You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
TJ - your opinions usually err towards mine on many issues, but your stance on this subject is clearly ludicrous. Dogs walk about. They may pass you on the path. They may have a quick sniff as they pass you.
What's the frigging problem?
Prezet:
OK my words were the [i]dog was having a sniff[/i] which is a point that keeps getting brought up and apparently my tone aggressive. As I've stated my tone wasn't at all aggressive just a little exasperated but not aggressive. Now I want you to understand it was the fact the dog was quite large very jumpy (hence the use of the words bouncy and bounding) and it was making my daughter very nervous. Now I'm not suggesting he was about to rip her face off (although I don't know the dog or his temprement) but the fact still remains he didn't return after a couple of calls from the owner and more the point the owner didn't make any attempt to retrieve him. My anger is in the fact that they assumed I was at fault for protecting my daughter and apparently instilling a fear of dogs SOMETHING I've tried very hard not to do, but it's Ok I'm a dog owner we'll teach her as we own 5 dogs and it's our right to let them do what the hell they like with out apology!
Interesting...
In much the same way that "we're all individuals" and at various times opt in/out of various easy to define groups ("Cyclist", "Driver", "Parent", etc, etc), "Dog owner/Lover" is just another label and as such is rather indiscriminate: It groups Scum with a Staffy Attack Dog and perfectly pleasant people with well trained a Lab' in together, people with totally different world views and reasons for owning Dogs...
I'm happy to play silly stereotypes on a forum, but I do actually know that real life has far more shades of grey than you seem to be attuned to TJ, your world view is a bit monochromatic, Day to day life must be a real trial for you...
That does assume your not playing the Troll... Which of course you are, So Troll on Brother!
I suspect dog owners perceptions will vary according to the context in which they live - we live in the countryside to the north of Glasgow, so my daily dog walking haunts tend to be sparsly populated and consist mainly of other dog walkers, cyclists, runners and the occasional horse rider. We can be out for an hour or more and not encounter another human being, especially if the weathers poor.
I would only exercise the dogs in a public park in extremis as it's just too much work keeping two energetic collies under close control, and the combination of boisterous dog and wobbly toddler is rarely a happy one. If i lived in town, or in a situation where I didn't have space to let the dogs burn off energy in safety, I'd probably either forgo dog ownership, or stick with a smaller breed - largely because the sort of conflict people describe in these threads is pretty much inevitable in a crowded urban environment.
Despite my best efforts at responsible dog ownership, things do sometimes go wrong ... I would like to apologise again to the wee Boy Scout we encountered at the top of Ben Lomond last year, who lost his sandwiches to an impressive display of canine cunning and teamwork; one of them walked up and let him pat them, while the other nipped in from behind and grabbed both his butties and legged it with the spoils. I'm pretty sure the bag of Jelly Babies which was all I could offer in compensation was a pretty poor exchange for your mum's ham and cheese rolls!
[quote=TJ].....
I do not want your dog to come up to me and that is my right.
[u][b]if you fail to stop the dog doing so then the dog is not under control. [/b][/u]
No if but of ands.
Is that the "TJ's Law" definition of what what constitutes an Out of Control dog ?
Because it sounds nothing like the [b]Actual Legal Definition[/b]
Would you care to explain which law you are referring to that states a dog is Legally out of control, if it wanders up to a stranger that[I] "doesn't like it"[/I] and has a sniff before moving on somewhere else.
[Scottish or English law will do]
he didn't return after a couple of calls from the owner and more the point the owner didn't make any attempt to retrieve him
Sorry, I must have missed the bit where you wrote the owner attempted to recall the dog, and it didn't return and then made no attempt to come and manually retrieve the dog. That's a bit poor on the owners behalf - and I can see why you said what you did to them. Fair enough.
Prezert -and you are a sterotypical selfish dog owner thinking it acceptable for the dog to upset others. Waht the effect your doghas on others is of no account to you is it - all that matters is your dog gets to run around freely
Let me describe a situation that actually happened to me.
Out of a bike ride. me and the missus stopped for a sandwich in a park. sitting down. on the grass
A dog comes up to us and starts sniffin around us and our picnic. teh dog is right in our faces as we were sitting on the ground and gets its nose within inches of our food as well as actully tryng to get inside the bag the food came in.
Is that acceptable to you? I do not know what the dog is going to do so I have to grab my food and get it out of the dogs reach. the dog owner was not in sight
Spoils my nice relaxing picnic
No - I agree, that's not acceptable.
TJ - You sound totally whiny and pathetic here to be perfectly honest.
+1
TJ next time you get sniffed by a dog, please please ring a dog warden and explain how you have been assaulted by an out of control dog that's randomly sniffing things, and see what reaction you get.
As I think it might help clarify things for you, when a complete stranger laughs in your face and calls you a sad little man.
Right - so now we are getting somewhere.
Its all I ask - just get your dog under control and stop it annoying other people. If it will come when called and walk at heel or drop when told then thats fine. If not then keep it on a lead.
You do not have to put your dog on a lead on public paths, as long as it is under close control. But as a general rule, keep your dog on a lead if you cannot rely on its obedience.
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/enjoying/countrysidecode/keepdogs.aspx
Is there a legal definition
of ’close control’?
No. However, the Code defines ‘under close
control’ to mean that your dog responds to
your commands and is kept close at heel.
If he can lie down or return to you on
command, your dog would then be under
close control. If you’re not sure that your dog
can do this the responsible thing is to keep
him on a short lead.
Did you know?...
A short lead is two
metres or less.
From the scottish guidance
Why did this need to go past Buttercup's post on the first page?
'tis the season of goodwill and tolerance, don't you know!?!
richc - another one who thinks its acceptable to lt their dogs annoy people
What selfish views some of you have.
A dog comes up to us and starts sniffin around us and our picnic. teh dog is right in our faces as we were sitting on the ground and gets its nose within inches of our food as well as actully tryng to get inside the bag the food came in.Is that acceptable to you? I do not know what the dog is going to do so I have to grab my food and get it out of the dogs reach. the dog owner was not in sight
Sounds like a PITA to be honest.
However I hope I wouldn't still have my knickers in a twist several months/years after the incident, if I did I would be quite embarrassed about dwelling on it
Do you wake up in the night after dreaming about this and fantasying about what you 'could have done', and screaming 'No! No! leave my cheese and hummus on wholemeal stone baked half baguette ALONE!'?
Richc - I am merely useing that to illustrate why having a dog come up to you and sniff at you is not acceptable. I do not have my knickers in a twist. I just want you dog owners to gain some understanding of what is acceptable
Why you have to denigrate me is odd. Is it emabarrasment?
Edit: Actually, I can't be arsed to try & rationalise anything in here.
'No! No! leave my cheese and hummus on wholemeal stone baked half baguette ALONE!'
Surely a baguette with Hummus is a bit on the adventurous side, mighty white with Darylea is more likely...
Hang on theis wasn't on top of Ben Lomond was it? you weren't dressed as a Scout were you TJ?
Why you have to denigrate me is odd. Is it emabarrasment?
Its slowly developing into a sort of a sport i think, like Bull fighting, badger baiting or weasel fighting...
No need for the abuse TJ is getting, personally speaking, from this thread he's coming out better than the animal lovers.
I don't mind dogs myself, but the Missus does have a (slightly irrational) fear of them. Why should she have her right to use public spaces limited by those who refuse to control their charges? Should dog (or any animal for that matter) ownership be limited to those who have the space and facilities to look after their chosen animal? Not sure of the answers, but worth a little think about...
The incident you describe is obviously wrong. I have to be very careful with kea in the summer because some pinicers will cal her over and feed her which is unhelpful to say the least i usually walk her elsewhere. However in your example as i have said before if you could handle dogs better yourself your life may be more pleasant.
As for the types of owners earlier, the worst are the "dont worry he's friendly" types and when kids are around i understand the worry. I am always shocked by the owners who let their dogs run up to kea when she's on the lead as she was when she had stitches. Many dog owners are idiots and most dogs poorly behaved, thats life moaning at me on the interweb wont help, giving yourself the power to take charge of the situation may.
cookeaaIts slowly developing into a sort of a sport i think, like Bull fighting, badger baiting or weasel fighting...
careful - you will get embroiled in the 1000 post circular argument that will haunt you for days
thats life moaning at me on the interweb wont help, giving yourself the power to take charge of the situation may
Agreed. Always provide feedback when incidents occur. Don't let people get away with not cleaning up after their dogs either, tell them to pick up and take pictures of them.
My park has a notice board so I've considered doing the pictures thing and popping A4/A3 print-outs of the owners in there in a name and shame kind of context.
I'd hate to be a responsible dog owner, it must be a constant embarrasment.
giving yourself the power to take charge of the situation may.
taser? 😉
[quote=TJ]...Prezet - why should I have to accept your dog coming up to me and sniffing me?
I don't like it,
I don't want your dog to do this.
[b][u] Please acccept your legal responsibilities and control it.[/b][/u]
TJ, you don't seem to be able to come up with a LAW that the dog owners are breaking, by allowing their dog to wander around sniffing things/people.
It's odd because normally you seem to like quoting Laws and subsections and paragraphs etc.
Is it maybe because there isn't a suitable LAW to quote.
And it's just that you "don't like it" and maybe think it should be Illegal.
TJ a dog sniffing someone is not assault or a sign of an out of control dog, regardless of what you think, as I said call a dog warden about being sniffed by a dog and demand that it be impounded and see what reaction you get.
Here's the link to make the complaint: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/1093/dog_warden_service/1559/out_of_control_dogs
Please let you know how you get on, and if TJ's law applies.
Right - so now we are getting somewhere.
Well, not quite. In that instance, the situation was wrong. The dog owner was no-where to be seen, and had obviously let his dog stray off some distance. In this case, yes, out of control, but, the dog was just being a dog and smelt food.
However, your recent posts insinuate a problem of a dog having a quick sniff of your feet should you happen to walk past it on your morning stroll. That, is not a dog out of control. Again, that is a dog being a dog. The only way you can stop that happening is to have all dogs on leads at all times - just because they 'sniff'. A tad overkill.
Should dog (or any animal for that matter) ownership be limited to those who have the space and facilities to look after their chosen animal? Not sure of the answers, but worth a little think about...
I guess this would apply to horse owners too - only allowed to exercise them on private land? Cats won't be allowed to stray from their garden into public spaces. Again, a bit overkill due to intolerant people.
richc - unfortunatly for yo it is a dog that is not under proper control.
You may not want to accept that because that would mean accepting you are a selfish dog owner that does not want to keep your dog under control.
Carry on being selfish dog owners that refuse to control your dogs and don't be supised as you become pariahs and someon boots your dog intot eh middle of next week
However, your recent posts insinuate a problem of a dog having a quick sniff of your feet should you happen to walk past it on your morning stroll. That, is not a dog out of control. Again, that is a dog being a dog. The only way you can stop that happening is to have all dogs on leads at all times - just because they 'sniff'. A tad overkill.
Aside from that, having a dog on a 2m lead isn't going to prevent it sniffing someone as it walks past - scent is important to a dog, so having a quick sniff of your aroma is the dog's equivalent of a pleasant "good morning" as you pass on the path. I'm not sure I could take someone who complained about my dog sniffing them as we passed all that seriously to be honest, particularly if the dogs were on the lead at the time.
Prexzet if you cannot control your dog then it should be on a lead. your dog does not have the right to irritate, annoy or to otherwise intrude on me at all. this is what yo seem to find hard to accept
Right - so now we are getting somewhere.
Dogs are rubbish! So there! And they smell!
No they're not! They're lovely and cute, n stuff
They're horrid!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
No they're not!
Yes they are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
Not!
Are!
..... have I missed anything?
Carry on being selfish dog owners that refuse to control your dogs and don't be supised as you become pariahs and someon boots your dog intot eh middle of next week
Keyboard warrior?
Are you actually suggesting that, if someone walks past you with a dog on a 2m lead and it sniffed you, you'd [i]"boot the dog into the middle of next week"[/i]. If that is the case, then you sound like someone who has some serious self-control issues that require a bit of professional help
richc - unfortunatly for yo it is a dog that is not under proper control.
Then report it! Here the link again http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/1093/dog_warden_service/1559/out_of_control_dogs Otherwise you are just a sad little man, who walks around moaning about everything and anything That is unless you don't have the courage of your convictions, and are too scared to speak to a real person on the telephone, about your brutal assault at the nose of a barely domesticated wild beast called 'Rover'! Next time it could be a childs face!!!!
.......... have I missed anything?
Not sure.
But one thing you [b]Haven't [/b]missed is TJ telling us which LAW dog owners are breaking by letting their dogs wander round having a sniff of people/things ??
Any news TJ ?
TJ show us the law, not a guidline, not common sense but a law, even better would be an example of anyone prosecuted for having a dog annoy someone by sniffing in their general direction....
You may not want to accept that because that would mean accepting you are a selfish dog owner that does not want to keep your dog under control.
who are you talking to here becaue your personnal slanders are becoming more and more comical?
Aside from that, having a dog on a 2m lead isn't going to prevent it sniffing someone as it walks past - scent is important to a dog, so having a quick sniff of your aroma is the dog's equivalent of a pleasant "good morning" as you pass on the path. I'm not sure I could take someone who complained about my dog sniffing them as we passed all that seriously to be honest, particularly if the dogs were on the lead at the time.
My missus has had a random loonie yell at her to pick up her dogs pee!
So unfortunately while irrational people like TJ are rare they are out there, I've only had one person try and kick my dog whilst its been running around, and it didn't end well, I am embarrassed to say 🙁
richc -- why the personal abuse? Because you have lost the debate?
Ditchjocky - not at all- just trying to get the selfish dog owners to understand that their actions irritate and upset a great many people and one day someone will snap. I didn't say I will do it - I said someone may.
Should dog (or any animal for that matter) ownership be limited to those who have the space and facilities to look after their chosen animal? Not sure of the answers, but worth a little think about...I guess this would apply to horse owners too - only allowed to exercise them on private land? Cats won't be allowed to stray from their garden into public spaces. Again, a bit overkill due to intolerant people.
It was intended as a kind of 'thought experiment', I hadn't thought of the practicalities of it! Bear with me here slight tangent but perhaps it'll explain my reasoning. Apparently in parts of Japan space is so limited that people aren't allowed to buy private vehicles until they own a parking space in which to keep it. I'm assuming this is because they don't want parked cars cluttering up the public roads. Which is fair enough really, so I was thinking could this be applied to other scenarios, hence my suggestion.
Anyways, yes it is a bit overkill, but overkill is sometimes required if people cannot accept the responsibilities they should when they agree to care for an animal. Ultimately it depends on whether you view the rights of the dog/dog owners as more important than those who dislike them. Tolerance is all well and good, but there is very little of it in the public open spaces that many people use (witness the anger demonstrated on the roads for example), the only way around this is draconian rules and appropriate enforcement.
edited to add - Apologies for the dodgy quoting, it looked fine in the preview and still does. Just on the real site it doesn't work?! I don't have the IT skillz to sort it!
All I see is more and more desperate attempts from the dog owners to discredit anyone who wants them to behave in a responsible manner.- do you realise how laughable and sad you are?
It really is quite pathetic - especially the inventing of things I am supposed to have sad.
I really find it so sad that grown men will put their dogs before their fellow humans.
TJ you can end this argument really easily, email env.wardens@edinburgh.gov.uk with the details of your assault by a sniffing dog and post the reply up, here.
That way, we can end the supposition and guess work.
As you know you are right, what have you got to lose? You can show us all up as irrational and prove you are right, all it takes is a single email.
TJ yesterday 🙂
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I was out running early one morning across some fields when i heard a dog barking ahead of me. I came around a corner to see a collie type dog braking in a very aggresive way to a women runner who was pinned up against a fence.
The owner was standing about 10 feet away laughing while she shouted that he should call it off.
The path I was taking took me between the dog and the owner. The dog clearly enjoying things turned his attention to me as I passed at roughly 10 mph, possibly thinking he would get the same response.
He didnt and the owner thought my response was less than funny.
Anyway how we laughed. 😆
Richc you realy are pathetic and laughable. really 🙄
I really find it so sad that grown men will put their dogs before their fellow humans.
Question - Ever wondered why there is a "Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals", but only a "National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children"?
Answer - It's because despite it having a royal charter, the NSPCC didn't want to be confused with the RSPCA! Interesting how the one preceded the other though...
TandemJeremy - Member
All I see is more and more desperate attempts from the dog owners to discredit anyone who wants them to behave in a responsible manner.- do you realise how laughable and sad you are?
It really is quite pathetic - especially the inventing of things I am supposed to have sad.
I really find it so sad that grown men will put their dogs before their fellow humans.
TJ, why are you avoiding posting the Law that these dog owners are supposedly breaking ?
I quoted you earlier saying it was their "Legal Responsibility" *
So come on, which law are they breaking ???
Must be simple enough to find as you seemed happy to use it in your argument.
Simple way to end this discussion is to enlighten us ???
* (just in case you accuse me of making up things you said, It was a cut and paste quote, in full)
All I see is more and more desperate attempts from the dog owners to discredit anyone who wants them to behave in a responsible manner.- do you realise how laughable and sad you are?
TJ most of us have written the opposite of what you said, I'd be mortified if my dog ran up to a child and jumped up she just doesnt do that, I'd be equally upset if she was bugging a picnicing couple (she has to be actively stopped from this), but your refusal to take the advice I give you about how to behave around dogs as anything other than a declaration of my own inability to control my dog is offensive.
You have also never managed to come up with any law that supports your own somewhat blinkered view.
I really find it so sad that grown men will put their dogs before their fellow humans.
Everytime because my dog wouldn't kill in the name of religion.
Neal - I have posted it all many times before and I posted a good clear set of definitions earlier on your legal obligations = there more but you will attempt to rubbish anything I post.
Kennel club has some good stuff on it if you are interested.
Richc you realy are pathetic and laughable. really
So from that response, I take it you aren't going to actually grow some and report the out of control dog that sniffed you? I wonder why that might be ....... ?
Can you please explain why you are so hesitant to report this? As it just leads everyone to assume that you realise deep down that you are being totally unreasonable, and your attitude is ridiculous.
Everytime because my dog wouldn't kill in the name of religion.
Mine might maim you for a sausage roll though ......
Kennel club has some good stuff on it if you are interested.
Kennel club posts guidelines, you stated there is a law to stop a dog sniffing you, that's the one people are after.
Ask the dog warden to clarify this law, when you email him about your assault.
The better I get to know [s]men[/s] TJ, the more I find myself loving dogs.
Charles de Gaulle
😀
No richc - I understand the law.
You are claiming I said stuff I never did in order to attempt to discredit me and you look utterly hysterical and ridiculous. that line is not for minor civil wrongs. its for criminal acts.
Guys - its really simple. keep you dog under control and everyone is happy. you have a legal obligation to keep your dog under control under a whole variety of bits of law.
just accept your legal obligation and everyone is happy.
you stated there is a law to stop a dog sniffing you, that's the one people are after.
really? - I did? - copy the post.
Nor did I claim it was an assault.
TandemJeremy - Member
Neal - I have posted it all many times before and I posted a good clear set of definitions earlier on your legal obligations = there more but you will attempt to rubbish anything I post.
Kennel club has some good stuff on it if you are interested.
No no no no.
You posted something from "The Countryside Code"
I would have thought that with your "legal training" you would know that that's not [b] quite[/b] the same as an Actual Law.
So. ....... .... Again.
[u]What [B]LAW[/b] are the dog owners breaking by allowing their dogs to wander around sniffing things/people ?? [/u]
You said they had a "Legal Responsibility" to stop them doing this.
Under what [b]LAW[/b] ??
.
.
.
.
.
(clue- there isn't one, your talking bollx and you probably have realised that by now)
Neal - stop talking hysterical pish - really how stupid do you look.
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/1052 is a starting point
I dont think he has realised it, I've had the same attempt at a conversation with him before
What LAW are the dog owners breaking by allowing their dogs to wander around sniffing things/people ??
I said this where?
come on - you claim I said this so show me where?
AA - of course I realise it - And I know its futile really but I hope that one dog owner might become a bit more responsible one day - there is always hope but look at the hysterical attacks on me here its seems unlikely.
TandemJeremy - MemberPrezet - why should I have to accept your dog coming up to me and sniffing me? I don't like it, I don't want your dog to do this. Please acccept your legal responsibilities and control it.
Unless you feel that the 'legal responsibilities' aren't linked to the legal system, ergo the Law?
As for links, thats nice, now give us a reference to the 'anti-sniffing' legislation
there is always hope but look at the hysterical attacks on me here its seems unlikely.
It's only equal to your level of hysteria TeeJ. Thanks for wrecking the thread. Again.
TandemJeremy - Member
Neal - stop talking hysterical pish - really how stupid do you look.
> http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/1052 is a starting point
Yep. That's the one.
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (section 3)
It is a criminal offence (for the owner and/or the person in charge of the dog) to allow a dog to be ‘dangerously out of control’ in a public place, a place where it is not permitted to be, and some other areas. A ‘dangerously out of control’ dog can be defined as a dog that has injured someone or a dog that a person has [b][u]grounds for reasonable apprehension that it may do so. [/b][/u]
.
You would need[b] "Reasonable grounds"[/b] to have any sort of legal case.
And what exactly is it about a calm Dog wandering around sniffing people/things that would give anyone [b]reasonable[/b] grounds to assume they were at risk of injury ??
.
.
Presuming that would indeed be "Hysterical Pish" 🙄
TJ I cannot be bothered to read through all of that but none of it seems to apply the way you describe, the dangerous dogs act requires a person to have reasonable grounds for being scared, having your crotched sniffed doesnt seem to be reasoable grounds as far as I can see.
TJ, people are taking your "legal responsibility" assertion to mean an obligation under law. Rightly or wrongly I don't know, but I can't immediately see how something not backed up by a law is a "legal" responsibility. Perhaps you could clarify?
FWIW, I'm kinda with TJ on this. I like dogs, but owners should take responsibility for their animals. If a dog is scaring a child, it's not the child's fault. Sure, the OP or whoever should reassure their kids and not unnecessarily antagonise the third party, but making out that it's somehow the parent's fault for the incident is akin to saying that rape victims were "asking for it."
It's not hard, is it. It's not the end of the world but I don't particularly want to get covered in slobber and muddy paws whilst I'm out minding my own business, and on a bike friendly dogs are probably a bigger hazard than aggressive ones. Get your pooch under control for a few seconds, I'll be gone before you know it.
Right - and that means what you claimed above in you hysterical outburst?
😆 🙄
FWIW, I'm kinda with TJ on this. I like dogs, but owners should take responsibility for their animals. If a dog is scaring a child, it's not the child's fault. Sure, the OP or whoever should reassure their kids and not unnecessarily antagonise the third party, but making out that it's somehow the parent's fault for the incident is akin to saying that rape victims were "asking for it."It's not hard, is it. It's not the end of the world but I don't particularly want to get covered in slobber and muddy paws whilst I'm out minding my own business, and on a bike friendly dogs are probably a bigger hazard than aggressive ones. Get your pooch under control for a few seconds, I'll be gone before you know it.
I dont think anyone has said this isnt the case, I merely have pointed out that as we dont live in an ideal world and many people are idiots (many of whom own dogs) a bit of knowledge about dogs may help people like TJ go about their life somewhat more happily. Apparently this makes me selfish and the owner of an out of control dog.
TandemJeremy - Member
Right - and that means what you claimed above in you hysterical outburst
Was that aimed at me ?
Which "hysterical outburst" ?
How come when you quote law, you are proving a point
But when someone else does it (perfectly calmly by the way) it somehow mutates in your mind as a "Hysterical Outburst" ?
Just explain how these dog owners are breaking the law please ? (without trying to is discredit me for pointing it out) please.
Civil wrong or crime?
Very simply for the hard of thinking
3 aspects
dog must be kept under control - - some circumstances
dog must be under close control - other cicumstances
dogs must not be dangerously out of control
the first two are civil law, the third criminal.
You still have legal obligation to keep your dog under control even in if its civil not criminal law.
teh best definitions are as I posted above.
You can argue about what constitutes being under control, you cannot argue you do not have an obligation to control your animal under the law. Yo have a legal obligation under civil law and under the animals act.
so if your dog scares someone that is a criminal offense and the dog can be put down and you convicted and fined under criminal law. If it merely irritates them its civil offense for whihc you couldbe ordered to make restitution
Pathetic hysterical exaggerations are really childish.
Sorry got bored, wandered off did some work...
Have we resolved this yet?
When does the Canine cull start?
Very simply for the hard of thinking
Pathetic hysterical exaggerations are really childish.
We all know what happens soon don't we?
TJ knows he's right, and the Law's on his side, that's why he refuses to report out of control sniffing dogs to the dog warden, who he is sure won't laugh at him .........
so if your dog scares someone that is a criminal offense and the dog can be put down and you convicted and fined under criminal law. If it merely irritates them its civil offense for whihc you couldbe ordered to make restitution
Why aren't you on the phone *NOW* demanding that all sniffing dog be destroyed immediately, its the only way you can safely leave you house.
Oh perhaps, its because you know you are wrong ..... yet again
If a dog is scaring a child, it's not the child's fault.
I think we all agree on this, regardless. No one wants to see dogs intimidating children (or anyone for that matter). And in those circumstances the owners should place their dogs on a lead, and muzzle if they're know to be, or become aggressive.
bike friendly dogs are probably a bigger hazard than aggressive ones
Again, I agree. When I see a bike I put my dog back on her lead (if she's off), or manually restrain her until the cyclist has passed. For the safety of both parties. Not that she's interested in people on bikes, or runners.
Neal
And what exactly is it about a calm Dog wandering around sniffing people/things that would give anyone reasonable grounds to assume they were at risk of injury ??
What LAW are the dog owners breaking by allowing their dogs to wander around sniffing things/people
I claimed this when?
so if your dog scares someone that is a criminal offense and the dog can be put down and you convicted and fined under criminal law.
My dog terrifies people walking down the road on a lead next to frank in his pram regularly, I am somewhat shocked to find she could be killed or are you just wrong and missed out that important wording about reasoanable grounds again. You dont have talk some rubbish.
You can argue about what constitutes being under control
I think this is the problem. Most people on here seem to have a common sense view on what is percieved as 'out of control' - however, TJ, you seem to think that a dog 'sniffing' someones ankle violates this.
[quote=Me] [b]nealglover[/b]
What LAW are the dog owners breaking by allowing their dogs to wander around sniffing things/people ??
[quote=TJ] [b]Tanden Jeremy[/b]
I said this where?
come on - you claim I said this so show me where?
.
.
.
[b]Ok squire, here you go ...[/b]
.
.
.
[quote=TJ] [B]Tandem Jeremy[/b]
...Prezet - why should I have to accept your dog coming up to me and sniffing me?
I don't like it,
I don't want your dog to do this.
Please acccept your legal responsibilities and control it.
Richc - why do you keep repeating this hysterical exaggeration of what I have said?
it doesn't make it any more sensible, real or anything like anything I have said. 🙄
Anyone else noticed that the more fanatical TJ gets the worse his typing is?
I wonder if the spittle is effecting his keyboard?
TJ go on, call the dog warden, be a man, human contact won't hurt you and you can hang up if he laughs at you.
prezet - MemberYou can argue about what constitutes being under control
I think this is the problem. Most people on here seem to have a common sense view on what is percieved as 'out of control' - however, TJ, you seem to think that a dog 'sniffing' someones ankle violates this.
really - where did I say that?
What LAW are the dog owners breaking by allowing their dogs to wander around sniffing things/people
I claimed this when?
Prezet - why should I have to accept your dog coming up to me and sniffing me? I don't like it, I don't want your dog to do this. Please acccept your legal responsibilities and control it.
You've been trolling for the last three pages haven't you TeeJ?
Fourundred.