Walking dogs off lead, why?
Discussion
Thevet said:
THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FORUM FOR ANIMAL LOVERS, HONESTLY THE TALK IS APPALLING
Hear, hear!Such ridiculously polarised viewpoints in a number of cases, neither side is ever going to persuade the other, so they end up arguing for the sake of arguing, achieving nothing in the process except to make themselves look more ridiculous. Honestly, just agree to disagree and move on.
Antony Moxey said:
Are you? I’m happily walking along with a placid dog trotting along minding his own business and we have to move because you’re afraid of a dog invading your personal space? If it affects you that much then YOU move - why should everyone have to change to accommodate you? What makes you think you’re a better person than a dog owner so they have to bow down to your paranoia?
Don't call me paranoid and I never once said i expected dog owners to move for me so get your facts straight!What i did say was dog owners could be considerate and appreciate other people might be scared or had a bad experience and for a small sacrifice (holding onto and controlling their dog) they remove this discomfort or prefernce.
When I'm driving past cyclists, joggers walkers or horses I slow down and give them room. Its called being considerate, when I'm out on my horse I've lost count of times an out of control dog has lunged or acted aggressively towards her, let me guess though she should be in a field out the way.
Edited by Greenbot35 on Tuesday 21st June 21:30
Greenbot35 said:
Dogs can and do kill
It's very rare. If it was common it wouldn't be in the news when it happens. You're far more likely to be killed by a person than by a dog.2021 deaths from dog attacks in the UK - 4
2021 homicides in the UK - 594
Edited by Sporky on Tuesday 21st June 21:33
Greenbot35 said:
Antony Moxey said:
Are you? I’m happily walking along with a placid dog trotting along minding his own business and we have to move because you’re afraid of a dog invading your personal space? If it affects you that much then YOU move - why should everyone have to change to accommodate you? What makes you think you’re a better person than a dog owner so they have to bow down to your paranoia?
Don't call me paranoid and I never once said i expected dog owners to move for me so get your facts straight!What i did say was dog owners could be considerate and appreciate other people might be scared or had a bad experience and for a small sacrifice (holding onto and controlling their dog) they remove this discomfort or prefernce.
When I'm driving past cyclists, joggers walkers or horses I slow down and give them room. Its called being considerate, when I'm out on my horse I've lost count of times an out of control dog has lunged or acted aggressively towards her, let me guess though she should be in a field out the way.
Edited by Greenbot35 on Tuesday 21st June 21:30
Antony Moxey said:
Are you? I’m happily walking along with a placid dog trotting along minding his own business and we have to move because you’re afraid of a dog invading your personal space? If it affects you that much then YOU move - why should everyone have to change to accommodate you? What makes you think you’re a better person than a dog owner so they have to bow down to your paranoia?
Isn't the issue the fact that the dog isn't minding it's own business?I think you said your dog was always under your control. If that's the case why can't you stop him from going up to other people?
Thevet said:
Well the rest of the thread is heading to s
teness so here are some rottie cheeks
[url]
|https://thumbsnap.com/XRdUUEZp[/url
]
two of the most important pics of my life of the most important dog I've ever had, miss him so much, Scooby has much to live up to, but he does a better job than some of the posters on here. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FORUM FOR ANIMAL LOVERS, HONESTLY THE TALK IS APPALLING
Look at it, rearing up to attack!teness so here are some rottie cheeks[url]
|https://thumbsnap.com/XRdUUEZp[/url]
two of the most important pics of my life of the most important dog I've ever had, miss him so much, Scooby has much to live up to, but he does a better job than some of the posters on here. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FORUM FOR ANIMAL LOVERS, HONESTLY THE TALK IS APPALLING
The trouble is as always, the extreme attitudes exist in those at either end of the spectrum.
This 5% vehemently believe THEY are the normal one else and everyone MUST cater to their needs, or there will be trouble.
The more extreme the personality, the less they’ll discuss anything reasonably.
I’d say that once a year, I experience somebody scared of dogs and they panic/ squeal / arms in the air etc..
Once I realise this, I put my dog on the lead. Not normal, but I’ll react helpfully and continue.
99% of folks walking the hills and woods love to say hello to the dog/s. Normal.
This 5% vehemently believe THEY are the normal one else and everyone MUST cater to their needs, or there will be trouble.
The more extreme the personality, the less they’ll discuss anything reasonably.
I’d say that once a year, I experience somebody scared of dogs and they panic/ squeal / arms in the air etc..
Once I realise this, I put my dog on the lead. Not normal, but I’ll react helpfully and continue.
99% of folks walking the hills and woods love to say hello to the dog/s. Normal.
Put it this way, if there is any danger of encountering other people, I wouldn't want to take the risk of someone calling the dog warden whether justified or not.
I also wouldn't want to take the risk of an altercation with other dog(s). I have tried to make this example myself but my way of explaining has failed, but still, unless you can be 100% sure of no interaction with anyone or anyone else's dog, I'm amazed more are not worried about this fact.
I also wouldn't want to take the risk of an altercation with other dog(s). I have tried to make this example myself but my way of explaining has failed, but still, unless you can be 100% sure of no interaction with anyone or anyone else's dog, I'm amazed more are not worried about this fact.
Countdown said:
Antony Moxey said:
Are you? I’m happily walking along with a placid dog trotting along minding his own business and we have to move because you’re afraid of a dog invading your personal space? If it affects you that much then YOU move - why should everyone have to change to accommodate you? What makes you think you’re a better person than a dog owner so they have to bow down to your paranoia?
Isn't the issue the fact that the dog isn't minding it's own business?I think you said your dog was always under your control. If that's the case why can't you stop him from going up to other people?
Antony Moxey said:
Countdown said:
Antony Moxey said:
Are you? I’m happily walking along with a placid dog trotting along minding his own business and we have to move because you’re afraid of a dog invading your personal space? If it affects you that much then YOU move - why should everyone have to change to accommodate you? What makes you think you’re a better person than a dog owner so they have to bow down to your paranoia?
Isn't the issue the fact that the dog isn't minding it's own business?I think you said your dog was always under your control. If that's the case why can't you stop him from going up to other people?
Your argument is a bit "tail wagging the dog". Rather than let your dog go up to other people and only call it away if they're clearly unhappy/annoyed why not stop the dog going up to them in the first place? You stated that your dog is under your full control so it shouldn't be that hard.
Countdown said:
Not always to be honest. I might tolerate somebody's dog sniffing around me or trying to lick me and not kick up a fuss but I'd much prefer they didn't.
Your argument is a bit "tail wagging the dog". Rather than let your dog go up to other people and only call it away if they're clearly unhappy/annoyed why not stop the dog going up to them in the first place? You stated that your dog is under your full control so it shouldn't be that hard.
Then tolerate it, it's not worth kicking up a fuss over is it? The dog'll have a quick sniff (no licks) and if he gets no attention he's on his way and won't bother you. I don't need to do anything. As much as you can to a reasonabe degree gauge what people's reactions will be, you can also to a reasonable degree gauge how a dog will be too. If my and my dog were walking towards you it would be an instantly forgettable experience for all three of us.Your argument is a bit "tail wagging the dog". Rather than let your dog go up to other people and only call it away if they're clearly unhappy/annoyed why not stop the dog going up to them in the first place? You stated that your dog is under your full control so it shouldn't be that hard.
Antony Moxey said:
Countdown said:
Not always to be honest. I might tolerate somebody's dog sniffing around me or trying to lick me and not kick up a fuss but I'd much prefer they didn't.
Your argument is a bit "tail wagging the dog". Rather than let your dog go up to other people and only call it away if they're clearly unhappy/annoyed why not stop the dog going up to them in the first place? You stated that your dog is under your full control so it shouldn't be that hard.
Then tolerate it, it's not worth kicking up a fuss over is it? The dog'll have a quick sniff (no licks) and if he gets no attention he's on his way and won't bother you. I don't need to do anything. As much as you can to a reasonabe degree gauge what people's reactions will be, you can also to a reasonable degree gauge how a dog will be too. If my and my dog were walking towards you it would be an instantly forgettable experience for all three of us.Your argument is a bit "tail wagging the dog". Rather than let your dog go up to other people and only call it away if they're clearly unhappy/annoyed why not stop the dog going up to them in the first place? You stated that your dog is under your full control so it shouldn't be that hard.
That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
Countdown said:
Why should the default position be that people have to tolerate your dog rather than you control your dog in the first place?
That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
The point is though that if the same people are going to pubs and getting annoyed by kids and also going out and getting annoyed by dogs then maybe it’s them that the problem? That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
Countdown said:
Why should the default position be that people have to tolerate your dog rather than you control your dog in the first place?
That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
The dog is under control. It's not running up to people, it's not pestering people, it's not jumping up or licking and if I call it away it goes away. Why shouldn't the default position be you tolerate a dog (that's not going mental), why should every dog owner tolerate your insecurities. What's wrong with tolerating? It appears you want everything to revolve around you because a dog minding its own business triggers you.That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
Antony Moxey said:
The dog is under control. It's not running up to people, it's not pestering people, it's not jumping up or licking and if I call it away it goes away. Why shouldn't the default position be you tolerate a dog (that's not going mental), why should every dog owner tolerate your insecurities. What's wrong with tolerating? It appears you want everything to revolve around you because a dog minding its own business triggers you.
if it's not running up to people, it's not pestering people, and it's not jumping up or licking, and it's minding it's own business then you don't actually need to call it away and we're possibly in total agreement. It was only the case where the dog WAS running up to people and pestering them that I assumed you were expecting people to tolerate.
El stovey said:
Countdown said:
Why should the default position be that people have to tolerate your dog rather than you control your dog in the first place?
That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
The point is though that if the same people are going to pubs and getting annoyed by kids and also going out and getting annoyed by dogs then maybe it’s them that the problem? That's the thing - most people will tolerate it, because it's not worth getting into an argument about, but it's selfish of the owners to expect other people to put up with it because they either can't or won't control their dogs.
I think It's similar to kids running around in a pub/restaurant making noise. For the parents I have no doubt they think it's just "kids being kids, normal boisterous behaviour and other people should tolerate it or stay home". They'd also argue that the "Pub/restaurant was fine with kids enjoying themselves and it was just a few miserable gits being grumpy". The reality is probably somewhere in between; some people won't mind, others will be irritated, some might leave the restaurant, and some might actually say something to the parents.
The way I look at things (rightly or wrongly) is that if my behaviour is impacting negatively on others then can I reasonably change something that stops upsetting them? Kids running around in a restaurant is a good example, mowing my lawn at 7am on a Sunday morning, revving the nuts off a sports car with a fartbox exhaust and so on. These things aren't going to bring the world to an end, they're just degrees of anti-social behaviour that p155 others off to some degree and ithey're things that i can change without too much difficulty.
The alternative standpoint is that they're all fully legal and I don't give a toss what others think, they can like it or lump it.
In relation to this thread I think expecting others to put up with your dog running up to them, sniffing them, nuzzling their hand and so on falls into the latter category.
Countdown said:
Possibly.
The way I look at things (rightly or wrongly) is that if my behaviour is impacting negatively on others then can I reasonably change something that stops upsetting them? Kids running around in a restaurant is a good example, mowing my lawn at 7am on a Sunday morning, revving the nuts off a sports car with a fartbox exhaust and so on. These things aren't going to bring the world to an end, they're just degrees of anti-social behaviour that p155 others off to some degree and ithey're things that i can change without too much difficulty.
The alternative standpoint is that they're all fully legal and I don't give a toss what others think, they can like it or lump it.
In relation to this thread I think expecting others to put up with your dog running up to them, sniffing them, nuzzling their hand and so on falls into the latter category.
Having kids is anti social ? The way I look at things (rightly or wrongly) is that if my behaviour is impacting negatively on others then can I reasonably change something that stops upsetting them? Kids running around in a restaurant is a good example, mowing my lawn at 7am on a Sunday morning, revving the nuts off a sports car with a fartbox exhaust and so on. These things aren't going to bring the world to an end, they're just degrees of anti-social behaviour that p155 others off to some degree and ithey're things that i can change without too much difficulty.
The alternative standpoint is that they're all fully legal and I don't give a toss what others think, they can like it or lump it.
In relation to this thread I think expecting others to put up with your dog running up to them, sniffing them, nuzzling their hand and so on falls into the latter category.
Kids - like dogs - need socialising to learn how to behave. If you don't take them to public places, they will NOT learn how to behave when they are older.
Gargamel said:
Having kids is anti social ?
Kids - like dogs - need socialising to learn how to behave. If you don't take them to public places, they will NOT learn how to behave when they are older.
"Having kids running around in a pub shouting and screaming" is anti-social.Kids - like dogs - need socialising to learn how to behave. If you don't take them to public places, they will NOT learn how to behave when they are older.
I should maybe caveat that by adding "in my opinion" as some might say "it's just kids being kids....."
Countdown said:
Antony Moxey said:
The dog is under control. It's not running up to people, it's not pestering people, it's not jumping up or licking and if I call it away it goes away. Why shouldn't the default position be you tolerate a dog (that's not going mental), why should every dog owner tolerate your insecurities. What's wrong with tolerating? It appears you want everything to revolve around you because a dog minding its own business triggers you.
if it's not running up to people, it's not pestering people, and it's not jumping up or licking, and it's minding it's own business then you don't actually need to call it away and we're possibly in total agreement. It was only the case where the dog WAS running up to people and pestering them that I assumed you were expecting people to tolerate.
Gassing Station | All Creatures Great & Small | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff