To think the law should be able to do more about this dog??

[curiousgeorgie]

Walking in the park today with my DH, 2.5 year old DD & dog, and DD walking in front of us (a very late walker, so very slow and can't run yet), suddenly a mastiff (we think) runs from the trees straight to DD and before we can get there literally steps away, my dog is between them.

It was so so quick but this dog was going for my child, and subsequently absolutely savaged my dog, I grabbed DD, was screaming for the owner and DH was trying to separate this dog from our dog (who is a small friendly breed and was pinned down, yelping, it was awful.)

The owners appeared and pulled the dog off after a few horrible minutes, and argued with us that the dog wasn't dangerous, and the woman got completely in my face and threatened me (while 30 weeks pregnant holding my sobbing DD) so we quickly left.

I called the local police from the car and was told there wasn't anything they can do about the dog as it didn't attack a human. (thank god though.)

But the fact remains, that a dangerous dog is allowed to remain in the park on a sunny weekend day where surely there'll be lots of children??

I'm so so angry and upset about this, my DD is really not herself and my poor dog left with bite injuries to his mouth, ears, face and neck.

Just because this dog didn't quite manage to bite my DD nothing can be done?? AIBU?

RTT - am slightly ghasted with my flabber.

YNK - I can see your point that if you don't want a dog in your sandwich or bounding around you, then you should keep to the no dogs allowed/keep on leash section of the park. But you are ignoring the major point everyone has tried to get across:

Parks have been created for the enjoyment of people and therefore priority should be given to people. You choose to have a dog, therefore it's your responsibility to keep your dog under control around people, dogs or children it doesn't known no matter what area of the park you are in.

By arguing that OP should use the non-dog areas of the park, you are putting the onus of the other dogs behaviour on her, her child and her dog which is wrong. The other dog approached OP's walking party and therefore the other dog owner should have had it under control or be able to call it back. It's not the responsibility of the OP to make the other dog behave by being in a dog walking area of the park, and by suggesting that she uses a different area reads as your suggesting that the problem should be avoided as opposed to the dog owner taking responsibility.

FWIW, I don't agree with your argument. But then I own cats who no doubt shit in the neighbours gardens when they're not trying to moult all over my clean laundry.

Doesn't matter how often we all read your posts YNK, you have not answered the specific question about how you would protect your GC.

Victim blaming at its best, from you.

OP, YADNBU, and I hope you read the post by Ohdearnigel, because it gives some very good advice, but may have been lost amidst the frothing.

Hope your dog is ok, and all goes well at the vets today (or was that yesterday, now?)

I have answered - you are not reading my posts!

I couldn't find the answer either, it would be really lovely YNK if you could find the post and just refer to the date and time, you could find it so much quicker than we could. We all seem to keep missing it.

Ynk you are coming across as a dog attack apologist!

Any time a dog attacks something or someone then it and it's owner are in the wrong not the thing or person who happened to be there.

Anyone who can not control their dogs should not have them in a public place unleashed and possibly unmuzzled (particularly if the breed is large and physically able to overpower it's owner).

Absolutely appalling attitude YNK. It's people like you that make me think that dogs should be kept on a lead at ALL times.

Of course, I am advocating that dogs should be out of control and trained to attack.....pffft!

Okay, I have read and reread your posts.

Perhaps since we are all so thick and unable to understand, maybe you could repeat how you would protect your GC in the circumstance described.
Thank you in advance.

Sorry, that was to YNK.

Thanks to all of you who illustrate my point about people being aggressive to dog owners!

No one is being aggressive, no one is suggesting that you are advocating out of control dogs - but what you are doing is suggesting that it is anyone but the dog owner's responsibility for preventing dog attacks by simply avoiding them - which is not the case in what everyone describes as reality.

It is always the dog owner's responsibility to maintain control of their own dogs especially in public wherever they are. Anything but complete control is unacceptable.

There is never anything to be gained by arguing with the insane. YNK is of that ilk, so walk on by.

I am torn between wanting to know what YNK will say, & wanting to hide this conversation as it's massively getting on my nerves.

OP - YANBU. You & your dog & child should be able to walk in the park in peace. So should other people, including those who own big scary looking dogs, without having to worry that they are going to witness any unpleasant incidents such as you described, no matter who starts them.

I feel sorry for the dogs as well - if they are badly trained they are surely more likely to get aggressive & out of control. It's not the dog's fault it's undisciplined & has to be put down when it attacks someone. The owner should be in control of it at all times, if they can't do this they shouldn't be allowed a dog in the first place.

Restored my faith/sanity a bit there. Thanks, Kansas.

They are shared spaces. That is, they are to be shared by all park users. Where I live, most parks are like this; apart from small playground areas. Where on earth do you live that there are large, grassed areas where dogs are forbidden or must be kept on the lead? Where is my toddler supposed to kick a ball or go for a decent walk or play a game of chase, if irresponsible dog owners have priority in that space, by your warped logic?

Here, dogs must be on lead at all times, unless in a designated off lead dog park (usually fully fenced in), although there are some larger park areas and beaches also accessible to dog owners to allow their dogs off lead. I think it works well. There is also provision in the law for dogs participating in certain canine events (such as agility and obedience, herding or field trials) for the club to determine when dogs may or may not be off lead within the precincts of the trial without breaking the law.

Right got about 2/3 of the way through this thread before ynks comments started to make me seethe. Where I live the parks all have notices saying that dogs should be kept on leads, but the dog owners just ignore them. So, where am I supposed to take my dd???

Midnitescribbler what country do you live in? Sounds like similar regulations to what YNK has described. If she also lives somewhere where dog areas are quite restricted, that might explain why she is struggling to understand the other points of view on here (even though several people have mentioned that most dogs are not restricted in public areas in the UK).

Yes I do live in an area like this, where shared areas are few and far between. Yet still parents make a big issue of coming to the only shared area for miles around to shout at dog owners.
They only seem to come out on sunny days though. Otherwise dog owners and children get on fine the rest of the year. There are some lovely children who encourage my dog to play hide and seek with them and it is so nice when everyone gets on well.
BTW I live in a small town in Northern England and I am well acquainted with the law and local bylaws. I usually refer aggressive parents to also check out the law!

Thing is, a shared area is just that - a shared area. Ie not a dog area. And the needs of humans - whether they be to do with eating a sandwich in peace or just to be able to walk around - take priority over those of animals. Tbh if you have the kind of 'dogs come first' mentality irl that you have displayed on this thread, then I'm not surprised people shout at you. If your dog is bothering people trying to have a picnic, for eg, and you counter their objections to this with a statement that your dog is allowed to be there, then of course they are going to get cross. It might be allowed to be there, but it doesn't mean that it should disrupt what other people are doing and you as a dog owner are responsible for it, whatever type of area you are in.

Ynk - you do know that dog ownership is a privilege, not a right don't you?

And that in return for the privilege you have a responsibility to ensure your dog is not a public nuisance?

And that public nuisance encompasses things such as not fouling or frightening, as well as not attacking other creatures? And not discouraging other people from enjoying the public spaces we've all paid our taxes for?

Btw, I'm assuming that ynk stands for 'you never know'. Perhaps ynl or ynu would be more appropriate?