Has anybody else noticed

[snapper_37]

In short yes, dogs should be on the leads at all times, but a dog owner doesn't know who and who not doesn't like dogs also.

I don't see what it's got to do with who likes or dislikes dogs tbh. I love dogs but don't trust any other than my own or those of the people I regular exercise my dog with.

I've got a staffy/lab cross who a lot of people mistake for a pitbull type.
I often see people (with dogs) turn back or cross the road when they see us coming. So, is that because they don't like dogs?

I regularly bump into a fella with 2 mastiff type dogs and they scare the crap out of me as they are aggressive and allowed to roam off the lead. We have to stop dead and still and wait for him to get the leads on. Luckily, we haven't had a blind corner incident yet. I feel this is totally out of order but it's nothing to do with me not liking dogs in general. I've tried friendly chat but he seems intent to make our early morning walk a fairly unpleasant experience. I have decided to take another route although I do feel 'why should I?'

My dog walks to heel unless I let her have any lead extension and I always walk her to heel whilst passing others or to sit when bikes or joggers go past. I'd expect any other owner to have the same respect and control - wishful thinking I know.

Oh and don't get me started on my favourite subject of dog shite!

BTW, your 'tripod' sounds cute - any pics?

 

[on the road]

If you know your dog is well behaved, then there's no reason why it can't be off the lead so long as it's not off the lead near a road. I always let my dog off the lead in the park, but my dog is well behaved and very friendly with people, in fact, people come up to my dog to stroke her instead of my dog going up to them.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

I don't let them off the lead now.

Snapper, I was actually talking about the fact that you just don't know how people will react to your dog, even if they themselves have a dog or not.

One of my dogs could go up to someone who doesn't seem too bothered about them, they might even appear interested, and then right at the last moment they will react as if it's something toxic. You just never quite know, and we aren't pshychic you know!

If you love your dog, you think it's great and you know that it wont be dangerous, so you want people who are interested to see it. This is especially so with Cindy where many DO want to see her.
It's difficult for me to judge, I'm not a mind reader!

On the other hand, and this is for Bear Pear, the thing about dog owners being offended when someone (usually someone who thinks they own the ruddy park) appears to wrongly assume that the dog will be violent, is a bit like if someone was to tell you your child was ugly and obnoxious (I bet you wouldn't be pleased if I reacted like that around your kid and gave you some scathing comment or insult, would you?).

Apologies might ensue if you think your kid was being obnoxious, but on the other hand you might think amongst other things

'Who the Fcuk are you?'

Most sensible dog owners know not to take it personally though, regardless of how downright idiotic the reaction might be (although we might have a laugh at your stupidity).

Oh and for the record, I bet your kid would be more violent than, say Bruno, who's only aim in life is to sniff, eat and sleep anyway.

 

[Zoiders]

Ah the other one, why do so many homeless people have dogs on the blankets next to them?

If you are homeless you get an extra allowance to feed the dog on top of your benefits.

That may not mean the dog does get fed though.

 

[snapper_37]

On the other hand, and this is for Bear Pear, the thing about dog owners being offended when someone (usually someone who thinks they own the ruddy park) appears to wrongly assume that the dog will be violent, is a bit like if someone was to tell you your child was ugly and obnoxious (I bet you wouldn't be pleased if I reacted like that around your kid and gave you some scathing comment or insult, would you?).

Mad Doug, and this is with all respect, a dog is simply not the same as a child! No child is ugly (and ugliness could hardly harm others) but a dog could rip apart a child/dog/adult/other animal. Every dog should be assumed to be violent because they can be until it is proven to be ok - and that doesn't cut it with people who don't have dogs OR have a little spaniel/yorkie etc.

IMO, I just think you are a bit doggy loved up and are not seeing the bigger picture. Just my penny worth.

 

[snapper_37]

If you are homeless you get an extra allowance to feed the dog on top of your benefits.

That may not mean the dog does get fed though.

Evidence?

 

[snapper_37]

Well, thanks. I will rush out and get one, I'm sure it would be quite happy in my one room second floor flat.

I'll tell my Mum she must get one too, she needs all the extra walks and so on. And my sister, with two small children, a dog is just what she needs to fill all that spare time she has...

Be a bit more careful with your wording, eh? I'd like a dog, one day, but I've never been in a situation where owning one would be practical, or responsible for the dog's wellbeing.

I missed this post but what a cracking one. Thankfully there are people like Arch who would rather put an animal's needs first rather than their own. Pity others don't.

 

[on the road]

I was under the impression homeless people got no benefit

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Mad Doug, and this is with all respect

If you have taken your dog to obedience training and made a LOT of effort to make sure the dog is safe (which they were anyway), it's a bit annoying when people simply assume that because it's a dog it's dangerous and you are some sort of psycho, junkie, or chav/ned who has a dog simply as a status symbol, as had been said/assumed elsewhere on here.

The attitude seems to be that I am there especially to injure someone with my dog, which I find so EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE beyond words!!

And no actually, I'm not 'All loved up with dogs' (there you are assuming) I can appreciate it all (Bruno, superlative as he is with people, didn't like other dogs when he was younger). It's just bloody annoying when people who know you for feck all, judge you just because you have a dog, and you yourself do not know what OTHER people are going to do, that's all.

I have said this story before, but I was in a Pub in Coventry one day and got talking to a guy next to me. When he found out I liked dogs, I got a tirade of abuse off of him because apparently, ALL dogs are dangerous, their owners should all be locked up, they never have them on the lead and worst of all, nobody EVER picks up after their dogs.
The irony is that he had a cat, which would have been let out by itself, kill small animals and birds and do a toxic turd on your lawn before having to be rescued after getting stuck in a tree.

Yeah, very good.

And I'll stand by my comment that a Kid would be more violent than Bruno by the way. I know that for a fact (unless you are/were another dog or a cat of course, but even then, he wouldn't have done any damage, he's not that kind of dog).

Humans are the most DANGEROUS animals on the planet, not dogs, and also, there is no such thing as a bad dog, just a bad owner (hence why humans are dangerous).

As an aside, I was walking with Bruno earlier and I came across an old woman at her front door. She called to me so that she could see the dog. I approached her and she went nuts, trying to kick the dog just because he had unwittingly stepped on a bit of grass as he turned round to go and see her.

That's the kind of crap you have to put up with, never mind the rest.

In short, it's more just the fact that you are judged by people who know sod all about you or the dog, and then imply that you are out just to injure someone, which I happen to find DEEPLY INSULTING, that's all.

If I had a dangerous dog, I sure as HELL wouldn't let it anywhere near people, that's for sure!

Oh and for the record, I keep my dogs on the lead at all times (as I've said umpteen times already).

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Thankfully there are people like Arch who would rather put an animal's needs first rather than their own. Pity others don't.

And just what are you implying exactly??

 

[summerdays]

Don't forget the owners who let their dogs run off the lead and then they bound up to your small child (who is very scared of dogs) and they always come out with the classic "it's all right, he won't hurt you!"

Yes - 2 of my children have been petrified by dogs... and it took ages to get through to them that they should not run away as that got the dog more interested thinking it was a game. (One of them was even scared of woodlice when he was a 1 yo). He now copes with dogs if he knows them and what their reactions are like but he still would rather they kept their distance. And yes we did know people with dogs, grandparents, friends, neighbours.

I work with benefit claimants and have come across someone who would rather be homeless than take a house which didn't take pets - complete lack of priorities?

A friend of mine works with young people having housing problems ... and has had all sorts of problems trying to get them rehoused when they want to take their dog/pet snake with them.

 

[Bman]

I see your point Mad Doug Biker. It would be annoying. However, you have to appreciate, the public dont know what your dog is like. Most arn't judging you, they are just being cautious as they dont know what the dog is like (I expect). I wouldnt take it personally.

 

[on the road]

I work with benefit claimants and have come across someone who would rather be homeless than take a house which didn't take pets - complete lack of priorities?

No it's not a lack of priorities; it shows their commitment to their pet. Like they say, a dog is for life.

And besides, what have the benefit agency got to do with finding them a home? That's not their job, all they are there for is to provide benefits for the claimants regardless of whether they have a home that allows pets or not, they don't have the power to tell them which homes they can or cannot live in, they just provide the benefits which they consider is appropriate for the claimant regardless of whether they have a pet or not.

 

[BearPear]

Oh my! I hadn't realised the depth of feeling on here and some of this is getting a little out of hand.

For the record, my daughter has never been comfortable with dogs, but you as a dog owner would not know that. By the same token she does not know anything about your dog either. The sensible course of action would be for owners in general not to let their dogs approach strangers. If your dog is on a lead those members of the public who are interested are free to approach and say "hi" and those who aren't can relax knowing that the dog is restrained. Obviously when I say "your dog" I am referring to dogs in general. I don't understand why this is such an offensive point of view? I am not saying that your dog is a rabid killer, and I would hope that you are not suggesting that my child is a dog-killer either.

Finally, I would like to add that I am a dog lover but have never been fortunate to own one because of work commitments it would be unfair to leave one home alone for extended periods.

 

[on the road]

A dog doesn't need to be on a lead if it's not likely to go up to strangers.