com/news/photos/view/231952955

An FBI SWAT team surrounds a home while they follow a tracking dog as
police search neighborhoods yard by yard after a police chase and
shootout with two heavily armed men shortly following the shooting of
an MIT police officer just three days after the dual bombings at the
Boston Marathon in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA, 19 April 2013.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:34:42 -0400, "Scout"

No it doesn't.

>> Too funny.
>>
>> fucking hilarious.
>
>So you think their inaction in failing to use a valid tool to track down the
>suspect sooner is a matter of humor?

Your idiotic self-inflated presumptions you know better than the
authorities is a source of endless humor.

[bigdog]

On Sunday, April 21, 2013 11:51:48 AM UTC-4, JohnJohnsn wrote:
> On Apr 21, 10:24 am, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you might want to consider issues with tracking in busy urban areas.

>
> Maybe you might want to consider knowing about that what you
> propagandize, Scheißekopf!
>
You want dudu to make a thoughtful post? Don't you think that's a little overly optimistic?

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:36:50 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Schei�e <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>
>>>On Apr 21, 10:24 am, Tiefe Schei�e <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:56:36 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
>>>> <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:59:39 PM UTC-4, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:28 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>

>>>>>>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in
>>>>>>> last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood trail starting
>>>>>>> at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as a
>>>>>>> mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing.
>>>>>>> A good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>>
>>>>>>> Just wondering.
>>

>>>>>> Well, BD, since we're "Monday morning quarterbacking" here, I'd point
>>>>>> put that both Boston and Watertown are very urban areas, and I'd find
>>>>>> it unlikely that many (any?) of the officers there are hunters, and
>>>>>> even less likely there was even a thought about using bloodhounds in
>>>>>> the search.
>>
>>>>>> But that notwitstanding, it is an interesting question. :)
>>
>>>>> FWIW, Judge Jeanine just asked the same question during Fox News
>>>>> 9:00pm segment. The guest danced around the question by pointing out
>>>>> the homeowner used the blood trail to find Tsarnaev without ever
>>>>> answering why the cops didn't do the same thing earlier.
>>
>>>>> I don't want to seem overly critical because I think overall, they did a
>>>>> good job of hunting these guys down, but I wonder if the manhunt might
>>>>> have ended sooner if somebody had looked to see if there was a traceable
>>>>> blood trail leading away from the bullet riddled SUV.
>>
>>>>> I mentioned earlier I have a couple of beagles and I am fascinated the way
>>>>> they can track an animal just from the scent it leaves behind. That's why I
>>>>> believe if he there was a trail of blood drops, blood hounds could have led
>>>>> them right to Tsarnaev in no time at all.
>>

>>>> Once again you demonstrate your appalling ignorance. Maybe you should
>>>> find someone to read to you about tracking dogs before you embarrass
>>>> yourself any more.
>>

>>> No need, Schei�ekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>> Service.
>>

>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>
>We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

>hereSchei�ekopf. <chuckle> ;)
>>
>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Schei�e!" [since police dogs she trains

>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>
>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>

>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>cornered.
>

>On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>>

>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>
>>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>
>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
>> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>>
>Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
>forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
>showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.
>
>Got any YouTube to back up your claim?
>

>Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were

>trained to do, Schei�ekopf?

>
>Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
>dogs?

Tracking

http://www.vosizneias.com/news/photos/view/231952955

An FBI SWAT team surrounds a home while they follow a tracking dog as
police search neighborhoods yard by yard after a police chase and
shootout with two heavily armed men shortly following the shooting of
an MIT police officer just three days after the dual bombings at the
Boston Marathon in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA, 19 April 2013.



>

>Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>>

>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>>

>I don't have Bloodhounds, Schei�ekopf; but mine would be great at

>tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>

>And you're the one "in the fields", Schei�ekopf:
>
>"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
> if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"
>--Schei�ekopf Tiefe Schei�e, Apr 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:16:19 -0600, deep wrote:

>On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:49:54 -0400, "Scout"
><me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"deep" wrote in message news:he78n8d6nkt4k8tp8...@4ax.com...

>>>>>> No need, Scheißekopf; I have a friend down in Waco who professionally

>>>>>> trains dogs for the police: up to and including the DEA and the Secret
>>>>>> Service.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then maybe if you've been paying attention can list a few of the
>>>>> problems trying to track a fleeing suspect in a busy urban area.
>>>>>
>>>>We'd rather have _you_ list them; seeing as how you're the "expurt"

>>>>hereScheißekopf. <chuckle> ;)

>>>>>
>>> What, I have to try to educate you AGAIN? I'm going to start billing
>>> you people for private tutoring services.
>>>
>>> I'll give you a few hints and then there will be a pop quiz:
>>>
>>> one is cross tracks
>>
>>No impact on dogs trained for air scent. Don't know about ground trackers.
>>
>>> the other is the lack of a scent priming article.
>>
>>Actually they had one. The interior of the vehicle they were shot in. Prime
>>the dog with that, give him an exemplar of the dead brother....and you're
>>rocking n' rolling. But hey, let's say we had to make it hard....I suppose
>>the police could have simply gotten a scent sample from the boy's home.
>>After all, they KNEW where he lived at this point.
>>
>>Oh, and FYI, this one alone proves you have NO idea of what you're talking
>>about.
>>
>Yea, right. And YOU know SO MUCH MORE about tracking dogs than all
>those dog professionals in the entire Boston metropolitan area.
>
>Yea, sure you do.
>
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA
>
>fuck, you are one crazy assed motherfucker. Too funny.
>
>So according to you, not only do I not know anything about tracking
>dogs, ALL those police professionals and private dog training
>contractors don't know what they are talking about either. Everybody
>in the entire world but you are idiots, right? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>

>>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains

>>>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>>>
>>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>>>
>>>>She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>>>days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>>>avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>>>cornered.
>>>>

>>> The properly trained dog is not going to listen to a target rather
>>> than it's master. If a perp can call off your dog it isn't trained
>>> adequately.
>>
>>Not necessarily, since police dogs are often not trained to obey only a
>>specific person. Unless the officer who is going to run the dog is going to
>>do all the training, then trying to obtain voice specific is all but
>>impossible. They are trained to obey specific commands. They do so.
>>

>They always team a training/handling officer with a dog. They never
>expect a dog to work under several handlers. In that situation they

>prove very unreliable, no matter what language you train them in.
>

>Once again you know nothing about dogs.

>>
>>>>On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>>>>blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>>>>

>>> True. Some bloodhounds are phenominal in their scent detection
>>> abilities. They probably are easily the top breed in that area. Scent
>>> tracking however, is very, very problematic in urban areas.
>>
>>Not really.
>>

>>>>>>> Oh, and they probably had a hundred dogs on the job.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yea: after he was cornered! (But I doubt your "hundred" claim.]
>>>>>
>>>>> There were many police dogs shown on the news standing around
>>>>> with all the guys in body armor with assault rifles.
>>>>>
>>>>Let's see: I watched the whole thing go down; alternating back and
>>>>forth between CNN and Fox News; guess I could have missed a scene
>>>>showing "police dogs...standing around;" but not likely.
>>>>
>>>>Got any YouTube to back up your claim?
>>>>
>>>>Moreover; care to provide the specifics of what _these_ dogs were

>>>>trained to do, Scheißekopf?

>>>>
>>>>Drugs, bombs, cadavers, live humans; or maybe just plain old attack
>>>>dogs?
>>>>

>>>>Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>>>>>

>>> This part is exactly right. Dogs are almost never cross trained. They
>>> don't perform nearly as well. The five main categories are cadaver,
>>> bomb, drug, scent tracking, and perp take-down ("attack") dogs.
>>> Probably most cop dogs are take-down dogs. If they need a scent dog
>>> they bring in a contractor specialist.
>>

>>So, when you saw all those police dogs.....by your own admission they
>>weren't tracking dogs.
>>
>I'm sure they had all of the above deployed. Including bomb dogs.

Not to mention tracking dogs leading the hunt.

the idea that a manhunt involving thousands of coordinated searchers
from a multiplicity of agencies didn't deploy tracking dogs is quite,
of course, quite insane.

[deep]

Isn't that hilarious? Scout insists that if they even had "mediocre"
tracking dogs finding the perp's track and following would have been
"no problem". If only they had thought of it. Nobody in all of the
Boston area knows anything at all about tracking dogs but Scout knows
everything even though he never even taught a puppy how to fetch a
ball.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:49:14 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"deep" wrote in message news:9tc8n8lbnpg7krju8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:34:02 -0400, "Scout"
>> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"JohnJohnsn" <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:794e3819-34a2-4a99...@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

>>>> On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>>>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Apr 21, 10:24 am, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:56:36 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
>>>>>>> <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:59:39 PM UTC-4, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:28 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Since we now know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was seriously wounded in
>>>>>>>>>> last night's gun battle, did anyone think to look for a blood
>>>>>>>>>> trail
>>>>>>>>>> starting
>>>>>>>>>> at the point the SUV was found. Deeerhunters do that routinely as
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> mortally wounded deer can run hundreds of yards before collapsing.
>>>>>>>>>> A good blood hound would have had no trouble following that trail.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just wondering.
>>>>>

>>>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiße!" [since police dogs she trains
>>>>> >are trained in Deutsch.]
>>>>>
>>>>> People with German Shepherds love to train them in German.
>>>>>
>>>> She trains more than German Shepherds (and the preferred dog these
>>>> days is the Belgian Malinois); but all are trained in German: helps
>>>> avoid problems with a "perp" trying to "call off" the dog when he's
>>>> cornered.
>>>>

>>>> On top of that, there is no better dog at "odor-specific" (such as
>>>> blood) tracking than the Bloodhound.
>>>

>>>Actually, they are generally considered best if you're training for ground
>>>scent. My sister has had excellent results using german shorthairs trained
>>>for air scent. Apparently air scent allows a quicker and broader 'search'
>>>pattern with less false leads and interruptions in the track.
>>>
>>>
>> As long as you're downwind from your prey.
>
>No, as long as you are downwind from their path.
>
>> In the country most scent
>> is lifted off vegetation along the track.
>
>If you're talking ground tracking. We're not so that's irrelevant.
>
>> Mostly clothing rubs on
>> tall grass and brush along the way, but broken vegetation greatly
>> augments a dog's ability to follow a track. One main reason urban
>> tracking dogs (UTD) are trained and certified seperately.
>
>Oh, so now you admit that you can track in urban environments.
>
>Man, you must be burning up Goggle trying to educate yourself enough to come
>up to speed.
>
>Sadly that comes too late to prevent you from showing your ignorance and
>making a fool of yourself.

Actually you are showing your ignorance and making a fool of yourself
by even imagining such a manhunt wasn't led by tracking dogs.

Where on earth DID you get that idea from?

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

In my admittedly limited experience, I have never seen a subject
raised in these forums where Scout didn't think he knew better than
all the experienced experts combined.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 17:37:07 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
<D...@null.net> wrote:

>>>An FBI SWAT team surrounds a home while they follow a tracking dog as
>>>police search neighborhoods yard by yard after a police chase and
>>>shootout with two heavily armed men shortly following the shooting of
>>>an MIT police officer just three days after the dual bombings at the
>>>Boston Marathon in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA, 19 April 2013.
>>
>>Isn't that hilarious? Scout insists that if they even had "mediocre"
>>tracking dogs finding the perp's track and following would have been
>>"no problem". If only they had thought of it. Nobody in all of the
>>Boston area knows anything at all about tracking dogs but Scout knows
>>everything even though he never even taught a puppy how to fetch a
>>ball.
>
>In my admittedly limited experience, I have never seen a subject
>raised in these forums where Scout didn't think he knew better than
>all the experienced experts combined.

And you won't. Everybody in the whole world are nothing but a bunch
of inferior, stupid idiots. Except for Scout of course. But the
tards do stick together. No matter how inane, stupid, and ignorant a
comment they make might be, the rest of the junk yard dogs will break
every logical fallacy in the book rather than admit a liberal might be
right and a conservative might be wrong (even though they ALWAYS are).

[deep]

You're the one who asked the incredibly stupid question. Do you
seriously think they didn't even THINK of using dogs in the largest
manhunt in recent history?

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

IMO the type you mention use these forums as a support group and
personal chat room rather than a debating arena or venue for learning
or exchange of ideas.

To be fair there are others such as RD that use logic and evidence
based arguments to support their positions rather than a tedious
continual litany of personal abuse or JohnJohnsn who seems to combine
the two.

[deep]

Yep. Sandman is definately an exception. He's a smart guy and
usually uses a tempered, logical argument to support his opinions.
He's a bit too conservative for me to agree with much he says, but at
least he says it intelligently. Unlike pretty much everyone else.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:oqi8n8h1tvn6u5v6s...@4ax.com...

How could they succeed if they weren't brought in?

Wow, Dudu, I knew you were stupid but really.

While you're attempting to figure out how you fucked that one up, I will
simply note for everyone else that you presented ZERO evidence to support
your claim.

>>Oh, and don't even claim the police dogs because you're already on record
>>as
>>agreeing that police dogs aren't trackers.
>>
> Not all of them are as I explained. Dogs are usually not cross
> trained as I explained. They have bomb dogs, and cadaver dogs, and
> drug dogs, and tracking dogs, and take-down dogs. I'm sure the city
> of Boston has all of the above, and most likely all were deployed
> along with everybody and everything else.

Most likely?

Odd, you just told me that was done by private contractors. So where you
lying then, or are you lying now?

> Didn't work though did it?

You haven't shown it was even tried so how can you claim it don't work?

Oh, that's right, you figure if you simply assert they had such dogs no one
will notice your lack of factual support.

[Scout]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message
news:0lv8n8lt0obdubost...@4ax.com...

So where is the dog in the photograph?

No offense G, but reporters regularly fuck up the facts. Indeed I will bet
you dollars to donuts that dog was either a bomb sniffing dog or a police
attack dog. Neither of which are of any use in trying to track a suspect.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:u6k8n89i2sgikb4l5...@4ax.com...

Yep, and your point?

> so what you are claiming is there isn't one single good tracking dog
> in all of eastern Massachussetts.

Ah, you're out to build a straw man since I said no such thing.

> A population of how many millions
> and not one good or even mediocre tracking dog.
>
> Yea, right.

Well, have fun with your straw man.

>>> Even though you have never trained one.
>>
>>True, but knowing about tracking dogs and what they can do, doesn't mean
>>you
>>had to train one.
>>
> But you clearly know nothing about what they can do or how.

So how come I was correcting you?

Who was it that said dogs couldn't tract in an urban area only to retract
that claim and admit they could?

Sounds like something you would say.

>>Hell. Look at you. You claim to be an 'expert' and all you did, by your
>>own
>>admission, was watch your mother when you were a CHILD.
>>
> She trained dogs until I was well into my thirties.

So as a person of 30 you were still considered a child?

Interesting.

> I heard about her
> tracking dogs all the freeking time. She didn't talk about anything
> else for years.

So you never actually trained one, and thus by your own standards you don't
know nothing about tracking dogs?

>>If my knowledge is invalid, then yours is even more so.
>>
> All those dog professionals in eastern Massachussetts are more
> knowledgeable than you.

I'm sure they are. Just as I am more knowledgeable than you.

> You can count on it. You're the one who
> thinks everybody in Boston is stupid and you know so much more than
> anybody somehow.

Another lame straw man by Dudu.

>>> Thread called "Did anyone
>>> think of this" and all you can do is criticize about why didn't
>>> anybody do this when it was SO simple.
>>
>>That is why the question was asked. I note you haven't answered the
>>question.
>>
> uh, yes I did. I explained to you that they thought of it but why it
> didn't work.

Oh, then where's your cite?

Not empty assertions you made, but actual reports that they thought of it,
actual tracking dogs were brought in and still managed to follow a recent
trail that included a blood trail by the person being sought.

>>I will note that my response included a comment about why law enforcement
>>agencies often fail to imply tracking dogs even when they could be of
>>great
>>service, but you seem to have ignored that along with so much other
>>information I've given you.
>>
> I think it's a good bet that during the biggest man-hunt in recent US
> history, that somebody in all of Boston thought of taking their
> tracking dogs out of the kennel.

Oh, now it's just a 'good bet'.


So when you claimed they did, you were simply lying.


I think at this point, we need to stop. When you start admitting you lied,
then clearly you no longer have anything to contribute.

Meanwhile, I will note that the question asked has been shown to be valid
and you've offered ZERO proof that tracking dogs were even called in much
less tried and failed.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:ttj8n89o7g23unsi4...@4ax.com...

I think for that, you need a time out.

<plonk>

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:svp8n85f5e93kjl9v...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:26:36 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
> <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>>On Apr 21, 4:42 pm, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:46:24 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> But the question was "Why weren't UDVST `track-trained' dogs used
>>>> here?"
>>>
>>> Why do you assume they weren't?
>>>

>>I haven't ASSumed anything, Scheißekopf; merely pointed out that you

>>have provided ZERO evidence that "blood-tracking trained" dogs _were
>>used.
>
> I never made any claims whatsoever about "blood-tracking trained
> dogs". I merely responded to Scout's absurd claims about any
> "mediocre" dog could have easily found the perp "no problem".

Bullshit, I specifically stated tracking dog. If you're going to lie Dudu,
you shouldn't lie about things so easily shown to be lies.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:17:52 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>>
>> An FBI SWAT team surrounds a home while they follow a tracking dog as
>> police search neighborhoods yard by yard after a police chase and
>> shootout with two heavily armed men shortly following the shooting of
>> an MIT police officer just three days after the dual bombings at the
>> Boston Marathon in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA, 19 April 2013.
>
>So where is the dog in the photograph?

Find someone to read the text to you.

>
>No offense G, but reporters regularly fuck up the facts. Indeed I will bet
>you dollars to donuts that dog was either a bomb sniffing dog or a police
>attack dog. Neither of which are of any use in trying to track a suspect.
>

You have no fucking idea so quit the bullshit.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:14:51 -0400, "Scout"

Prove they weren't. There's pictures of cops with dogs in Boston all
over the net. Google it.

>Wow, Dudu, I knew you were stupid but really.

Once again you prove how willing you are to lie to tapdance around the
truth and hide your bullshit.

>
>While you're attempting to figure out how you fucked that one up, I will
>simply note for everyone else that you presented ZERO evidence to support
>your claim.
>

You're the one who claimed it was SO easy to track somebody down that
you assumed they didn't even try or else it would have worked. Now
PROVE IT! But you don't have a shred of evidence for anything you've
claimed. Just made a fool of you again.

>
>>>Oh, and don't even claim the police dogs because you're already on record
>>>as
>>>agreeing that police dogs aren't trackers.
>>>
>> Not all of them are as I explained. Dogs are usually not cross
>> trained as I explained. They have bomb dogs, and cadaver dogs, and
>> drug dogs, and tracking dogs, and take-down dogs. I'm sure the city
>> of Boston has all of the above, and most likely all were deployed
>> along with everybody and everything else.
>
>Most likely?
>
>Odd, you just told me that was done by private contractors. So where you
>lying then, or are you lying now?
>
>> Didn't work though did it?
>
>You haven't shown it was even tried so how can you claim it don't work?
>

You are insane if you think they didn't think of deploying tracking
dogs in Boston.

>Oh, that's right, you figure if you simply assert they had such dogs no one
>will notice your lack of factual support.
>

You're the one that originally claimed that it was SO EASY that if
they had thought of it they would have succeeded. And nobody in all
of Boston thought of that. I proved you lied and don't have a clue
about dogs. You've never explained one single thing about tracking
dogs. Only insisted that everybody else was a clueless idiot but you
are the smartest guy in the world. Once again all you do is prove
your insanity.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:ke89n8lgrpgop4v93...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:17:52 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> An FBI SWAT team surrounds a home while they follow a tracking dog as
>>> police search neighborhoods yard by yard after a police chase and
>>> shootout with two heavily armed men shortly following the shooting of
>>> an MIT police officer just three days after the dual bombings at the
>>> Boston Marathon in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA, 19 April 2013.
>>
>>So where is the dog in the photograph?
>
> Find someone to read the text to you.

And as noted, reporters regularly make errors in the facts.

>>No offense G, but reporters regularly fuck up the facts. Indeed I will bet
>>you dollars to donuts that dog was either a bomb sniffing dog or a police
>>attack dog. Neither of which are of any use in trying to track a suspect.
>>
> You have no fucking idea so quit the bullshit.

Actually I do even the huge number of errors documented in news reports.

Now besides the caption of a single picture which may or may not be correct,
is there any conclusive proof that actual tracking dogs, not bomb dogs, not
attack dogs, but TRACKING dogs were actually used?

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 7:14 pm, GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:36:50 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>>On Apr 21, 11:11 am, Tiefe Scheiße <d...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>
>>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>> here Scheißekopf . <chuckle> ;)
>
>>>> She would say "Sie sind voller Scheiß!" [since police dogs she trains

My Hebrew is a little rusty: are you _sure_ of that translation? ;)

And WOW! An invisible "tracking dog"!

That will certainly come in handy. <chucke> ;)

Seriously though, saying the dog is a "tracking dog" doesn't actually
make it so.

BTW: this is a more-relevant photo:

http://assets2.static.vosizneias.com/uploads/news_photos/thumbnails/800_2fpxhmbjrrwczxfi4wa9j9pswve6jfov.jpg
"A Police SWAT team sniper keeps watch as the team makes house to
house searches in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA 19 April 2013."

I mean, at least the _car_ is "K-9"! <joke> ;)

Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about

using bloodhounds in the search."

So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
this Thread.

>
>> Very few CopDogs are "cross-trained" to do all the above.
>
>>> But, unlike your totally uneducated right wing friends, I know
>>> tracking a fleeing suspect in a city isn't as easy as turning your
>>> bloodhounds loose on a rabbit running across a field.
>

>> I don't have Bloodhounds, Scheißekopf; but mine would be great at

>> tracking you, as they are bred to track down burrowing animals like
>> weasels. <chuckle> ;)
>

>> And you're the one "in the fields", Scheißekopf :

>
>>"I would wile away the hours, talkin' with the flowers,
>> if I only had a braaaaaaaaain"

>> --Scheißekopf Tiefe Scheiße, Apr 20, 2013 @ 1:08 pm

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>using bloodhounds in the search."
>

There is no doubt they would have used scent tracking dogs in an
attempt to narrow their search patterns. There is no evidence
anywhere that any modern police units use bloodhounds rather than a
more versatile breed, nor is there any reason to think it was a deal
breaker. You don't have one shred of evidence that bloodhounds would
have been more successful than the standard police dog breed which is
almost always a German Shepherd. They can be taught to scale 10 ft
chain link fences. Bloodhounds can barely get their ass off the
ground.

>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>this Thread.
>>

What makes you think they still use bloodhounds in urban police k9
units? You really need to watch something besides old escaped convict
units. I'm sure you once claimed you were an ex-cop. From your posts
you prove you know nothing about police work.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:17:52 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>

They deployed tracking dogs as well as bomb dogs.

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/1co7a4/live_update_thread_unofficial_part_3/

EDIT 53 7:50: Clearing crawlspace on ----.

EDIT 52 7:49: "Tracking kanines right around the corner, how far out
are you?"

EDIT 51 7:48: Come to -------, north of that device, all six units
come, 50-75m apart.

EDIT 50 7:47: Requested tracking dogs near --------.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Obviously a picture of one of the SWAT team following the tracking
dog.

God only knows what the poor devil did to deserve immortalizing
globally.

>Seriously though, saying the dog is a "tracking dog" doesn't actually
>make it so.
>
>BTW: this is a more-relevant photo:
>
>http://assets2.static.vosizneias.com/uploads/news_photos/thumbnails/800_2fpxhmbjrrwczxfi4wa9j9pswve6jfov.jpg
>"A Police SWAT team sniper keeps watch as the team makes house to
>house searches in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA 19 April 2013."
>
>I mean, at least the _car_ is "K-9"! <joke> ;)
>
>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>using bloodhounds in the search."

They did deploy tracking dogs, and bomb dogs as per the police
scanners.

>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>this Thread.

Tracking k-9s were deployed and AFAIAA they are usually hounds.
but it sounds like you are talking about trailing dogs rather than
tracking actually.

http://www.gak9.com/obedience-training/trailing-versus-tracking/

[JohnJohnsn]

Argumentum ad hominem: your favorite form of "debate."

For one thing, Scheißekopf, the last time I was involved in a man-hunt
was back in 1991 when we were tracking down the murderers of my friend
and fellow Constable Darrel Lunsford in the area around Garrison.
There we used bloodhounds.

You forget that I've been out of civilian law enforcement for many
years now, and in the Air Guard Security Policewe used Shephards and
Malinois as our MWDs. And those were handled by 3Papa0x1Alpha MWD
trainers and handlers, and I was 3P071Bravo CATM and ABGD. Our Alphas
often worked perimeter and flightline security when we went "Orange,"
when I usually worked either ECP or CopShop admin.

Our MWDs, as well as virtually all those in the DoD, were trained by
the 341stTS down at Lackland, where our Security Police Academy is
located.

Nevertheless, most all my knowledge about CopDogs, though, comes from
my friend Nancy down in Waco, where she has a large training faility.
Even that knowledge was mainly from listening to her go on about her
day and some of the yayhoos she has to train as CopDog handlers.

Actually, come to think about it, several she described were just as
obnoxious and stupid as Scheißekopf here: couldn't tell them a
thing! :)

BTW, Scheißekopf; tell us what kind of MWDs you used when you were a
Colonel in the Indian Air Force? <chuckle> ;)

[JohnJohnsn]

On Apr 21, 11:42 pm, GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn

>>http://assets2.static.vosizneias.com/uploads/news_photos/thumbnails/8...

>>"A Police SWAT team sniper keeps watch as the team makes house to
>>house searches in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA 19 April 2013."
>
>>I mean, at least the _car_ is "K-9"! <joke> ;)
>
>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>
> They did deploy tracking dogs, and bomb dogs as per the police
> scanners.
>
>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>this Thread.
>
> Tracking k-9s were deployed and AFAIAA they are usually hounds.
> but it sounds like you are talking about trailing dogs rather than
> tracking actually.
>
> http://www.gak9.com/obedience-training/trailing-versus-tracking/
>

Could very well be: sounds more like what was going on in WTown.

[Scout]

"deep" wrote in message news:e2a9n893t7lg9gpm8...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
> <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>>
> There is no doubt they would have used scent tracking dogs in an
> attempt to narrow their search patterns.

No doubt? There is quite a bit of doubt, and your inability to document
conclusive evidence they did so does nothing to address that doubt.

>There is no evidence
> anywhere that any modern police units use bloodhounds rather than a
> more versatile breed, nor is there any reason to think it was a deal
> breaker.

Ah, so now the tracking dogs come only from the police department, despite
you told us earlier this sort of work was always contracted out.

So which is it?

Are you lying now, or were you lying then?

> You don't have one shred of evidence that bloodhounds would
> have been more successful than the standard police dog breed which is
> almost always a German Shepherd.

The standard police dog, by your own admission, isn't trained to track. So
it's a moot point.

> They can be taught to scale 10 ft
> chain link fences. Bloodhounds can barely get their ass off the
> ground.

No, ATTACK dogs are trained to do so. A tracking dog doesn't need that
skill.

Further I'm not up on police attack dog training, but somehow despite the
time I've spent watching them trained, I don't think I've ever seen one
being taught to climb a 10' chain link fence. Can you back this up with some
video of the police training their dogs to do this?

>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>this Thread.
>>>
> What makes you think they still use bloodhounds in urban police k9
> units? You really need to watch something besides old escaped convict
> units. I'm sure you once claimed you were an ex-cop. From your posts
> you prove you know nothing about police work.

Dudu thrashes around trying to avoid the fact that he can't produce any
creditable proof that tracking dogs were used in this man hunt.

[Scout]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message

news:mce9n81606dgomt3f...@4ax.com...

Really? I saw no picture of a dog. I saw a picture of a man, and a caption
that claimed to tell us what that picture represents. Given how often
reports get the facts screwed up, a solitary caption is hardly conclusive.
Besides, I strongly doubt that a reporter is going to know the difference
between a police attack dog, a bomb dog and a tracking dog.

> God only knows what the poor devil did to deserve immortalizing
> globally.
>
>>Seriously though, saying the dog is a "tracking dog" doesn't actually
>>make it so.
>>
>>BTW: this is a more-relevant photo:
>>
>>http://assets2.static.vosizneias.com/uploads/news_photos/thumbnails/800_2fpxhmbjrrwczxfi4wa9j9pswve6jfov.jpg
>>"A Police SWAT team sniper keeps watch as the team makes house to
>>house searches in Watertown, Massachusetts, USA 19 April 2013."
>>
>>I mean, at least the _car_ is "K-9"! <joke> ;)
>>
>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>
> They did deploy tracking dogs, and bomb dogs as per the police
> scanners.

Cite.

>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>this Thread.
>
> Tracking k-9s were deployed and AFAIAA they are usually hounds.
> but it sounds like you are talking about trailing dogs rather than
> tracking actually.
>
> http://www.gak9.com/obedience-training/trailing-versus-tracking/

Ok, and I'm still waiting on conclusive evidence they were used.

Oh, and BTW you just proved your buddy Dudu is an idiot because he claimed
tracking dogs couldn't be used in urban environments.

[Scout]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message

news:j2b9n853lh4niif9e...@4ax.com...

Ok, and when you can show that request was actually fulfilled then you will
be getting somewhere.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

You have already seen the proof and are just thrashing about in
denial.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

It was reported by every major news source world wide not just the one
randomly chosen to cite .

>Besides, I strongly doubt that a reporter is going to know the difference
>between a police attack dog, a bomb dog and a tracking dog.

Give up on the straw clutching already.

The police know what they are requesting.

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/1co7a4/live_update_thread_unofficial_part_3/

EDIT 53 7:50: Clearing crawlspace on ----.

EDIT 52 7:49: "Tracking kanines right around the corner, how far out
are you?"

EDIT 51 7:48: Come to -------, north of that device, all six units
come, 50-75m apart.

EDIT 50 7:47: Requested tracking dogs near --------.

>
>

[bigdog]

If those running the manhunt did look for the blood trail and/or used tracking dogs, fine, but that isn't in any report I have read or heard so it is a legitimate question. You on the other hand are perfectly free to make your wild assed assumptions based on zero information. It's what you do best.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 21:54:36 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 21, 10:08 pm, Tiefe Scheiße <du...@vlillldm.dnc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>> <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>> off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>> using bloodhounds in the search."
>>
>> There is no doubt they would have used scent tracking dogs in an
>> attempt to narrow their search patterns. There is no evidence
>> anywhere that any modern police units use bloodhounds rather than a
>> more versatile breed, nor is there any reason to think it was a deal
>> breaker. You don't have one shred of evidence that bloodhounds would
>> have been more successful than the standard police dog breed which is
>> almost always a German Shepherd. They can be taught to scale 10 ft
>> chain link fences. Bloodhounds can barely get their ass off the
>> ground.
>>
>>> So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>> this Thread.
>>
>> What makes you think they still use bloodhounds in urban police k9
>> units? You really need to watch something besides old escaped convict
>> units. I'm sure you once claimed you were an ex-cop. From your posts
>> you prove you know nothing about police work.
>>
>Argumentum ad hominem: your favorite form of "debate."
>

<YAWN>

>For one thing, Scheißekopf, the last time I was involved in a man-hunt
>was back in 1991 when we were tracking down the murderers of my friend
>and fellow Constable Darrel Lunsford in the area around Garrison.
>There we used bloodhounds.

Sure ya did, bitch. If you are really an ex-cop you would know that I
am 100% correct and actually try to be man enough to admit it.

[stooges@bass.gov Mike Watt]

"deep" wrote in message news:1chan8hn1fgoub0km...@4ax.com...

####
Again, the retard known as "Deep DuDu" (a girls name), shows what his
brains consist of... Marshmallow Fluff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_dog#Popular_breeds and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodhound
also;
http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4615944_police-dog-track-criminals.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_dog_breeds

[deep]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 02:30:18 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>

>"deep" wrote in message news:e2a9n893t7lg9gpm8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
>> <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>>>
>> There is no doubt they would have used scent tracking dogs in an
>> attempt to narrow their search patterns.
>
>
>No doubt? There is quite a bit of doubt, and your inability to document
>conclusive evidence they did so does nothing to address that doubt.

Only doubt is by clueless idiots like you. You haven't provided one
shred of evidence of anything you claimed. Once again you make some
clueless stupid comment then insist that everyone must prove you
wrong. I keep explaining to you that's not the way it works.

>
>>There is no evidence
>> anywhere that any modern police units use bloodhounds rather than a
>> more versatile breed, nor is there any reason to think it was a deal
>> breaker.
>
>Ah, so now the tracking dogs come only from the police department, despite
>you told us earlier this sort of work was always contracted out.

They do both obviously. Depends on the area and how much money the
municipality has. Boston has tons of money so they have their own k-9
units, while smaller outlying communities wouldn't so they have to
call in contractors. Either way, the always use dogs now. Boston had
dozens of

>
>So which is it?
>
>Are you lying now, or were you lying then?
>

You're a pathetic idiot. You've gotten as bad as Klaus. Anything you
hear you can't understand or accept is a lie. Everybody in the world
are all lying to you about everything. Once again you prove yourself
hopelessly insane.

>> You don't have one shred of evidence that bloodhounds would
>> have been more successful than the standard police dog breed which is
>> almost always a German Shepherd.
>
>The standard police dog, by your own admission, isn't trained to track. So
>it's a moot point.
>
>> They can be taught to scale 10 ft
>> chain link fences. Bloodhounds can barely get their ass off the
>> ground.
>
>No, ATTACK dogs are trained to do so. A tracking dog doesn't need that
>skill.

Depends.

>
>Further I'm not up on police attack dog training, but somehow despite the
>time I've spent watching them trained, I don't think I've ever seen one
>being taught to climb a 10' chain link fence. Can you back this up with some
>video of the police training their dogs to do this?
>
>
>>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>>this Thread.
>>>>
>> What makes you think they still use bloodhounds in urban police k9
>> units? You really need to watch something besides old escaped convict
>> units. I'm sure you once claimed you were an ex-cop. From your posts
>> you prove you know nothing about police work.
>
>Dudu thrashes around trying to avoid the fact that he can't produce any
>creditable proof that tracking dogs were used in this man hunt.

I don't have to. You claimed first that they weren't simply because
they weren't successful. Any "mediocre" dog could have done it "no
problem" That was YOUR claim. Once again I don't have to prove the
negative. Once again you make a complete fool of yourself so maybe
you should just STFU.

[deep]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 21:42:56 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
<D...@null.net> wrote:


>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>
>They did deploy tracking dogs, and bomb dogs as per the police
>scanners.
>
>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>this Thread.
>
>Tracking k-9s were deployed and AFAIAA they are usually hounds.

Mostly German Shepherds actually.

>but it sounds like you are talking about trailing dogs rather than
>tracking actually.

Exactly right. Another concept Scout can't grasp is that there are
different methods and applications of "tracking".

[deep]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 02:34:50 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>Ok, and I'm still waiting on conclusive evidence they were used.

Once again, you claimed first it would be EASY even with a MEDIOCRE
dog. No problem you said if they had only thought of it. You need to
prove it would have been easy, no problem, even with a mediocre dog.

We're waiting.

>
>Oh, and BTW you just proved your buddy Dudu is an idiot because he claimed
>tracking dogs couldn't be used in urban environments.

Liar. Once again you pathetic argument is going to pieces and you
must resort to lies. I never said the couldn't be used. I said it
was "highly problematic" and "NEARLY impossible". Obviously they have
many applications. It's not trail scent tracking like you think it
is. It's not sending your bloodhounds across the field after the
escaped convict after they sniffed an article of his clothing. It's
nothing at all like that. But you are just to stupid to grasp that.

[stooges@bass.gov Mike Watt]

"deep" wrote in message news:1fian8to9pn959dnv...@4ax.com...

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 21:42:56 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
<D...@null.net> wrote:


>>Anyway; if you go back to the top of this Thread you will find where I
>>off-handedly wondered whether or not there was "even a thought about
>>using bloodhounds in the search."
>
>They did deploy tracking dogs, and bomb dogs as per the police
>scanners.
>
>>So far, no bloodhounds have appeared in any of the K-9 evidence of
>>this Thread.
>
>Tracking k-9s were deployed and AFAIAA they are usually hounds.

Mostly German Shepherds actually.

####

Wrong again, you retard.
German Shepherds, while they can track by smell, are INFERIOR to the Mighty
Bloodhound.
If you weren't afraid of me constantly ridiculing you ALL THE FUCKING TIME,
you would have read my posts.
Those dogs are HERDING dogs, originating in the VERY late 1890's.

Bloodhounds, on the other hand, "bred for hunting deer and wild boar, but
also used from the Middle Ages onwards for tracking human beings, and now
most often bred specifically for that purpose."

You really Do like advertising that yer a retard, don't you?

[Scout]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message

news:3co9n85v3fr4jnn94...@4ax.com...

Did they get the dogs?

Simply requesting them doesn't mean they ever arrived.

[bigdog]

This thread has diverted to the question of whether blood hounds were used which is an important question, but my primary question was whether or not there was a visible blood trail leading from the bullet riddled SUV. That would depend in large extent to the amount of blood Tsarnaev was dripping as he fled that SUV. If it wasn't enough to be easily traceable by the human eye, then that's where the blood hounds would have come in handly. I began wondering this when I read the report that the first thing that alerted the homeowner that something was wrong was the blood he spotted in his garage near the boat which Tsarnaev attempted to take refuge. If he was bleeding that much inside the garage, is it unreasonable to think there may have been a visible blood trail leading all the way from that SUV to the garage? Maybe this is a case of 20/20 hindsight, but I'm curious as to what the actual facts are and whether an important clue was overlooked.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:41:06 -0700 (PDT), bigdog

<jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, April 21, 2013 9:09:04 PM UTC-4, deep wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 17:13:37 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
>>
>> <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You want dudu to make a thoughtful post? Don't you think that's a little overly optimistic?
>>
>> You're the one who asked the incredibly stupid question. Do you
>> seriously think they didn't even THINK of using dogs in the largest
>> manhunt in recent history?
>
>If those running the manhunt did look for the blood trail and/or used tracking dogs, fine, but that isn't in any report I have read or heard so it is a legitimate question. You on the other hand are perfectly free to make your wild assed assumptions based on zero information. It's what you do best.

The report and photo of tracking dogs leading the SWAT team were
reported by all major news agencies like CNN, ABC and Reuters.

Perhaps you should spend less time listening to Glenn Beck.
That's where this idiocy seems to have started.

[bigdog]

Perhaps you should quite making erroneous assumptions about what I watch and listen too. Maybe the same question occurred to Glenn Beck that occurred to me when I made the OP for this thread. I'm not a regular listener of Glenn Beck so I have no idea when he raised the issue. Tsarnaev was captured on Friday night after Beck's last scheduled weekday radio show, so if he brought it up on that radio program, it wouldn't have been until Monday. If you would bother to check the OP, you will see that I raised the question on Saturday. Judge Jennine asked the same question on Saturday night on Fox News, so this question has apparently occurred to a number of people.

This thread is specifically about the blood trail and whether dogs speciifically trained for such duty were used. The K-9 German Sheperds are good dogs for certain types of police work, but aren't the best choice for tracking game, in this case a bleeding human being.