You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Or recently, a hound in the local park that chased my 10 yr old around trying to bite her
This thread does my head in. Unless this was a chihuahua or one of those useless pugs it would have actually caught and bit her had it wanted too. I realise it's a shit situation and said dog would have got a boot up its arse had it been my 10 year old (assuming our dog hadn't chewed its ears first) but most likely it was just badly behaved dog with a moron owner trying to play. I would imagine had the dog actually been trying to bite the child calling the police and booting the owner round the park may well have been the preferred option as well. Dogs are remarkably agile and able to bite a child fairly easily if they want to.
Dogs are remarkably agile and able to bite a child fairly easily if they want to.
I'm sure explaining that to the child would instantly alleviate the terror
I’m sure explaining that to the child would instantly alleviate the terror
If you read what was said, you will understand that wasn't what he was saying.
Unless this was a chihuahua or one of those useless pugs it would have actually caught and bit her had it wanted too.
I'm glad you were there to witness it in your expert way, a_a. Pity you didn't tell me that at the time. (I've owned enough dogs through my life not to need correcting by some internet random who wasn't there.)
Oh right so what he wrote wasn't what he was saying, fine then as you were, continue with the hyperbole.
This thread does my head in
It's doing your head in as all you've done in this entire thread is victim blame and be one of the entitled dog users. Why can't you accept that some people don't like dogs and/or are scared of them and that dogs and dog owners are at fault?
If you read what was said, you will understand that wasn’t what he was saying.
I think he was saying that we can tell that the dog wasn't actually trying to bite the child, because the child was never actually bitten? So there was no actual malicious intent, just bad behaviour.
The difficulty is that to me (non-dog owner and completely clueless to dog behaviour) and to my toddler (also non-dog owner and completely clueless as to dog behaviour and many other things) there's no functional difference right up to the point where the bite happens and then it's too late.
Life changing owing a dog 🙂
https://clearcaninecancer.com/11-reasons-owning-a-dog-could-change-your-life/
I’m sure explaining that to the child would instantly alleviate the terror
Objectively yes, that would work.
A badly trained dog is a problem, but there's naff all an 11-page rant on a cycling forum will do to solve that. Training the kid on the other hand is within your remit and will solve the problem.
Either ignore it so it gets bored and goes back to it's owner. Because that's how recall works, the dog has to perceive the owner as being more interesting, if you make yourself interesting they don't stand a chance. If you're running around screaming of course the dog's going to find this exciting. Or play a different game with it, throw a stick, fuss it, whatever, just not the "run around hysterically whilst it yaps at you" game, because dogs love that one.
This is what every single dog owner says until the day their dog bites someone though isn’t it.
Apart from the 99.9% that actually do never bite anyone.
Training the kid on the other hand is within your remit and will solve the problem.
It absolutely is, and is likely just as useful as learning how to use cutlery. After all, we were all trained at some point as you don't see many adults running away screaming.
On the other hand, this takes time and in the meanwhile a bit of understanding that from their perspective they are being attacked by a bear coming at them at eye level would be nice. This is of course an understanding that many many people have, but not everyone. Hence I suppose the 11 page rant.
I think he was saying that we can tell that the dog wasn’t actually trying to bite the child, because the child was never actually bitten? So there was no actual malicious intent, just bad behaviour.
Exactly - thank you. Try to stand by what someone is saying and get abuse instead. Bloody people - as badly behaved as some dogs.
Apart from the 99.9% that actually do never bite anyone.
66.7% of people who play Russian roulette survive. Not really the point though is it. And apart from in the deer hunter I guess most people play it voluntarily.
your head in as all you’ve done in this entire thread is victim blame an
Such as?
To all those entitled dog owners on here who think people should get used to dogs:
Looks like there's been a massive increase in bites due to poorly trained dogs bought during the pandemic, and a potential bomb of untrained/unsocialised dogs to come because they haven't been trained/socialised at the right time because of lockdowns.
Anyway. Most of this problem is due to the fact that there are just too many humans. And humans want dogs. Germany has an exhorbitant licencing system in place and a legal requirement for 2 6-week training courses for dogs and dog owners and they *STILL* have the problem.
Stop having kids is the answer people. Then you'll come across less people with dogs. Because in my experience actually trained dogs (that are obedient) are few and far between.
The difficulty is that to me (non-dog owner and completely clueless to dog behaviour) and to my toddler (a
I agree, better safe than sorry, boot the dog up the ass
Anyway. Most of this problem is due to the fact that there are just too many humans.
This is probably true.
And now the "other" humans have found all my secret, quiet places. The incident that sparked this thread was in a local village of about 200 people, 3 miles up a dead end forest track, leading to a non-descript hill, surrounded by 'posh' mountains...
That is exactly where I'd expect to me some of the most problematic dogs Matt. Somewhere the owner thinks itll be ok, they wont meet anyone.
Not really the point though is it.
Kinda is.
You said every single dog bites people
I disagree
You agree you were wrong / hyporboleing
Point resolved.
Back of a fag packet based on that link up there , 8000 dog bites a year, 12million dogs, that's 0.07% of dogs per year, say 14year lifespan, so 7year average age, 0.49% of dogs are biters. I'll take back my 99.9% guess and say 99.5% then.
exactly where I’d expect to me some of the most problematic dogs
They weren't problem dogs. Quite the opposite until one jumped up.
It was the owner and her lack of interest in just holding/calling the dogs away for 20 seconds that was the issue.
You don't have to be bit by a dog (let alone actually report it - which skews your stats) for it to be a "problem dog" @thisisnotaspoon
I'm not scared of dogs and, frankly, if they come up to me and start sniffing about I don't often give two hoots. I like 'em in general. Maybe I'd be a bit annoyed if I wasn't doing anything. But I'm generally not too bothered even if I'm on the bike.
If random's dogs started to jump up at me? Dependent on my mood, might piss me off a little. But it's not a "day ruining" thing for me.
This is what most people are like around dogs. But there are a percentage of people who really don't like it - and frankly, they shouldn't have to put up with it.
So if you're a dog owner, and don't have perfect recall and can't stop your dog bothering others (or, in fact, if your dog isn't trained not to bother others) then you're a bit of a tool tbpfh.
Having a dog is a dog-owner's idea of heaven. Other people's idea of heaven shouldn't impinge on other people's heavens - especially those who think dogs are their idea of hell.
You said every single dog bites people
I absolutely did not. What a weird thing to say.
Came back to the thread to post the link to the Guardian article but many before have beaten me to it!
Good to see levels of not listening to each other are still high though.
My kid is trained to not pet dogs unless she has asked the owner, I expect the same sort of thing from the dog. Friends have trained their dogs thus or keep them on a short lead when they are in situations where their dog instincts stop them listening.
All sounds pretty simple to me, not sure why anyone else thinks differently as IMHO anything else is ignoring the needs of others and, well, that's just selfish and a bit rude.
grum
Free MemberI absolutely did not. What a weird thing to say.
My apologies, ownerless dogs are perhapse excluded by your statement.
This is what every single dog owner says until the day their dog bites someone though isn’t it.
8000 dog bites a year
That's 8000 hospital admissions for dog bites a year. I suspect the actual number of bites is somewhat larger than that. It's certain that the percentage of dogs that end up biting someone is relatively small. However, until they've actually bitten someone, you don't know if any particular dog will bite or not. Indeed, many of the dogs that end up killing someone are claimed not to have bitten before. In these circumstances it doesn't seem unreasonable to find a dog's attentions concerning at least.
Either ignore it so it gets bored and goes back to it’s owner.
Its owner. No apostrophe needed. No-one on this thread will change their view of dogs and dog owners so you may at least learn some grammar from it.
That’s 8000 hospital admissions for dog bites a year.
I would love to know what proportion of that is the dogs owner or family of owner, what proportion is owners of other dogs getting bitten trying to separate fights and what proportion is random strangers. I would imagine the first is by far the biggest.
So after 11 pages we’ve largely concluded
Dogs = good
Humans = bad
.
My apologies, ownerless dogs are perhapse excluded by your statement.
No, my point was that all the dogs that end up biting people were dogs that 'never bite anyone', until the point where they did.
I thought that was fairly obvious. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Stop having kids is the answer people. Then you’ll come across less people with dogs.
The worst dogs I’ve ever come across are owned by the childless who then treat their dogs like children instead of dogs. That’s the crux of the issue in my opinion. People that suffer with anthropomorphism. It’s not a person and doesn’t think nor act like one. It’s a dog, learn to understand how it thinks, perceives the world and behaves and life will be better and less stressful for everyone. Oh and it’s not a ****ing wolf or a bloody pack animal either. It’s a domesticated dog, about as far removed from a wolf in a behavioural sense as I am from a chimp
The worst dogs I’ve ever come across are owned by the childless who then treat their dogs like children instead of dogs
<ahem> Childfree, thank-you, and we don't all do that..
I thought that was fairly obvious. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Then you're not talking about "every single dog owner" are you?
What you meant perhapse is "this is what somewhere less than 1% of dog owners say untill their dog bites someone".
The other 99.something% probably say it too, and it turns out to be completely true.
Jeez. 🙄
Let me simplify it for you; 99.5% (another made up stat) of dogs that bite people will have been described as ones that 'never bite' or had 'dont worry he's just being friendly' etc said by their owners.
The point is that just because they haven't yet is no reliable indicator that they won't.
Could you not just get a cat? Or a hamster? Goldfish?
Just something less smelly, incontinent, annoying and bitey?
From that graun article - CBA screenshotting more but basically the poster was attacked and bitten by two dogs completely out of the blue in the woods, aged 13.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/r2qMGKx/Screenshot-2021-04-15-21-02-14-581-com-guardian.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/r2qMGKx/Screenshot-2021-04-15-21-02-14-581-com-guardian.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
I'm sure it's a great consolation when you've been attacked to be told that the dog isn't like that normally and he's never done anything like that before, with a nice hint of 'therefore it's probably your fault'.
As I said earlier, I used to tell people that my dog hardly ever bites anyone. When in fact, he didn't ever bite anyone, at all, ever. How does that fit into all these people you know who have been bitten, consolation wise? Or will you need a new coloum in your spreadsheet?
Cool story bro
There’s some very entitled none dog owners on this thread.
Not really entitled, more just living in a dream/ideal world.
When I am out cycling;
I don't want people to drive like they do
I don't want people to take up the whole fire road path like they do
I don't want peoples loose dogs jumping up/chasing after me
In fact, I would prefer it it nobody else was came anywhere near me for the whole ride
None of those things are going to happen so I just get on with it. Although I do tend to ride at around 08:00 which lessens all of those things.
The worst dogs I’ve ever come across are owned by the childless who then treat their dogs like children instead of dogs.
One of my guilty pleasures presently is Canine Intervention on Netflix. One of his mantras is “Treat your dog like a person; how does your dog treat you? Like a dog!” 😀
I think he was saying that we can tell that the dog wasn’t actually trying to bite the child, because the child was never actually bitten? So there was no actual malicious intent, just bad behaviour.
Schrödinger's dog bite
not read every single page but seems the take away message I can apply to everyday life is I need to educate myself that all the drivers who give me close passes are just playing and don't mean me any real harm as only a couple of them have ever actually hit me, and none of those killed me.
Furthermore, I should accept that every aspect of society and the environment needs to be designed to cater for their wish to impose their lifestyle choice on everyone else - thats it isn't it?
I thought the message was every car is going to kill you and you shouldn’t venture out into the world as it’s a dangerous place.
Actually now I think about it I've been bitten more times by humans than dogs !! Ok I was drunk a lot in my yoof 🙂
grum
Free Member
Quote
Jeez. 🙄Let me simplify it for you;
No, that's an entirely different statement, may or may not be true, but I'd agree more likely than your last one.
99.5% (another made up stat) of dogs that bite people will have been described as ones that ‘never bite’ or had ‘dont worry he’s just being friendly’ etc said by their owners.
No, it was derived from that Guardian article.
8,000/12,000,000 x100% = 0.06% of dogs (add a for the ones that don't end up needing medical treatment, the average life of a dog before it bites someone and gets put down etc).
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian
Herer's another Guardian article. Shall we have a thread on how we're all bastards in denial about how we're going to kill people with our bikes one day. No that would be absurd nonsense, just like your assertion that every dog is out to bite you someday.
Because:
The point is that just because they haven’t yet is no reliable indicator that they won’t.
A 99.94% percent statistic that they don't, however statistically unreliable and in need of refining, isn't going to be pushed into the realms of reliably supporting your argument that all dogs are out to bite you. That doesn't mean you need to extrapolate that to a fear of everyone and everything.
That doesn’t mean you need to extrapolate that to a fear of everyone and everything.
Clearly that isn't the case, or nobody would go outside. For my part I'd just like people in charge of dogs to recognise that it's not a genuinely bizarre reaction for someone (of whatever age, but again I'm thinking of my 2 year old here) to be afraid of their beloved pet. And also that saying something like 'don't worry they won't bite' is an entirely unhelpful response because seriously, how the hell is a toddler going to be comforted by that?
how the hell is a toddler going to be comforted by that?
Next time it could be a child’s fear!
I know it's completely won't somebody think of the children but also in this case it's my child so I don't care.
good to see a) this is still going and b) turning out exactly as I said on page 5
However, I fear this will just descend into the usual camps; those who can’t understand how anyone can dislike dogs, and those who are indifferent or actively dislike them.
reliably supporting your argument that all dogs are out to bite you.
Sigh. I've already said that wasn't what I said or meant but carry on arguing against your made up version if you like. I'm done.
Funny, I used to think you came across as a reasonable person.
They don't bite until one day they do, and for people who don't own a dog, its hard to tell the difference between a friendly and non-friendly one.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-56737576
its hard to tell the difference between a friendly and non-friendly one.
Is it?
I wouldn't want that thing within 20m of my son or my dog!!
That dog could be really chilled and friendly. Just because the tabloids decided that an entire breed was deadly it doesn’t make it so. Staffies for example are pretty much daft, fun loving, over excitable buffoons in my experience.
To be fair most dogs will give off plenty of signals before they resort to biting. Just like all other animals you get the odd dickhead. I’m not condoning what happened in the OP and I’ve always kept my dogs on leads and ensured they are consistently trained and socialised. Sadly, just like with driving, cycling etc you’re going to get the entitled shit gibbons who think social niceties and not breaking rule one don’t apply to them. Learn to live with it or stop leaving the house.
Staffies for example are pretty much daft, fun loving, over excitable buffoons in my experience.
Of all the rescue breeds I came across Staffies were by far my favourite to work with. They love humans & crave affection. They are also super easy to read.
To be fair most dogs will give off plenty of signals before they resort to biting.
Not sure about this - the signs can be quite subtle & easily missed...
Just because the tabloids decided that an entire breed was deadly it doesn’t make it so.
Breed specific traits are a fact no matter how much people try to deny it and that ain't a staffie and I would be in no rush to give it a cuddle.
No one said that was a Staffie.. 🤦♂️
We have two Boxer X dogs - when they bark and play rough&tumble with each other, they look like this:
[img] 
[/img](not my actual dogs)
Neither of them has ever even come close to biting a person, nor would they ever, because when they were young they were taught not to. Boxers are lovable daft idiots, something which is well-known.
Judging the potential aggression of a dog on the way it looks is just wrong, and ends up with Breed Specific Legislation - which should be thrown out and should never have existed to start with. But that's another discussion.
One thing you can be sure of about the dog in the picture anagallis_arvensis posted is that at one time in its life as least, it's been badly treated.
I mean, their ears don't get like that without going under the knife.
It might have been capable of being a lovely dog but I wouldn't want my dog getting too close to it.
It's a terrible shame for the dog.
Boxers are lovable daft idiots, something which is well-known.
Judging the potential aggression of a dog on the way it looks is just wrong, and ends up with Breed Specific Legislation
🤔🤔🤔
Neither of them has ever even come close to biting a person, nor would they ever, because when they were young they were taught not to.
And that right there is exactly the problem, that mindset.
You can not claim ever, that a dog of any breed would never bite another human or animal (think about the poor sheep that die from those loveable pooches) even if it was "taught" not too.
Breed specific traits are a fact
Evidence?
Not sure about this – the signs can be quite subtle & easily missed…
That’s why I said most and I never said the signs were easy to see
No one said that was a Staffie..
This too! I used staffie as an example as they are more common over here in the UK and have a pretty similar reputation to the American pit bull.
Another animal - no, I couldn't guarantee it, which is why they're on leads whenever anywhere near sheep, cattle, etc.
But a person? No - in their 11 and 6 years they've never even remotely come anywhere near that. In all truth they're both better with people than they are other dogs!
Tbh, this thread might as well be closed. They always go the same way, and no one ever changes their views because of it. Sensible dog owners get annoyed at being tarred with the same brush as the idiots, but don't see why they should have to modify what they do because of it. Non-dog people want everything done the way they say and won't compromise. It always ends in an impasse with everyone disliking the other side.
OP - I'm sorry you and your OH had to encounter an idiot and their dogs. If you're ever in the Surrey/Hants Borders area and would like to meet a couple of dogs that have helped several people with their fear of dogs, you're quite welcome.
Breed specific traits are a fact
Evidence?
Ask yourself what the point of a 'breed' is? They have relatively predictable traits. If you can't see this have you ever seen a dog. Greyhounds like chasing, sheep dogs like doging and retrievers like erm.. you work it out
I used staffie as an example as they are more common over here in the UK and have a pretty similar reputation to the American pit bull
Except ones an illegal breed and the other one isnt
Sensible dog owners get annoyed at being tarred with the same brush as the idiots, but don’t see why they should have to modify what they do because of it. Non-dog people want everything done the way they say and won’t compromise.
And in a nutshell there is the entitled dog owner attitude.
All I ( and the other non dog owners) want is for you to keep within the law by keeping your dog under control at all times and that means it does not come up to me at all unless I invite it to do so.
It does NOT have to be on a lead IF its properly trained. I have only ever known one dog so well trained. all others needed to be on a lead at all times because otherwise not under control.
to be under control it MUST be withing eyesight at all times and recall immediately and reliably. If your dog does not do this then it MUST be on a lead at all times
thats the law
I’ve owned a retriever that retrieved nothing and a Newfoundland that was scared of water. Dependent entirely on the lineage of the breed and how far removed they are from working stock.
As per previous post the staffie was used as an example and pit bulls were banned as a knee jerk reaction. No point continuing this as we’ll just keep arguing.
Breed specific traits are a fact no matter how much people try to deny it
racist
All I ( and the other non dog owners) want is for you to keep within the law by keeping your dog under control at all times and that means it does not come up to me at all unless I invite it to do so.
Are you the one controlling the dog? If not then that argument makes no sense. That's up there with a dog that causes fear being automatically dangerous (regardless of context). You're doing a good job of conforming to the stereotype though, I'll give you that.
thats the law
Really.
that means it does not come up to me at all unless I invite it to do so.
Isn’t that rule for Vampires?
And in a nutshell there is the entitled dog owner attitude.
All I ( and the other non dog owners) want is for you to keep within the law by keeping your dog under control at all times and that means it does not come up to me at all unless I invite it to do so.
It does NOT have to be on a lead IF its properly trained. I have only ever known one dog so well trained. all others needed to be on a lead at all times because otherwise not under control.to be under control it MUST be withing eyesight at all times and recall immediately and reliably. If your dog does not do this then it MUST be on a lead at all times
thats the law
You seem to be missing a word there, dangerously.
"Under section 3(1) of the 1991 Act (as amended by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, (the ‘2014 Act’)), if any dog is dangerously out of control in any place, including all private property, the owner, or person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of a summary offence. That offence becomes an aggravated offence, and triable either way, if the dog injures any person or an assistance dog while out of control.
A dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person or assistance dog, whether or not it actually does so, (section 10(3) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991). This is not an exhaustive definition and the ordinary meaning of the words should still be applied. If a dog is factually deemed to be acting in a way that could be termed ‘dangerously out of control’, for example attacking livestock, a prosecution may still be brought.
Section 10(3) of the Act provides an exemption in any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown. In R v PY [2019] EWCA Crim 17 the defendant was a police constable with a police dog. He faced one count of being in charge of a dog which was dangerously out of control. The relevant question was whether the dog was being ‘used for a lawful purpose by a constable’. If it was, the incident fell out of the scope of section 3 by virtue of section 10(3). The Court held that the key to the scope of the exemption lay in the concept of ‘being used’. Whether a dog was being used for a policing activity by a constable was a question of fact. On the assumed facts upon which the issue was argued in R v PY, the exemption in section 10(3) was not established, (the dogs were kept at home and were being exercised as the defendant was required to do so). R v PY provides guidance as to the meaning of ‘lawful purpose’.
Under section 3(1A) of the 1991 Act a person is not guilty of an offence where the dog is dangerously out of control with respect to a trespasser who is in, or entering, their home, whether the owner is present or not. This exemption does not apply to dog attacks on trespassers in gardens, driveways or outbuildings.
The offence under section 3(1) is an offence of strict liability. The prosecution is, however, required to prove that an act or omission of the defendant, with or without fault, to more than a minimal degree, caused or permitted the dog to be dangerously out of control. R v Robinson-Pierre [2014] 1 Cr App R 22 provides: Parliament did not intend to render the dog owner absolutely liable in all circumstances for the dog being dangerously out of control, or to create an offence without regard to the ability of the owner or someone to whom he had entrusted responsibility, to take and keep control of the animal; there must be some causal connection between having control of the dog and the prohibited state of affair that has arisen."
Now that's the law....
Isn’t that rule for Vampires?
That only applies to inviting them into your house and it is also a vampire law so that explains why the government has never had to put it into UK law.
Nope flicker - dangerously is different/ Plenty of case law. On previous threads I have read up this stuff. Kennel club website is good
That is the legal position - you dog must be under control at all times. If it is not you are liable for any damage or other issues it causes. civil and case law not statute
Ie your dog knocks me off my bike - you are liable as you did not have it under control.
3 categories - dangerously out of control which can get the dog put down and is a criminal offenses.
Under control which is as I said above You are liable in civil law
In Scotland there is a further category - under close control which applies around livestock which is defined as on a lead or at heel. Breech this one and the farmer has the right to shoot the dog
As I said - check the kennel club stuff on this - its very good.
good point squirrelking
you dog must be under control at all times
What about if my dog is in the garden whilst I'm not at home, do I have to use a Jedi mind trick on it or something?
Doesn't read like you describe it here:
https://www.bluecross.org.uk/pet-advice/laws-all-dog-owners-need-know
Nope flicker – dangerously is different/ Plenty of case law. On previous threads I have read up this stuff. Kennel club website is good
That is the legal position – you dog must be under control at all times. If it is not you are liable for any damage or other issues it causes. civil and case law not statute
Ie your dog knocks me off my bike – you are liable as you did not have it under control.
3 categories – dangerously out of control which can get the dog put down and is a criminal offenses.
Under control which is as I said above You are liable in civil law
In Scotland there is a further category – under close control which applies around livestock which is defined as on a lead or at heel. Breech this one and the farmer has the right to shoot the dog
As I said – check the kennel club stuff on this – its very good.
That would fall under dangerously out of control.
I can't find anything on the kennel club website, I'm guessing I need to be a member.
So far I've found nothing about control at all times not even on the government website, so far everything references dangerously out of control only, which to me seems sensible, it's impossible to keep any animal 100% under control 100% of the time, we haven't managed it with humans yet so I'm not sure why dogs should be a special case.
https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public
What about if my dog is in the garden whilst I’m not at home, do I have to use a Jedi mind trick on it or something?
These were left in the garden, obviously the jedi trick didn't work https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-56624119
Not read the entire thread but have seen a couple of posts along the lines of "just grab the dogs collar and everything will be ok".
As a non-doggist I would be extremely uncomfortable trying to do that. Basically you would be putting your hands in easy biting range - I might try with a very small dog but no chance on anything that would not fit in the average sized handbag.
That only applies to inviting them into your house and it is also a vampire law so that explains why the government has never had to put it into UK law.
Thanks for clarifying Kerley. Got muddled up there for a second. What if the vampire is on a lead?
As a non-doggist I would be extremely uncomfortable trying to do that.
I wrote that, the context is really needed to see the full picture, it was simply some advice, as you say it needs some confidence and understanding, the person I was addressing was a dog owner. As always, if you are genuinely scared, boot it up the ass.
Except ones an illegal breed and the other one isnt
Why?