The first several answers were “Because people don’t show up to a rally with the means to fight off dogs” as far as I can see. Which is an answer, but I don’t walk to the metro with the means to fight off dogs either, but if one attacks me, I’m going to use whatever I can find to beat the thing off of me.
Some other answers included references to protests that involved Police dogs. My question is NOT why didn’t the protestors fight off the police dogs because 1) They weren’t police dogs, and b) I already know the answer to that question.
I’m not sure how to be much clearer, other than saying “Why don’t people use whatever means are at their disposal to beat an attacking dog off of them?”
You need to experience the situation, I guess. A dog is chewing on your forearm. Chewing. The dog would be even more worked up if you caused it pain.
Sure, a dog standing there allowing a free kick, I’ll bet I could hurt the dog. Maybe fracture a rib if I’m lucky, but also maybe miss with my kick and fall down. But I doubt most people would have the composure to aim and deliver an effective kick in a situation where a 95 pound dog is hanging from/chewing on their forearm.
When I had a dog on my arm (in a bite sleeve) I was mostly trying to keep the dog from re-positioning onto a non-protected body part. The arm not in the dog’s mouth was being used to maintain my balance. Fall to the ground and that’s it for you.
Police don’t have special breeds unavailable to the public. A vicious German Shepherd is going to be a problem whether or not he’s attached to a K-9 unit. I’m pretty confident that if a semi-wolf is leaping at you as if to EAT you, your last concern is whether or not it has a badge.
That’s true. But my point was if a police dog is attacking you, you are probably doing something illegal, and any injury to the dog will just add charges. Thus, I can understand why someone would not fight off an attack by a police dog.
If I’m sitting somewhere and a non-law enforcement guy comes up and sets his dog on me, I’m using everything at my disposal to try to get it off, including injuring or killing the dog. I’m sure poking a dogs eyes out with a stick would be pretty effective.
But it is eventually going to cross treaty lands without the permission of the tribes. If they wait to protest until the contractor is actually on tribal land, it’s far too late.
Perps who resist arrest via hand-to-hand combat with the arresting officer seem to have no concerns about injuring said officer. I don’t think perps who go easy on an attacking K9 are doing so for fear of additional charges; I think they’re just too overcome with terror to do anything except try to get the hell away.
According to some of my more scummy acquaintances, a much higher percentage of security dogs than ever before haven’t had the training not to eat random meat (i.e., what’s not supplied by their handlers and trainers). This is highest in dogs used by the small security companies, not actual law enforcement dogs. They distract such animals with some nice bloody meat.
Dogs have small eyes set towards the back of their head, well behind the muzzle. They are moving about rather quickly. Poking it in the eye is not going to be an easy task. Whether you fail or succeed at this task though, the dog is going to be pretty upset with you, and a dog does not need both, or even any, eyes to maul you pretty well.
The only real way to fight a dog barehanded is to close with it, bear it to the ground ('cause you weigh more than it), and try to choke it out. (You will likely get bit in this process, and this will obviously only work with one dog.) Pretty much anything else you do is not going to be effective. Kicking is just going to get them biting your leg, punching is just going to lose you fingers. A heavy stick might be able to beat them one of them off, and obviously once we get to sharpened weapons, or firearms, we have new options, but those are not things that peaceful protesters are going to be carrying with them.
A lot of these issues seem to be caused by one person trying to fight off a dog. There was a crowd of people. Seems like they could all start beating on the dog with sticks or rocks or something.
And lest I get chastised again for “not reading posts that have answers”, thanks for the information.
In that scenario the individual may have prepared himself mentally to slug it out with a human adversary, but has a moment of hesitation when the attack dog comes at him, hesitation which gives the advantage to the dog.
Also, the assumtion that a human being attacked, will instinctively fight back fiercely, is not a sure bet. In a fight-or-flight situation,often “flight” is the dominant urge (and most often the wisest!) and all you want is for the dog or assailant to let go so you can run. Especially if the persons, again, did not go into the situation with their minds already made that they might engage in a fight.
Is this a tactics question or a legal question. Because your OP made it seem like a legal question. They are going on to private property to commit a crime. I don’t think legally they have much of a leg to stand on here. It may also be that those hired to guard the area could be found to use excessive force as well.
Kind of both really. Not “How could they” but more “Why didn’t they”
Also, as I said, I couldn’t find anything definitive on whether or not they were on private property in the news articles I could find, so I wasn’t sure.
from further news reports, initially I thought it was on a reservation, but the more explicit reports say it is happening on private lands near the reservation. Part of the objection is that the pipeline company has bulldozed the topsoil off a long swath of land. Local natives claim this has displaced a number of rock cairns and circles which likely were burial sites of their ancestors over the centuries, and if they carry on the bulldozers will destroy even more such graves.
