No it's not alright. (A dog owner rant)

I just wish people would be more considerate, don’t we all? My 7 year old son is absolutely terrified of dogs (for no obvious reason, never been ‘attacked’ but he is autistic). If they run up to him he is likely to jump in a stream, into the road, anything to get out of the way.
It’s not acceptable for kids to go chasing up to people and wiping their muddy feet on strangers so why do some dog owners think it’s ok?
I’m not sure licensing will do any good as previous people have said.
Like a lot of things, it’s just the culture and seemingly lack of thought for others that needs to change. Simple as that eh?!

Typical Daily Mail reader thread.

Welcome to modern Britain

Yeah, you’re right. Other countries don’t have any idiots at all. Life must be so perfect there.

Cougar – Moderator

I’d be happy to pay a dog license if the result was less suffering for both dogs and humans.
Wouldn’t you?

Well, no, because I don’t have a dog.

It’s a moot point though because that’s not really what I meant. What I was trying to say was, why should it be only other dog owners who have to pay to fund Operation Naughty Dog, how are they contributing to the problem by owning a well-behaved dog? It’s a problem which affects everyone equally, it should be funded from general taxation should it not?

I’m not particularly fussed how it’s funded, tbh.
General taxation is fine by me.

I wasn’t really, but I’d wager that a large proportion of those who have an intentionally dangerous dog are likely to be of lower (legitimate) income…..

You might be right:
NHS website info.

But……

If you drew a Venn diagram of “people who intentionally own dangerous dogs” and “people who visit the theatre”, do you think the intersection would be a large number?

Dunno.
How many people who go to the theatre own Dacshunds?

Telegraph linky.

The top ten most aggressive breeds, apparantly:
1.Dachshunds
2.Chihuahua
3.Jack Russell
4.Australian Cattle Dog
5.Cocker Spaniel
6.Beagle
7.Border Collie
8.Pit Bull Terrier
9.Great Dane
10.English Springer Spaniel

Of course, a bigger dog is going to cause more damage…..

So I guess the question is, are the bulk of “dangerous dog” cases down to generally law-abiding people being naive, or people being gang members or criminals? I was assuming the latter, but that may be a false assumption.

Complicated isn’t it?

richc – Member

is it groundhog day?

I’m sure you said that on the last dog thread.
🙂

devash – Member

Typical Daily Mail reader thread.

Please elaborate.

I’m sure you said that on the last dog thread.

I sure you said that on the last thread as well, which was about someone’s dog running up to someone and not actually doing anything and the person who hadn’t had anything done to them got offended by what might have happened in a parallel universe and got shouty and abusive at the owner of the dog…. oh hang on……

😀

The top ten most aggressive breeds, apparantly:

“Aggressive” isn’t exactly the same as “dangerous” though. You’re unlikely to find a group of EDL members carrying attack daschunds for protection.

It does strike me that had a doberman really been running up to a group of kids snarling with teeth exposed the op would be currently at the hospital with the kids not moaning on the interweb.

You’re unlikely to find a group of EDL members carrying attack daschunds for protection.

🙂

Ooooh, I dunno.
I’m sure many EDL members have a fondness for all things Teutonic.

“Aggressive” isn’t exactly the same as “dangerous” though.

You could trip over one very easily…….

Has anyone got a link to the last dog thread, btw?

Rusty Spanner – Member
Dog attacks in Wales up 81% in 10 years.

Do the Welsh have dogs whose mouths open really wide? 😀

Do the Welsh have dogs whose mouths open really wide?

A combination of that, and their prey not being able to waddle out of harm’s way.

You could trip over one very easily…….

That’s a good point actually. You could probably do a good deal of damage with chihuahuas if you had a bag of angry ones and could throw them hard enough.

Has anyone got a link to the last dog thread, btw?

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/dangerous-dog-owners-proud

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/sarcastic-comments-from-dog-owners

And the infamous “A dog sniffed my wife’s bag, I’m outraged” thread.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/entitled-dog-owners

Just a few samples.

Ta Drac.
I thought this one went quite well, considering.

I’m not particularly fussed how it’s funded, tbh.
General taxation is fine by me.

And you expect it to be fine with everyone else?
Certainly not fine with me.

We could add another 10% to concert ticket prices?

TBS, how would you suggest we deal with irresponsible dog owners?

I suggest we focus on application of the current laws but I guess that isnt knee jerk enough.

The current laws only take effect once the dog has been dangerously out of control.
Which is obviously too late for the dog and those affected.

Given the rise in the number of hospital admissions and reported incidents, how do you suggest we minimize the risk of these situations occurring?

We could add another 10% to concert ticket prices?

Well played sir i salute you

Its pointless though dogs, like children, can do no wrong in the eyes of their owners and the problems are always caused by other peoples not theirs

The problem with the dog licence idea is that the people most likely to want to own a dangerous dog are the same people who are likely to think “screw that” when faced with the prospect of getting a licence. Ie, it’ll make it easier to remove said dogs from their owners but IMHO is unlikely to make a fig of difference to them owning one in the first place.

What do you mean by “dangerous dog”?

Any dog with the wrong person can be a danger to others, it’s owner & itself.

It’s not dog licensing we need, though I think it has it’s place, it’s better education of how to be a responsible dog owner & a better understanding of how dogs see us & the world around them. That would end half the negative dog/human interactions in a thrice!

mrlebowski – Member it’s better education of how to be a responsible dog owner

I agree.
How do you suggest we go about this?

& a better understanding of how dogs see us & the world around them.

I also agree.
As long as this does not shift responsibility for the dog’s actions from owner to victim.

What do you mean by “dangerous dog”?

A dog which is dangerous. In honesty I don’t know I can expand on that, I thought it was relatively self-descriptive as phrases go.

I was talking about people who actively want a dog which is actually dangerous, rather than someone just wanting a breed of dog which happens to be on a list of ones which have the capacity to be dangerous in the wrong hands.

I don’t disagree with your post, it’s the people who need to change. Though it’s not always an education issue, people may be doing it deliberately.

And the infamous “A dog sniffed my wife’s bag, I’m outraged” thread.

Bah, checked the OP on that thread. All about dogs and bags; not a hint of euphemism. Don’t waste you time following drac’s link

Junkyard – lazarus
Its pointless though dogs, like children, can do no wrong in the eyes of their owners and the problems are always caused by other peoples not theirs

Just acknowledging that the increase in irresponsible ownership is an issue would be a start Junky.

Bah, checked the OP on that thread. All about dogs and bags; not a hint of euphemism. Don’t waste you time following drac’s link

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/entitled-dog-owners/page/5#post-6148822

 current laws only take effect once the dog has been dangerously out of control.
Which is obviously too late for the dog and those affected.

So are you suggesting pre emptive measures to eliminate any do that sniffs a bag kr scares someone who is scared of dogs and if so what should they be? Wonder how a license would help in eliminating these problems too.

What is this dogs vs kids discussion? Nowt against dog owners in general but if my kids were free to run around frightening other kids and shitting on the pavement I expect the other parents would have a word or two with me. You don’t need licences to govern that on either side, just simple common sense.

You don’t need licences to govern that on either side, just simple common sense.

Amen to that

anagallis_arvensis – Member
So are you suggesting pre emptive measures

Yes.

to eliminate any do that sniffs a bag kr scares someone who is scared of dogs

No.

and if so what should they be?

I’ve told you what I think should be done.

I asked you how do you think we can minimize the risk of these situations occurring.
I’d be interested to hear your answer.

I’m not sure you can minimise idiots owning dogs or pant wetting stwers getting upset when a dog looks at them funny.

I am still intrigued by the license idea is, how it would help and how it would do anything that current laws dont

anagallis_arvensis – Member

I’m not sure you can minimise idiots owning dogs
Ok.
Thanks for your insight.

I am still intrigued by the license idea is, how it would help and how it would do anything that current laws dont

I’ve told you what I think on pages one and two.

No problem, could you return they favour by explain how the dog license would help. I’ve skim read the thread and cant see how you suggest it would help other than employing more dog wardens(with what new powers?) and rehome and destroy unlicensed dogs. I fail to see how this would help can you spell it out to me?

It’s a deterrent, at least.
Punish repeat offenders.
Employ plenty of wardens.
It would also mean that less children are injured, and less unwanted dogs bred.

In the long term, make owning an unlicensed dog socially unacceptable.
Yep, it’ll take a long time, but it will be worth it.

The total suffering to the innocent victims in all this – the dogs and those they attack will decrease.
People will feel safer.
The sum total of human and canine happiness increases.

I’d suggest a sliding scale of dog license charges based on the size of the dog – a tax on emissions, if you like.

Repeat offenders of what?
What would the wardens do?
What powers would they have?
How would it reduce attacks and breeding?
Why should larger dogs cost more?

I’d suggest a sliding scale of dog license charges based on the size of the dog – a tax on emissions, if you like.

Only the rich would be able to afford big dogs. As the more money you have means you are more responsible obviously.

Promoting threads like ” has anyone had their golden retriever stolen as I saw one being walked down so and so high street by some scroute”

After reading this thread title several times now, I can resist no longer.

anagallis_arvensis – Member

Repeat offenders of what?
Breaking the existing laws you are so keen to see enforced.

What would the wardens do?

Ensure stray dogs and those involved in incidents are licensed.

What powers would they have?

Remove unlicenced dogs from their owners.

How would it reduce attacks and breeding?

Try the RSPCA Dog Registration Report.
It’s 25 pages – I’m not going to attempt to paraphrase it here.

Bugger how do I link to a pdf?

Why should larger dogs cost more?

Because they consume more, excrete more and have the potential to cause more damage.

Because they consume more, excrete more and have the potential to cause more damage.

Like horses?

I like horses.

U like horses 2?

What about a big dog with a small mouth.

Or if he has had lost some teeth could I get a reduction.

Or how about a gastric band.