Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately there are so many dog owners who just don't get it. Not everyone likes dogs - not everyone think it's cute to have one run at them, or jump up at them. Personally I don't like to be hassled, by strange dogs or strange humans when I'm just going about my business, strolling in the park. I think this is reasonable.

Children should be able to walk and play in the park without a massive (to them) animal jumping all over them. Your dog isn't just 'saying hello' (if you are personifying your pooch in this way, you're delusional). It's 'intentions' are unknowable and irrelevant - it is intimidating a small child and you as an owner are responsible. If you choose to house an animal in a built up urban environment, then you should learn to control it.

dwe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well surely I am, by stating that dogs should be

> on leads in areas designated as such, and in areas

> that they don't need to be I am happy with that

> too.

>

> If those are the rules of the public space, and

> everyone adheres to them, what then is the area of

> concern?


Nice 'compliance mentality' - Just because 'the rules' don't require your dog to be on a lead, doesn't mean there is no obligation to keep an eye on your dog, to have it under control and be able to recall it should it be upsetting someone.

I would just repeat that, whether we like it or not, the law now provides the means for recourse where someone considers themselves to be unreasonably frigtened by a dog that is not under control.


A dog that is off lead and that goes up to a child, unbidden, and 'snatches' a toy out of that child's hand is not under control. A large dog might be very intimdating to a small child. A snatchy dog, in a state of high arousal, can quite easily and unintentionally graze a small child with its teeth or claws.


I do not want to see dogs banned from parks or orders requiring them to be on lead all the time in public parks, but if people continue to be so laissez faire around dog control those that want dogs out of parks will have a good case.


In this instance, the second woman said the dogs were not just offlead they 'snatched' a toy out of her child's hand. If this happens in your own home it is still highly undesirable but only impacts on the owner- in this case the child and mother were simply out an about minding their own business. Were another strange child to march up and snatch a toy I am sure it would be viewed as undesirable and efforts would be made to ensure this was not repeated. Equally many dogs would not be at all amused if a strange dog approached and attempted to grab their toy.


I do agree that parents staying calm will help the child not to develop a generalised fear of all dogs. I do despair of children that scream and cry as an on lead dog approaches on the street and they are comforted and shepherded by obviously, highly anxious parents, who probably do not help their child's anxiety. If I see this anxiety at distance and I am walking my dog I try to cross the road to give the child space, but perhaps parents with anxious children might also consider doing the same, occasionally.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dwe Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Well surely I am, by stating that dogs should

> be

> > on leads in areas designated as such, and in

> areas

> > that they don't need to be I am happy with that

> > too.

> >

> > If those are the rules of the public space, and

> > everyone adheres to them, what then is the area

> of

> > concern?

>

> Nice 'compliance mentality' - Just because 'the

> rules' don't require your dog to be on a lead,

> doesn't mean there is no obligation to keep an eye

> on your dog, to have it under control and be able

> to recall it should it be upsetting someone.



Well if that is compliance mentality then so be it. As it shows from your post, the wording in itself is woolly as a well trained dog may well be under control without it being on a lead, or not as the case may be.


first mate's post above sums it up well for me.

I personally am more offended by someone who would even have an issue with a dog being near them if it is only being friendly and not causing a problem. If the child is upset it's more than likely due to a learned experience from the parent who dislikes dogs. A friendly dog approaching in a controlled environment with the parent nearby should be encouraged for both parties to create better interaction. Adults who have issues with dogs tend to be weird middle class pedants who just like to moan for no reason in particular. Those people should be banned from parks in my opinion, for the good of everyone else both human and animal.


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I personally am more offended by someone who would

> even have an issue with a dog being near them if

> it is only being friendly and not causing a

> problem. If the child is upset it's more than

> likely due to a learned experience from the parent

> who dislikes dogs. A friendly dog approaching in a

> controlled environment with the parent nearby

> should be encouraged for both parties to create

> better interaction. Adults who have issues with

> dogs tend to be weird middle class pedants who

> just like to moan for no reason in particular.

> Those people should be banned from parks in my

> opinion, for the good of everyone else both human

> and animal.

>

> Louisa.


clickbait.

For what it's worth, if a dog approaches one of my kids I'll sort of put my arms around the kid so she feels protected but I'll encourage her to interact with the dog.


I don't think people should have to keep dogs on leads at certain times of the day for fear of seeing a child.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> For what it's worth, if a dog approaches one of my

> kids I'll sort of put my arms around the kid so

> she feels protected but I'll encourage her to

> interact with the dog.

>

> I don't think people should have to keep dogs on

> leads at certain times of the day for fear of

> seeing a child.


A Rottweiler bounded up to one of ours when he was on his tricycle and to be honest I grabbed him off the trike and had a go at the owner when he finally caught up with his dog. As the owner suggested to me the dog was harmless I guess I overreacted.


I didn't try and pet the dog either.

Don't think anyone is saying that dogs shouldn't every be allowed off the lead, but that when they are, they should be under control and the owner able to be recall them. What's clear is that a dog that runs up to a child and snatches a toy from it's hand is not under control.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't think anyone is saying that dogs shouldn't

> every be allowed off the lead,



OP Suggests that maybe they should be on leads at times when there will be lots of kids around (like school run).



> What's clear is that a dog

> that runs up to a child and snatches a toy from

> it's hand is not under control.



Agree. But how often does that happen.


I was thinking just yesterday (about an unrelated topic) that we are in danger of raising a generation of real soft useless people, not equped to deal with the world they live in because we wrap our kids in cotton wool too much. That's not to say I want big dogs flattening small kids, but I also don't want to take away anything in the environment that could possibly cause harm to our little ones.


And I dsay that as a parent who is probably also guilty of over protecting sometimes.

rahrahrah, exactly.


Let's be clear, young dogs, just like young children, are going to have moments when they go off piste and test the boundaries. If I were the owner of the rottweiler and this was the very first time ever it had bounded up to a child I would thenceforth, apologise to the parent, get the dog on a longline and do intensive training, until such time I could be pretty confident the dog would not do this again.


All this is normal dog behaviour and, as ever, I blame the owners for being absent in the moment and not taking training seriously. That said mistakes do happen and we cannot create a risk free world. On the other hand, if the dog had already behaved like this and was still being given unfettered freedom to bound up to people and children, then the owner deserves a real ticking off for potentially scaring a child and parent, but also for putting his/her own dog in harm's way.


Otta, just seen your post and I do agree but times have changed and, let's be honest, people are not so canny about animals in general. In days of old you'd often see pictures of a terrier hanging off someone's trouser leg (that's just the way terriers are)and it was brushed off. If a child got bitten for standing on a dog's tail, the child learned the hard way not to do that again. Today, either of these two incidents could get a dog put down as vicious.


My concern is with the reality of the law and what can/could be done with it should people decide to. Because I don't wnat to see swathes of normal dogs put down or kept on a lead all their lives, I urge owners to be realistic and train and supervise properly.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was thinking just yesterday (about an unrelated

> topic) that we are in danger of raising a

> generation of real soft useless people, not equped

> to deal with the world they live in because we

> wrap our kids in cotton wool too much.


I agree that we are in danger of doing this in many aspects of modern life, but dog owners having control of their dogs and generally being responsible isn't about wrapping kids in cotton wool, it's about consideration for others.

It's not an easy thing to control though is it? Consideration is all very well but in a park where there will likely be dogs and children , including puppies and people afraid of dogs it's likely there will be these occurrences.

So if a dog runs up to a child is the owner then deemed inconsiderate? That's was what I got from the OP

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Where did I say he did a good job? Yup and Corbyn was very close to Len McCluskey and funded by Unite wasn't he...they're all as bad as each other... Labour have to purge their party of the far-left - they're a disaster. Allan Johnson summed it up so well on election night in 2019....  
    • Thank you for the detailed advise @trinidad It is definitely damage we are concerned about. I don’t think Evri would agree to pay the bill to fix our gate or letter box if they were to be damaged as a result of their delivery drivers helper. Our doorbell can be heard from outside when rung so we don’t quite believe the aggressive simultaneous door/letter box banging is necessary. It can be quite a shock it is done very aggressively.  I’ll definitely action the steps you’ve kindly provided along with a phone call tomorrow. I do sympathise with the role drivers have and how busy they are, which is why we tried communicating directly with her but sadly we haven’t succeeded 
    • What outcome would you like? Disciplinary action? Not to have the driver back? Retraining? I know there is alot of pressure on drivers to deliver within a set day. if he slams the gate, is it evidence he is causing damage, or is the noise a irritant to yourself? You could put a sign up or buy a signing asking to close the gate gentle???? can you hear the door bell from the door? he might be ringing, not hearing and therefore knocking. In trhe notes section of the be livery page, there is a note section, although there is not 100 per cent these notes would be read as these drivers are constantly rushing.  I did a google search for you, i found this and you can try the envri website Contact Us | Evri   To complain to Evri, you can follow these steps: Contact Customer Service: Call Evri's customer service at 0330 808 5456 for assistance with your complaint.    1 Write a Letter: Address your complaint to Capitol House, 1 Capitol Close, Morley, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS27 0WH.    1 Use the Official Website: Visit the Evri complaints page on their official website for detailed instructions on how to submit a complaint.    2 Email or Call for Specific Issues: For issues like missing or damaged parcels, you can email or call 0800 988 8888, which is free to call.    1 These methods will help you effectively communicate your concerns to Evri.   My driver is called anthony, he is brilliant to be honest. I cant fault him.
    • When I have more time and energy, I will look up the actual number of votes cast for each party in that election, rather than the number of seats won. I'm interested to see that you apparently  think that  Boris Johnson did a good job of "leading the country through Covid." Is your memory really that short? I won't stoop to calling Johnson and his cronies names in the way that you seem to think is appropriate for left wing politicians. At least the left wing politicians have some semblance of morals and a concern for people who aren't in some over privileged inner circle and/or raking in money for themselves on the back of an epidemic. I'm not going to open a can of worms on here  by commenting on the disgraceful so called "purge". 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...