Traveling crate or harness? Please help..

[take4roll10]

Large soft-sided crate strapped firmly in the backseat -- the two dogs share for the fewer times both go places with me at once. I think crating is the best because a cop can't shoot them in a crate. Even tethered in the car a cop can claim threat of bite and maybe shoot them -- not that I get pulled over a lot, but it is a thought. In an accident, the crate might be a smaller place to get knocked around, less likely to hit me or a window etc.

I've actually been pulled over with my dog in the car. She was in the backseat in a seatbelt harness. Of course she barked like a lunatic when the cop came over. I told him she is harnessed into the seatbelt buckle, so she's not going anywhere. She's just all noise. He just grinned and walk off with my information. And he decided not to give me a speeding ticket. Still gave me a ticket for my tints though...

Anyway, that's another good reason besides accidents for restraining your dog in your car. If your dogs are reactive or protective, they'll probably bark like crazy if a cop pulls you over and that could lead to a bad situation. It's actually a law in some states now to either crate or harness your dogs in a moving vehicle. I know NJ has a law. If you get pulled over, you could get a hefty fine.

 

[Jess041]

I've actually been pulled over with my dog in the car. She was in the backseat in a seatbelt harness. Of course she barked like a lunatic when the cop came over. I told him she is harnessed into the seatbelt buckle, so she's not going anywhere. She's just all noise. He just grinned and walk off with my information. And he decided not to give me a speeding ticket. Still gave me a ticket for my tints though...

Anyway, that's another good reason besides accidents for restraining your dog in your car. If your dogs are reactive or protective, they'll probably bark like crazy if a cop pulls you over and that could lead to a bad situation. It's actually a law in some states now to either crate or harness your dogs in a moving vehicle. I know NJ has a law. If you get pulled over, you could get a hefty fine.

I think it's probably more respectful to have your dog restrained when being pulled over. Cops have to use caution when approaching a vehicle, and they like to see that you're not a threat by keeping your hands visible. If there's something distracting going on like a crazy dog climbing around, barking, I think their safety is compromised when your sitting there scrambling, trying to get your dog to calm down. How do they know you're not scrambling to do something else...? Not to say any of us are criminals or bad people, but it's just a thought.

 

[Han&Bon]

Large soft-sided crate strapped firmly in the backseat -- the two dogs share for the fewer times both go places with me at once. I think crating is the best because a cop can't shoot them in a crate. Even tethered in the car a cop can claim threat of bite and maybe shoot them -- not that I get pulled over a lot, but it is a thought. In an accident, the crate might be a smaller place to get knocked around, less likely to hit me or a window etc.

Holy moly!! That makes me feel sick. Thanking God my dog getting is shot is the last thing I have to worry about here.

 

[Emmasmom]

How many of you have a truck? I have a Ranger with extended cab. Traveling crates would fit in the back for the two girls but I would need something for the front seat. Has anyone had this problem?

 

[Cindy]

<http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/2013_cps_harness_study_summary_final.pdf>

full study report....the results are interesting and not exactly what the headline leads you to believe

 

[JLSOhio51]

<http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/2013_cps_harness_study_summary_final.pdf>

full study report....the results are interesting and not exactly what the headline leads you to believe

Cindy: Thank you for providing that information.

WOW!!! I hardly know where to start. Let me just say that as an individual with a background that lends itself to understanding this type of research, I have come to the conclusion that the results (at least as detailed in the study) are far less than I expected . There are just too many lapses and holes in the setup, testing and data interpretation to be of any help in selecting the proper equipment for my companion. I am a firm believer that any study has some net worth in that it gathers data that was not necessarily gathered before. But, data gathered in a questionable manner isn't much more useful than a collection of anecdotal references. Since this is my 1st reading of the data (and I intend to go over the report a few more times) perhaps my impression will change. Doubtful, but possible.

I do not doubt the desire and willingness of the Center for Pet Safety to provide a much needed service. I just don't think that the data released accomplishes that goal.

 

[take4roll10]

Hmmm disappointed that they didn't test the one I have, which is Snoozer harness. It claims to be crash tested, so I wonder why it wasn't considered.

Let me get this straight, if the harness didn't come in s,m,l, they didn't test it?

 

[Jess041]

It wasn't crash tested because it didn't meet the preliminary testing criteria. It explains the criteria on page 4 and 5, then lists all the brands results starting on page 6. I have a Kurgo harness and it had a catastrophic failure.. so that's nice to know .

 

[JLSOhio51]

Hmmm disappointed that they didn't test the one I have, which is Snoozer harness. It claims to be crash tested, so I wonder why it wasn't considered.

Let me get this straight, if the harness didn't come in s,m,l, they didn't test it?

Perhaps at the time that they decided which units to test, your harness manufacturer was not claiming to be crash tested. But, that is one of the concerns I had with their criteria. They showed no dates associated with when they made their selections. They also gave no indication of what units they considered, but chose not to test for whatever reason.

The S, M, and L thing was a concern for me also. According to what the study says, S, M, L, was the target, but then they produced two more "small" test dummies to be able to include a couple of additional harnesses. It is normal for this type of testing to target specific anthropomorphic standards (95%, 85% targeted ranges) and test to those standards. It seems that here, they just selected a few harnesses and produced test dummies to accommodate them.

 

[take4roll10]

It wasn't crash tested because it didn't meet the preliminary testing criteria. It explains the criteria on page 4 and 5, then lists all the brands results starting on page 6. I have a Kurgo harness and it had a catastrophic failure.. so that's nice to know .

Oh ok. I see that it wasn't the size, but they had to pass a threshold test first... I skimmed over that part because it involved too much psychics. Lets just say psychics wasn't my best subject in high school.

And now I see that the snoozer harness is on there. I guess I initially missed that too, but it didn't qualify for crash testing. Great!