To be utterly exasperated with the ‘but she’s really friendly’ dog owners out there

[Flamingolingo]

You know the kind - the ones who holler after their bounding dog who barks and bows and jumps at you about how friendly they are.

I feel like since lockdown I’ve had multiple altercations with people and their marauding dogs. Especially either while out running or out with my small children who are terrified.

That’s not to say there aren’t loads of really responsible dog owners out there who do try and call their dog back/put it on the lead, but the few who make no attempt other than shout about their friendliness really get my goat. For clarity: we are mostly using city centre green space, that is quite busy, I think in a rural location it’s a little different.

So I guess my Aibu is about my being annoyed at people who assume everyone wants their ‘friendly’ dog to bound into their social space, and who make no attempt to call their dog back unless specifically asked to.

@flashbac - This thread is about dogs and their inconsiderate owners. It's not about inconsiderate people in general.

Threads evolve. Suggesting all users of public areas show consideration and respect to others is not a derailing. It is simply broadening the subject slightly. What is bizarre is the umbrage shown by some posters at the suggestion that people other than dog owners should be considerate when using public spaces.

If you want to moan about hating children and joking (?) about rather shooting a child rather than a dog then start another thread instead of derailing this one.

No need to start a new thread. This one is fine and still pretty much on topic. Regarding the shooting post - the original question was so ridiculous and so irrelevant to the topic that it didn't warrant a serious answer.

Control your dogs people. We don't care if it's being 'friendly'. I don't want to play.

Fair enough. But how is your request so totally different to "treat others with respect and consideration in public spaces"?

A friend lives in a dog friendly building in US where dogs travel in the service lifts, people use either passenger or service lifts.

Of course ....One woman started using the passenger lift with her dog, and a tenant complained it was aggravating her childs asthma PLUS it was breaking the rules (it was). Unbelievably dog woman told my friend "people whose children have health conditions shouldn't live in a dog friendly building! My friend could never look at her the same way..such cruel selfish insanity.

@vlnr77yac

A friend lives in a dog friendly building in US where dogs travel in the service lifts, people use either passenger or service lifts.

Of course ....One woman started using the passenger lift with her dog, and a tenant complained it was aggravating her childs asthma PLUS it was breaking the rules (it was). Unbelievably dog woman told my friend "people whose children have health conditions shouldn't live in a dog friendly building! My friend could never look at her the same way..such cruel selfish insanity.

That is an appalling selfish attitude. People who can't abide by the rules and treat their co-residents with respect and consideration should not live in a shared building.

Agree that people should control dogs and have them in sight. I have a terrier who is great with people and children but frightened/aggressive of and towards other dogs despite puppy training So she is always on the lead and only ever off if there is no other dog ( 5am etc).

However I had her on lead in north Norfolk and two large dogs came hurtling round the corner towards her. No owner in sight. So I shouted at the dogs to keep away and one of them cowered away but the other came bounding on. Two minutes later the dogs owner came up and scolded me for shouting at her dogs because they were friendly but scared of me. I tried to explain my dog on lead could still be aggressive and I was doing it for their sake.

It was public woodland.

However I can see how hard an issue it is. I presume she'd had no prior problems with her dogs and liked them being off lead. However she was seriously rude.

YANBU.

My dog is loud and not around children much. If I see people coming with kids, I take him to the side and distract him whilst holding or ready to grab him.

On the odd occasion he has bounded up to someone I have chased after, apologised profusely and they can tell I'm doing my best to get him (he likes to evade capture) and that he's just loud, won't do anything and won't jump up (as I know this for a fact) however it doesn't stop me from acknowledging that I'm in the wrong and trying to stop the situation straight away. My dog is also tiny, so not too scary.

I, too, hate it when dogs bound over to me and their owners are so blasé about it.

@ SayNotoArtificialLipids Thank you

Always keep my dog on a lead. Even in large spaces he has an extended lead.
If a dog is off the lead and something happens, even accidental, the owner is then liable (do I’ve been told) so not worth the risk - Even though I do trust my dog it’s other dogs that worry me!

If a dog is off the lead and something happens, even accidental, the owner is then liable
the owner is liable for anything and everything the dog does irrespective of the lead situation

the owner is liable for anything and everything the dog does irrespective of the lead situation

That is not necessarily the case.

Well a dog can't be liable can it, @OchonAgusOchonO 😂 of course the owner is responsible for it and will be the one answerable legally should anything happen.

@Notredamn - of course the owner is responsible for it and will be the one answerable legally should anything happen.

Obviously the owner is responsible but is only liable under certain circumstances. If they are negligent, then yes, they are liable. However, if the injured person is totally or partially at fault, then it's a very different situation.

I'm struggling to think of a scenario where a dog attack victim would be seen as at fault to the extent there would be no repercussions for the dog itself and certainly the owner, but ok.

A child came up to my dog who was minding her own business and whacked her with a stick. If my dog had snapped, I expect at least partial blame would have been attributed to the child and his parent.

Dog owner.
I agree that those owners are awful, selfish individuals and if they don’t have adequate control over their dogs they should be leashed.
However.
I do think it goes both ways sometimes and a bit of tolerance/resilience is needed.

My dog doesn’t approach people, but I still occasionally get people who on sighting her scream their heads off and run or hide when she’s no where near them, has no intention of going near them and isn’t acting in any way ‘threatening’.
Its ridiculous and really annoys me.

Like a few days ago, dog is running along the field, family appear, she’s no where near them running about minding her own business and the mum and child start screaming and flapping.
So she stops and looks at them, I recall her (so at no point is she ever near them!) then get evil looks off them.

What dog isn’t going to stop and look at someone screaming their bloody heads off and flapping?!

Same woman later ran off and left her child petrified and screaming for her on the way back, dog walking down pavement, mum and child on opposite grass so again, she’s no where near you and not interested in you!

Yanbu - my Ds is diagnosed with a dog phobia - he has had cbt . He can just about cope with dogs on leads but loose he panics - telling him dogs are friendly is no help whatsoever.

Obviously the owner is responsible but is only liable under certain circumstances. If they are negligent, then yes, they are liable. However, if the injured person is totally or partially at fault, then it's a very different situation.

Example needed of when the injured person is totally or partially at fault?

I understand police dogs might injure someone they have been set on or owners getting bitten for teasing or kicking their dog...

www.dogbitesolicitors.co.uk/dog-bite-laws

Dogbitesolicitors....

www.dogbitesolicitors.co.uk/dog-bite-laws

I am wondering why it is so important for some people to prove that their dog doesn't need to be on a lead. I don't own a dog, so it's a genuine question. A few posters have mentioned that their dog walks to heel and has good recall. I get this. But is there any particular reason not to keep a dog on a lead in a public space? I'm talking about simply walking along, not when the dog is running around getting some exercise.

I have to admit that I feel slightly nervous when I see someone coming towards me with a dog which isn't on a lead. I can't be sure that this person's dog isn't going to come over to me and my children. This has happened, mostly with no drama or consequences. But I don't know that until it happens.

Some dog owners here claim that their dog has no interest in me or my children. How am I supposed to know this? I don't run around in circles screaming and waving my arms in the air when I see a dog walking perfectly happily off lead, but I admit to feeling a bit wary. And, as I said, I often wonder why the dog isn't just on a lead.

I use my foot to push away unwanted dogs. To be clear, I don’t kick or hurt them, just push them away. However the number of times I’ve been told that I’m an animal hater or to “get over myself, he’s only being friendly” is ridiculous. Irresponsible dog owners are arseholes.

Why the dog just isn't on a lead
From what I can gather the 'reason' is that the dog has a right to enjoy itself and feel fulfilled and that is more important than the rights of people to not be inconvenienced by dogs 🙄
I suppose we should just be grateful that these types of people aren't able to have even more powerful carnivores as pets

@WhattheHhashappened - Example needed of when the injured person is totally or partially at fault

I already gave an example of a child who came over to, and hit my on lead dog with a stick. My dog didn't snap or bite but if she had, the child and parent would have been more than likely considered to be at fault.

If you read through the link you provided, you will see that it states it is not as clearcut as the dog owner is always liable.

@AhBallix - there is no legal requirement to keep your dog on a lead. Personally, I keep mine on a lead on busy areas as I know some people are uncomfortable with dogs but I am not required to do so. I let them off lead in suitable areas for a decent run. However, some people seem to think dogs should never be out in public areas or that if they venture into an area where dogs are allowed off lead that all dogs should immediately be constrained because they are uncomfortable.

@OchonAgusOchonO

Thanks for answering. I think the question of whether it is a legal requirement isn't really the point. There are many situations where a person is not technically doing anything illegal by behaving in a particular way. It's more about social responsibility, which I appreciate you have, in that you give consideration to other people's discomfort.

I suppose the problem is mainly that there are so many people who don't train their dogs adequately (my SIL among them, with her mad, marauding hounds!) that all dog owners get tarred with the one brush. And that's human nature - people who are frightened of dogs have no way of knowing who the responsible dog owners are, so they automatically become anxious when they see a dog off lead.

I am wondering why it is so important for some people to prove that their dog doesn't need to be on a lead. I don't own a dog, so it's a genuine question. A few posters have mentioned that their dog walks to heel and has good recall. I get this. But is there any particular reason not to keep a dog on a lead in a public space? I'm talking about simply walking along, not when the dog is running around getting some exercise
People are pointing out their off lead dog will walk to heel and has good recall because some posters are so irrational that they have decided that off lead dog must equal out of control dog.

In an appropriate area it's absolutely fine to have dogs off lead, but part of having a dog off lead is they are trained well. It's impossible to train a dog to be good off lead if you don't train them off lead.

For example in a typical walk with my dogs they are on short leads on all footpaths and shared use paths and they are off lead in large open area that allow off lead dogs. We rarely go to parks and places that insist on leads because they benefit from off lead time. If I call them back they come back and they walk to heel (off lead) until I say it's fine to go again, or I might call them to me and we wait together until someone has passed. Some areas I'm happy for them to run around freely, others I'm happy for them to be off lead and sniffing around but they have to remain close by.

The only reason I can do all of that with confidence is precisely because they have a range of off lead training and have their training regularly refreshed on a daily basis.

It also means that when I have to use a longer or extendable lead (for example visiting national trust places or walking in national parks when restrictions are in place) I can be confident that my dogs will be obedient.

Unfortunately some people seem to think that the presence of a lead is what makes a dog obedient and under control. Personally, I've had more issues with poorly trained dogs on extendable leads than I have with off lead dogs, precisely because people seem to think that being on a lead equals being under control.