Should financial costs be ignored when dismissing a Police Dog?

  1. Bretsuki profile image78
    Bretsukiposted 6 years ago

    Should financial costs be ignored when dismissing a Police Dog?

    I read that East Haven CT have dismissed their last K-9. The claim is he cost too much in financial terms, they had invested thousands of dollars in training and veterinary fees in the dogs five years service. Now he is just too expensive. But is this view short sighted, the cash cost is not balanced against risk for human officers chasing offenders, the need for dogs in search and rescue and the loss of a high value public relations team.

  2. peterelmhirst profile image61
    peterelmhirstposted 6 years ago

    Having an office injured would be incredibly expensive for the police force. I would image if they felt that the dogs significantly prevented this then it would be financially worth while for them to keep him.

    I definitely agree with the loss to their public relations team though. There's nothing that gets kids excited like a dog! (not the greatest reason to choose a career in law enforcement though)

  3. davenmidtown profile image89
    davenmidtownposted 6 years ago

    Dogs are used to do jobs that are too dangerous for human officers to perform.  The problem may be that the cost of keeping one or two dogs is too high for some police units.

    The cost benefit analysis should be compared to what it costs the city to pay for an human officer, including benefits, retirement, overtime, etc.  The reality is that a K9 officer is not nearly as expensive.  That being said... does the cost equal the use?