Steve Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 The leash range of a strange dog to me is their personal space which I prefer to keep out of to prevent what happened in this case. So if you want to be a thrillseeker by entering a strange dog's personal space, the bottom line is, be aware that getting bitten may be the result........the choice is yours :D There is no choice at all. People have a right to go about their daily business unaccosted. Which, btw, includes not being attacked by dogs. Further more, people are protected by law in that right and privelege. Mace I think you need to step back from this line of argument. It may be time to seek informed opinion rather than hanging on to a very tenuous point of view. You are not doing yourself any favours here. Px Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodoggies2001 Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 No, I don't own dogs who bite people and I manange mine responsibly, this scenario wouldn't happen walking past my dogs I can guarantee that, but as we have found out in this thread alone, you can't trust every dog owner to have the same level of responsible management and with that fact, I choose to take my own action to avoid this situation happening to me is my point. The victim could have done the same in this case is what I am pointing out? If you want to nurse a dog bite and tell yourself what morons the dog owners were and how right you were to walk past in close proximity, great what ever floats your boat, but if you want to avoid a bite when encounting morons as in this case, get out of the dog's leash range and you will avoid the bite is my whole point here? The victim may have walked out of the way to the extent of the leash. They have stated they walked on to the nature strip. The dog may however have lunged at the person, dragging the owner and so decreasing the distance. The fact that the victim did move any distance around the people suggests that they attempted not to get chomped. Or do you think the victim should have crossed the road? They stated that the footpath was blocked with the offenders and their dogs and walked onto the nature strip for that reason, not to be clear of the dog's leash range, which at the time probably didn't enter the victim's head to do so? The leash range of a strange dog to me is their personal space which I prefer to keep out of to prevent what happened in this case. So if you want to be a thrillseeker by entering a strange dog's personal space, the bottom line is, be aware that getting bitten may be the result........the choice is yours :D In all honesty, shouldn't people with dogs move off the footpath onto the nature rather than the other way around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzieUD Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I know I do because I'm respectful of the fact not everyone likes dogs. Also its just good manners in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 There is no choice at all.People have a right to go about their daily business unaccosted. Which, btw, includes not being attacked by dogs. Further more, people are protected by law in that right and privelege. Excuse me!, my son was bitten on the arm by a unleashed dog pushing his bicycle past a dog walker on the footpath in a similar situation and afterwards became terrified of dogs. The way I got him over his fear was using the leash as an indicator that he had the choice to easily avoid the dog and that a leashed dog couldn't get him. The leashed dog was the first step in his fear rehabilitation to give him confidence that the dog being leashed did provide him with choices to feel safe around them. The basis of his early treatment was to ensure that a leashed dog posed no threat beacause they were restrained and he had the choice to pass them at a distance he felt safe knowing that the dog couldn't make physical contact with him. We could have given him the above advice I highlighted, but I doubt such advice although I agree should be the case in a perfect world, would have had much effect in his dog fear rehabilitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) There is no choice at all.People have a right to go about their daily business unaccosted. Which, btw, includes not being attacked by dogs. Further more, people are protected by law in that right and privelege. Excuse me!, my son was bitten on the arm by a unleashed dog pushing his bicycle past a dog walker on the footpath in a similar situation and afterwards became terrified of dogs. The way I got him over his fear was using the leash as an indicator that he had the choice to easily avoid the dog and that a leashed dog couldn't get him. The leashed dog was the first step in his fear rehabilitation to give him confidence that the dog being leashed did provide him with choices to feel safe around them. The basis of his early treatment was to ensure that a leashed dog posed no threat because they were restrained and he had the choice to pass them at a distance he felt safe knowing that the dog couldn't make physical contact with him. We could have given him the above advice I highlighted, but I doubt such advice although I agree should be the case in a perfect world, would have had much effect in his dog fear rehabilitation. Welcome to the forum m-sass. :D My comment was in response to the earlier post by mace mace on 20 January 2012 - 11:44 PM, said: The leash range of a strange dog to me is their personal space which I prefer to keep out of to prevent what happened in this case. So if you want to be a thrillseeker by entering a strange dog's personal space, the bottom line is, be aware that getting bitten may be the result........the choice is yours. However, I did not give any advice, or present advice in the sense in which you have framed it. My point of reference is the biting dog not the pedestrian. I refuted the point of view that a leashed dog is a calculated risk that provides choices. It doesn't and the law clearly says so. Congratulations on the successful efforts to desensitise your son. Px Edited January 22, 2012 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovemesideways Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Congrats mace on getting the rise out of people you were hoping for. Go and crawl back into your hole :rolleyes: +2 Everyone, Mace(aka:joek/m&m/magic/many others) is a known Troll with multiple logins, so do not take him seriously. Best way to treat a troll is to ignore them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Congrats mace on getting the rise out of people you were hoping for. Go and crawl back into your hole :rolleyes: +2 Everyone, Mace(aka:joek/m&m/magic/many others) is a known Troll with multiple logins, so do not take him seriously. Best way to treat a troll is to ignore them. add m-sass :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Congrats mace on getting the rise out of people you were hoping for. Go and crawl back into your hole :rolleyes: +2 Everyone, Mace(aka:joek/m&m/magic/many others) is a known Troll with multiple logins, so do not take him seriously. Best way to treat a troll is to ignore them. Wow, how sad. Some people really need to get a life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 There is no choice at all.People have a right to go about their daily business unaccosted. Which, btw, includes not being attacked by dogs. Further more, people are protected by law in that right and privelege. Excuse me!, my son was bitten on the arm by a unleashed dog pushing his bicycle past a dog walker on the footpath in a similar situation and afterwards became terrified of dogs. The way I got him over his fear was using the leash as an indicator that he had the choice to easily avoid the dog and that a leashed dog couldn't get him. The leashed dog was the first step in his fear rehabilitation to give him confidence that the dog being leashed did provide him with choices to feel safe around them. The basis of his early treatment was to ensure that a leashed dog posed no threat because they were restrained and he had the choice to pass them at a distance he felt safe knowing that the dog couldn't make physical contact with him. We could have given him the above advice I highlighted, but I doubt such advice although I agree should be the case in a perfect world, would have had much effect in his dog fear rehabilitation. Welcome to the forum m-sass. :D My comment was in response to the earlier post by mace mace on 20 January 2012 - 11:44 PM, said: The leash range of a strange dog to me is their personal space which I prefer to keep out of to prevent what happened in this case. So if you want to be a thrillseeker by entering a strange dog's personal space, the bottom line is, be aware that getting bitten may be the result........the choice is yours. However, I did not give any advice, or present advice in the sense in which you have framed it. My point of reference is the biting dog not the pedestrian. I refuted the point of view that a leashed dog is a calculated risk that provides choices. It doesn't and the law clearly says so. Congratulations on the successful efforts to desensitise your son. Px My son was 6 years old at the time walking along with my mum (nanna) and the approaching dog was walking at heel with it's owner, mum thought the dog was leashed. When they passed, the dog doubled back, chased my son biting him on the arm from behind, he was about 15 feet away from the dog's owner, suffice to say had the dog been leashed, it wouldn't have happened? I agree that people should have control and restraint over their dogs, but I took your post as meaning we should just assume that people will have control with no need to take precautionary measures just in case they don't? My apology if I took your post out of context, it was the way I read the thread and how the comments were unfolding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) My son was 6 years old at the time walking along with my mum (nanna) and the approaching dog was walking at heel with it's owner, mum thought the dog was leashed. When they passed, the dog doubled back, chased my son biting him on the arm from behind, he was about 15 feet away from the dog's owner, suffice to say had the dog been leashed, it wouldn't have happened? I agree that people should have control and restraint over their dogs, but I took your post as meaning we should just assume that people will have control with no need to take precautionary measures just in case they don't? My apology if I took your post out of context, it was the way I read the thread and how the comments were unfolding? Horrible, just unimaginably horrible. I hope he is OK now. I was attacked several times as a child. Once I'm even sure my step-father knew the dogs temperament before he sent me into the yard where the dog was. However, that's another story. But agreed, a strange dog remains a strange dog. The outcome is always known. Px Edited January 22, 2012 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now