Talk:List of police dog breeds

article is bad

It seems their is no clear mechanism for including a breed. Is it enough for a breed to have EVER been used or must it be a commonly used breed? It seems that this list is added to by breed fanciers for their own purposes.

For instance, everyone knows that in the US over 90% of all dogs used for public order enforcement are either german shepherds or a similar breed (belgian malinois) and that american pit bull terriers are very, very, very rare in this role.

So, what use is this list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.19.90.70 (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Bully breeds

It may be true that pit bulls and other such dogs are commonly used as police dogs, but it's hard to believe. Police dogs must be able to control the severity of an attack, to release quickly and not to cause undue tissue damage. It is commonly known that highly developed specifically bred Germanic working breeds have long been the preferred category of dog for subduing and defense and focus on the orders of the handler. Therefore, the addition of such breeds should not stand until a citation is provided. Chrisrus (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

A had already been provided for the American Pit Bull Terrier at the time it was removed from the list, so I re-added it. I left the other ones off since they weren't referenced. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 13:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Bad list?

The first list claims to be of dogs which "have the job of chasing a fleeing suspect and detaining the suspect until officers arrive; or restraining suspects from some action by threat of the dog being released and causing harm."

But the list which it is sourced from (http://www.dogbreeds.net/police-dogs.html) makes no such distinction. I have a hard time believing a Bassett Hound would be any good as a chase dog! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.191.204.101 (talk) 12:27, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Unreferenced

I've removed everything that was unreferenced. However I'm not sure it can save this terrible article. Canterbury Tail talk 19:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)