Just curious. Would spaying them decrease their natural aggressiveness?
I think you mean “neutered”, for male dogs. I’m not sure “spaying” (the equivalent sterilization procedure for females) would have an effect on aggression.
On checking, it doesn’t look like spaying is common, since the females are kept for breeding. Ref: RCMP Police Dog Service, with one super-adorable recruit. In any case, the process looks about as selective as choosing guide dogs for the blind, and any animal that was either too aggressive or not aggressive enough would get weeded out.
Not sure you want a police dog to be in heat. So for the females I suspect they would spay them else the dog would be out of action when she is in heat.
For males their balls might be considered a liability (kicking a dog in the nuts has much the same effect as kicking a human male in the nuts).
Additionally police dogs are not about aggression per se. The testosterone fueled aggression, the unthinking rage kind, is NOT what you want in a police dog. Those dogs are trained to respond in a controlled fashion and I am not sure they need their balls to get there.
Of course some aggression needs to exist in the dog. But too much is as bad as too little (called being too hard or too soft). The dogs go through a LOT of testing and only the best and brightest pass.
I suspect they leave the breeding to others and the working animals are neutered/spayed.
The Victoria Police canine unit’s phone isn’t open 'til 8:30 a.m. but the lady at the switchboard thinks they’re spayed/neutered. Don’t think she’d ever had the question before. 
The police dogs in my town are neutered…I asked a K9 cop this once (he had a male dog). Not sure about the females but I agree that a bitch in heat would not be a good idea. On an unrelated note, I also learned from this cop, that police dogs have the title ‘Officer’.
I believe it.
If you harm a police dog IIRC the law has it as the same as if you mess with a human police officer. They are literally, under law, deemed as law enforcement. Certainly we can see the practical reasons for that (bad guy may view a police dog as a dog and be violent towards them where they would not with a human police officer so it protects the dog). They are acting in that capacity and I suspect the human officers think of them as a partner as well. Just natural to label then with that honorific (and I agree).
I also might add that neutered/spayed animals tend to be more tractable which is definitely what you want in a police dog learning rather advanced and complex behaviors.
So another reason to see it done.
Even better, military working dogs are always one rank ABOVE their handler. So a sergeant’s dog is a staff sergeant. Ha!
In Florida, there are seperate crimes for harming a SAR or police dog. The crimes are more stiff than harming a normal dog, but not as harsh as harming a human police officer.
I agree. If you’ve just done a drug deal and go on the run because the K-9s have been called in, and you decide to cap a dog they’ve put on you, you’re not just committing cruelty to an animal. You’re gutting city resources; it takes thousands of dollars to train and house these dogs. In some places, the dog goes home with the officer who directs it.
However, I don’t believe that someone should get more scrutiny or pursuit if they assault or kill a police officer as opposed to a citizen. If a homeless person gets killed, the DA and the cops barely care. But if a law enforcement officer is killed, it’s in the newspapers with all the photos of the spouses and children crying and they ALWAYS follow up with an article about the funeral. When have you ever seen a newspaper article about the funeral for a homeless person?
A human life is a human life.
Been ages since I looked at this and doubtless there are regional variations but I think it is safe to say the penalties are considerably more stiff for harming a police dog than just any dog. That it falls somewhere short of harming a human police officer I can see but I think someone messing with the dog is in the realm of a felony offense and serious punishment as a result (i.e. jail time).
Even if one were to take a cynical view that the animals are nowhere near worthy of protection they represent a significant cost expenditure on the tax payers’ dollar. Add in we all feel a connection to the animal over, say, a police cruiser and you are in a world of hurt if you think you can hurt the animal.
Yeah but this is a whole other debate.
I agree a human life is a human life and should be treated equally. However, police put themselves in harms way on our behalf. It is only natural that when one of their own gets capped they take a unique exception to it. The law views it this way too I think. Killing (or assaulting) anyone is serious…killing (or assaulting) a cop is considered worse and merits a worse punishment.
I also agree with this since the cop is expected to wade into trouble on my behalf and is deserving of more legal protection. Which to the OP would apply to the dog as well.
Crimes against police officers are not more serious because it is a dangerous job that they do. The crimes are more serious because they represent a crime against civilized order–not simply a crime against another person.
Same with the animals. Harming a police animal or SAR dog is not just a crime against another animal. It is a crime against civil society.
So is the sergeant allowed to give commands and orders to his superior (the dog)?
And there lies the silliness of the whole thing.
Coincidentally, I was just chatting with some dog handlers. For shits and giggles, I am going over to their compound to play bad guy tomorrow afternoon. It was my buddy’s idea. Gonna put on the arm pad and try to run from the dog. I hope I dont crap myself! Hope he bites the padded arm and not my leg or my nuts!
I’ll try to post some pics…
Apropos of nothing, I remember early episodes of Fear Factor when there’d be six contestants (three male and three female) and the first challenge was meant to eliminate two. One such challenge was, roughly, run 100 yards across this field but five seconds after you start, we’ll release this police dog who will do his best to clamp onto your (padded) body and stop you. For the three male contestants (who averaged about 185 lbs), the dog wasn’t that much of a burden; it typically chomped on the contestant’s wrist and the man would just keep running as though wearing a huge furry bracelet. For the female contestants (average weight ~120 lbs), though, the dog would flatten them immediately and they’d have to struggle back to their feet (if they could) and stagger/crawl to the finish.
It was shortly after this and other incidents where the first challenge would invariably eliminate two female contestants that the rules were changed - instead of eliminating the two weakest contestants, the weakest man and the weakest woman would get cut.
Yeah, if the dog were allowed to ham string you or tear out your throat it would have been more fair. 
Surprised they made this mistake. There is no doubt that the average male is physically more strong than the average female so such a test would be lopsided in favor of the males…unless they recruited atypically large and strong females.