to think that dogs in park should be muzzled?

[hawkgirl]

I live in London where quite a few teenagers have fighting dogs in the park around babies and toddlers. Its been a bit scary at times and I know i'm not the only one who worries.

It must be hard to enforce some kind of police control on who can and can't have a certain dog breed, but thinking that around areas where small children play that all dogs should have a muzzle.

theQuibbler - In this situation it's best to keep still or move slowly, avoiding eye contact with the dog. Never run or scream, waving your arms about. Keeping calm is the best thing really. Dogs can sense fear as aggression, so may feel threatened by it. If you are able to keep calm, this is less likely to happen.

In my opinion, an under control dog should not be approaching people uninvited. They may try, but the owner should have sufficient control to be able to call them away.
Unfortunately not everyone is perfect. So not everyone has proper control of their dog. Thats life.
However, an annoying dog is very different to a dangerous dog and the two shouldn't be classed as the same.

It is the owners of DANGEROUS dogs that need tackling and it's usually fairly obvious who they are.

It is this that upsets me so much TBH. People just shrug and say well you're stupid for being scared.

Midori I think your approach is correct, but you are unfortunately in the minority.

"Nobody is perfect" - why should my DD be knocked to the ground by a dog because the owner isn't perfect? And then if she ends up scared of dogs (and let's face it, she might with that sort of thing going on, and I try to hide my fear I really do), then she will just have to suck it up as dog owners "aren't perfect"?

If I had a car and my driving "wasn't perfect" and as a result I occasionally knocked people off their feet with it would that be AOK?

Of course it's not OK that some people can't control their dogs. That's not what I'm saying. And of course some people aren't stupid for being scared of dogs.

But there is a difference between an annoying dog/owner and a dangerous dog/owner.

Some drivers are simply thoughtless and annoying and some are bloody dangerous! It's the dangerous owners and their dogs that need dealing with not everyone else.

ImSoNotTelling, I agree again. Who is to say the dog of the 'not perfect' owner won't knock over a small child or elderly person, causing possibly serious injury.

People aren't perfect, not everyone is able to train their dog to a level where is has a perfect recall. Those who cannot do so should either walk their dog in a secure area away from other people or keep their dog on a lead. If they cannot control said dog when it is on a lead, they shouldn't own a dog.

As a dog owner and serious enthusiast myself, I am constantly appalled and embarrassed by what othr dog owners deem acceptable.

The dog that knocked my DD over wasn't dangerous, it was a big overexcited puppy. The owner wasn't an evil thug, he was a pleasant looking young man.

But that sort of thing doesn't need dealing with?

this is really why dog people and non dog people end up at loggerheads. i do not want dogs running up to me, jumping on me and my children, running after us. Even if they are just playing, I am frightened of dogs, they are a lot bigger than my children, I don;t know that particuar dog. i just don't want it.

But dog owners just say "well my dog is fine" and look on its behaviour as an indulgent mother looks at an unruly child. I have been in a position a couple of times where I have asked the owner to take their dog away and they just stand there smiling saying things like "oh she's just being friendly", "don't worry she won't hurt you" and stuff like that. Thing is I am not interested in how nice your dog is, I do not want it proving to me, I just want you to take your bloody jumpy slobbery dog away from my family when I ask you politely.

You are right. Every dog owner should be able to control their dog.

I'm a dog enthusiast myself and all the dogs I've had in my life have been under control or on a lead until they're under control. I also clean up after my dog and make every effort for them to be as socially acceptable as possible.

It's the bad owners that give us all a bad name and I'd hate to see a blanket law brought in because of them.

laws rule the law biding. the people you mention are not law abdiing. So a law won't help YABVU.

making the vast vast majority of dogs that don't bite people wear muzzles is just bloody stupid. And deeply upsetting to those dogs, who is no longer free to catch a ball, sniff things and do those things that dogs do.

incidentally the statistical probability of you being bitten this week is about 1 in 500000, and actually less likely than that if you don't own a dog, or work with them professionally.

this always comes up, and is the product of hysteria, and total lack of sensible risk-analysis.

Thing is most people are fine. it's just if you go for a walk and 19 dogs are fine (and I don't even mind them coming up as long as they aren't "jumpy") and the 20th is really overexcited/jumping up and down/paws on your chest etc or worse barking at you then that kind of spoils the whole thing and puts you off going out.

Of course dog lovers will have a higher tolerance for that sort of stuff as they like dogs and are probably more confident that they know they are only playing/they could get it off if they needed to, but for people like me just one doing that on a walk confirms all my fears and just puts me right off.

Then you end up with situations like the OP where a combination of that, and yobs with genuinely dangerous dogs, and you just lose sympathy with the whole thing.

It's NOT okay for dogs to run up and sniff people. Not even puppies, although it is more understandable when puppies do it, it's in no way okay.

I will admit I have very little control over my dog when he is not leashed. He is still in training and it's taking a while for it to sink in as he is an older dog and there was no ground work done when he was a puppy by the eejits who abandoned him before I got him. He still thought it was okay to mouth/nibble people and he was almost 2.

Therefore he is not let off his leash. He is allowed a run by the side of my bike or on a tracking lead. But he is not allowed to run loose because I cannot trust him not to bother people. He won't be allowed to do so untill his recall and down command are 110%.

I despair of dog owners who exercise less control than this over their dogs. It is those people who give dog owners in general a bad name.

I do feel for you ImSoNotTelling. I know it's not right that people let their dogs jump on people etc, I don't appreciate it myself.

I do think something should be done about the whole status dog thing and pronto. Just dealing with this problem alone would probably help the confidence of people like yourself to some extent.

The plain thoughtless dog owners need tackling too, but how?
Should every potential dog owner attend a course on the responsibilities of dog ownership before they get their hands on a dog of any sort? That would be good, and might help the general 'nice but dim' owners. But it wouldn't stop the yobs from going to the back street puppy farmers.

My son was bitten in a hotel by the owners dog.. he blamed my son for running towards the dog! now all 4 of my boys are terrified of dogs the bigger ones watched as the baby ran to see the dog and it turned on him! You don't have to be out in the open to encounter irresponsible dog owners.

joolyjollyhjo - you walk your kids in your 'local country park' - of course you don't come across the kind of experiences those of us in London have!
Honestly, finsbury park, sunday afternoon, take your toddlers life in your hands if you go for a little stroll around. drunk people with staffs totally out of control, children with staffs on leads, it is terrifying. I like the suggestion that they are all shot on sight.

rocknstroll, you appear to think all staff are a problem, why? Despite their appearance, as a breed they are hugely outgoing and people friendly by nature.

rocknstroll - are you seriously suggesting that all staffs are shot on sight??

i am the owner of a staffy. he is a fantastic dog and the reason we chose a staffy is that they make such fantastic family pets.

as to your stereotyping of staffy owners - i live in the countryside and i am a social worker currently working in child protection. i know loads of staffy owners who do not fit the stereotypes you mention.

ImSoNotTelling, chili powder is the answer. In a 35mill film canister.
Dog ignores you, fine.
Dog rushes up to you in a threatening manner, barking and jumping up? Empty the canister.
Works much faster than waiting for the owner to notice what their animal is doing. Or standing there in a panic, wetting yourself and hoping that it's 'only playing' and won't treat your anatomy as a chew toy.

I am neithrer hysterical or a dog hater. In fact I would love my daughter to have the companionship of an appropriate dog when she is old enough.

You say a change in the law would do nothing, but the conversation I had with the local neighbourhood police support team paints a different picture. Currently only 3 breeds of dog are covered by the dangerous dogs act in England. The police / park rangers are powerless to do anything about dogs of other breeds unless an animal does something that could be said to be evidence of it being out of control.

I asked whether they couldn't politely just stop the owner and ask them to put their dog on a lead and was told the response would be eff off.

It was the first really warm sunny day of spring and the park was rammed with small children on scooters, learning to cycle / playing ball.

I would be FURIOUS if an unleashed rottie came running over to sniff my little girl or play with her. It's not appropriate. And were it to attack, I'm not strong enough to get it off before serious injury would be sustained.

The problem is the owners aren't responsible. If they were they wouldn't be keeping big dogs like this in inner city London in the first place.

Most people live in one or two bed flats with (if they're lucky) some outside space that might be large enough to 'swing a cat'. I wouldn't coop a big animal up like that.

By extending the law to cover some other large breeds, the police would at least have the authority to take preventive action in situations where it's obvious problems might occur.

My local park isn't big enough for a dog area. Maybe it could be regulated by time of day? i.e. all large dogs to be kept on a lead between 10AM and 5PM. That way the kids can play and so too can the dogs.

"I would be FURIOUS if an unleashed rottie came running over to sniff my little girl or play with her. It's not appropriate. And were it to attack, I'm not strong enough to get it off before serious injury would be sustained."

Would be you equally FURIOUS if an unleashed Golden Retriever came running over?!

Dog attacks aren't defined by breed, they are defined by the stupid owners inablity to properly train, socialise and control their dogs. A well trained, well socialised rottie is no more likely to attack or bite than a well trained, well socialisd dog of any breed.

I do wish people would give it a rest with their stupid, ignorant biases.

I don't know anyone who's been killed or maimed by a golden retriever. However I do know a little boy who had part of his calf muscle bitten off by a rottweiler that he cycled past.

I'm not particularly interested in the semantics of whether it's the dog or the owner that's at fault. All I care about is our childrens' right to be safe.

With respect I don't think I'm the ignorant, stupid person here.

I for one wouldn't be able to live with myself if my dog attacked a small child becuase I was too pig headed to face facts.

o sorry ceres - maybe if you read some of my earlier posts on this thread before jumping down my throat about stereotyping - I am fully aware that some of the people who own staffs, such as yourself, as the crem de la crem of dog ownership, and your staff is probably so well trained he could take sole care of a new born baby, but my point is that most of the people i see with staffs, in my local park in london, are not like you, they are thugs, or they are people who don't seem to know that much about looking after dogs - hence their dogs are not obedient, but compltely unpredictable. The difficulty for me, as a parent of little children, is to know, in the 2 seconds i have to decide once i see a staff, whether this is likely to be dangerous or not. I don't want to instill in my kids a life long irrational fear of dogs, so don't want to pick up my toddler on sightof every staff and run for it, buit at the same time, I'd quite like them not to be mauled to death. In the absence of any credible solution from the dog loving community - apart from of course, that people like me with fears of dogs should get over it and stop being so hysterical - i would happily see them all shot on sight.
you must surely accept that some staffs have injured some children and killed others and as such it is legitimate for parents of young children to be wary of them and not want them interfering with our right to take our children for a walk in a park??????????????????????????

why don't the dog lovers accept there is a problem, and with your unrivalled dog knowledge, give us some suggestions on what to do? How do I keep my children safe in a park full of out of control staffs?

yes but that wouldnt stop an under 21 year old taking it for a walk, having it in a public place would it?
it is defintely a problem in London, it really is, and it really needs dealing with.
I was out of London at the weekend, and going for a walk in the park was such a joy, there were dogs frolicing around everywhere as in every park, but they weren't staffs, and they weren't out of control, they wee with owners who oozed 'i can control my dog' and it just made for a lovely walk - my kids could just run off and enjoy the freedom. about to take DD out to the park now in london, whole different ball game and she'll have to hold my hand every 5 seconds when a revolting status staff slobbers by.