I don’t have a dog, but I’m interested in what dog owners think about this. Personally, I get annoyed when people bring dogs to places (like farmer’s markets) where signs are posted specifically requesting that people leave their dogs at home. But if a sign isn’t posted… well, no holds barred, I guess.
I lived in Paris for a little while, and I was really surprised by the nonchalance there about bringing dogs to public places. I once had a german shepherd jump partially into my lap (trying to get at my food) at a really nice restaurant there, and I was shocked that no one seemed to care. It really bugged me. I felt like a jerk for trying to discipline the dog to get it off me. I’m not scared of dogs or anything, but I am a little squiffy about dog slobber and smell. I don’t like it when strange dogs approach me and make physical contact, especially when the owner doesn’t seem to think it’s a problem at all. And what about for those people who are scared of dogs? Do they have a reasonable right to assume they won’t be canine-molested when going out to a crowded public event?
If it’s posted “no dogs” then there should be no dogs. I have no issue with that.
But even if dogs are allowed, then I think that people do need to still keep their dogs under control. I’ve had dogs most of my adult life, and I never, ever, ever allow them to approach or physically touch a human without making sure it’s OK first. And by “making sure”, I mean that I keep my dog restrained unless the other person says “Oh, it’s OK, I’d love to see your dog” or some such thing.
There is some latitude in that - for example, if I’m at the dog park, I’m not going to be too worried about my dog running around and potentially greeting people. It’s a dog park, after all, and if you don’t want strange dogs coming up to you, go somewhere else. Also, out on trails that are designated no-leash dog-friendly trails, I’ll be a little less vigilant. That said, it’s only to a point - if your dog is aggressive, they should not be off leash, even if it is allowed.
I’ve seen my share of idiots with dogs, and it is annoying. I’ve been in the position where people have asked me if they could say hi to my dog, and for whatever reason I say no, and they go ahead and try. I also had a friend who was almost legally forced to put her dog down because she once left her dog in her truck, with the window cracked an inch or so, and some passer-by stuck his fingers IN her car to “pet the dog” and the dog snapped at him. Did not break skin or anything like that, but sheesh - who sticks their hands INSIDE a stranger’s locked car?!?
I personally wouldn’t bring my dogs to a crowded event, because I find dealing with the jackasses who are stepping on my feet annoying enough without having to worry about them accidentally kicking or stepping on my dog.
I don’t know that shooting the dog was the right thing to do, but I tend to take the dog’s side in most cases anyway. What can I say - I will remember your dog’s name, but probably not your kid’s.
Ditto Poland, last time I was there. Mini dachshunds everywhere.
Frankly, it’s a chicken-and-egg thing in my mind. To paint with the broadest brush available to me: Dogs in America are left home alone while their people are at work, so they’re not as well trained and socialized. Dogs in many parts of Europe go everywhere with their person, so they’re highly socialized, accustomed to all the crowds/sights/smells/sounds, and therefore, better trained to handle being out in public. So, the more society in general approves of dogs in public spaces, the more people take them out and about, and the better the dogs handle it. Conversely, the less society approves, the less dogs get out and about, and the less the dogs know how to behave.
I hate to be one of those guys who blusters with digital machismo, but if a cop shot my dog he’d better save some bullets, because I honestly don’t know what I’d do.
I’m a dog owner. Our dog goes to a lot of public places, but never crowded places, and he has professional obedience training and stays by our sides at all times. It is not acceptable for him to touch other people or even sit staring at them while drooling in hopes to get the bottom tip of the ice cream cone. (We had to take corrective measures last year because everywhere we went, shopkeepers gave him treats, so he started thinking all strangers were treat dispensers ,and if you were eating he’d sit looking at you drooling.)
We do not take him to crowded events, it would be horribly unfair and stressful for our pet. I feel terrible for the poor small dogs we see at huge outdoor festivals and events. They look miserable getting dragged through a sea of legs sometimes not getting out of the way successfully (I’ve seen a dog trip up someone and get hot coffee dumped down its back).
It would be as if you or I were being forced to walk through a dense forest that had moving trees! I can’t imagine how stressful that is.
Reading that article- Jesus Christ, that’s insane. And for an officer to pull out a gun and discharge it in a crowded public place over a dog charging him (if that even happened)? Isn’t that what his spray or club is for? Wow.
Despite that: I don’t take my dog too many public places, because she is a pound doggy with issues. She has no manners and wants to play with other dogs so, so, so SO much that it’s-- too much. It’s a catch 22, though-- she needs to spend time in public so she can be a good four legged citizen, but taking her in public, even restrained, makes me not such a good citizen. So, most of the time, Mia stays home.
I was at a pub in the UK and a dog came up and begged for some food. I didn’t mind, but it just would not be done here in the states.
If a sign is posted, don’t take your dog.
My dog is great, not a mean bone in her body and she will not leave my side, no matter where we are, but I don’t take her to crowded places, just because many people are not comfortable with dogs.
I find it interesting that witness who backs up the cop’s story is an ex-cop, and he claims that the dog was charging him, while the cop claims he shot the dog because the dog was charging him. A dog that is capable of being in two places at once should definitely not be shot!
As bad as taking a dog to a crowded space could potentially be, I’d say that shooting a gun in said crowded space is rather more dangerous.
The one time I took my dog to a crowded place, it was horrible purely because of all the people wanting to stop and pet her. I kept her on a short lead close to me, so there was no danger to her or anyone else and she seemed unperturbed by the crowds. Some dogs are scared of crowds, though, so I wouldn’t take a dog like that there.
Between our house and a big park there’s a very busy market. Sometimes I do have to take her through there because the alternative is not going to the park.
Haven’t read the follow-up article yet, but it’s worth pointing out that the event in question wasn’t a “farmer’s market” but a festival day, to which pet adoption groups had been invited for the purpose of showing their animals to the public. Any attempt by the Washington Post to connect that event to some kind of implication that the animal intruded on human activities is a reach of epic proportions.
Frankly I am very close to this story, as people from the dog’s rescue post on dog boards I am active on, and personal friends have been to a vigil for this dog. I’ve been following it since before it was in the paper – word of mouth got out immediately – and it’s been all I can do to avoid Pitting the entire freaking sorry tale.
For the purposes of this thread, let me at restrict myself to clarifying that the dog in question did not molest or bother humans. Eyewitnesses other than the police agree there was a dog-on-dog scrap, after which both dogs were under control when the police showed up. The only affront offered to humans might have been the noise of barking/snarling startling people not expecting it.
I submit that a police shooting incident startled festival goers significantly more.
Wow, that makes it even worse that they shot the dog - at an event like that, you’d have to expect a scrap or two, to be dealt with as this one seems to have been before the shooting. What dishonest reporting.
It was a foster dog, which means that even though the handler had little experience with the dog, he decided it was a good idea to take it into that situation. The dog it attacked had two broken bones and a large cut. And though the Lucky Dog Animal Rescue has been really good about capitalizing on this to solicit donations they are pretty short on information on where this animal was rescued from. For all we know it was raised to be a fighting dog or rescued from a animal farm where it already had issues.
Okay, having read the first page, it looks like one source of confusion is that the shooting occurred at the Adams Morgan Day Festival, causing the reporter in question to get a story idea about dogs at public events, for which he/she interviewed people, one of whom talked about an unrelated incident at the Takoma Park Farmer’s Market, and led off the article with that. The OP linked both articles and maybe confused the two events (not that the Post clearly distinguishes them, but it doesn’t appear to be a deliberate lie. Not that the Adams Morgan shooting had much at all to do with a dog bothering people, mind you.)
First, I must say I disagree with the outcome of this event. The cop was wrong. However, I wonder if he made an assumption about what was happening between the dog’s foster parent and the dog, based on this:
So, the cop sees a man “subduing” a dog on the ground, and blood. (possibly a hand inside a dog’s mouth?), plus a second dog, badly mauled. Maybe he mistook the situation as the opposite, and thought the dog was still the aggressor? After all, I’m not so sure a dog’s tongue is so dexterous as to hold something sharp, and I’m not so sure what else would cut a hand inside a dog’s mouth besides the teeth.
Not that the cop would know the dog’s history at the time of the incident, but what was the foster person thinking, taking a foster dog of unknown history, and it sounds like untested, into a situation where the dog may have a problem with other animals or children? I’m not trying to set blame here, what happened was unconscionable, but it does sound like a recipe for a possible unfavorable outcome.
I’ll also admit I have had issues with inexperienced foster people who think they know what they are getting into when they have no idea and think they know best. So I’m a little jaded.
Without commenting on what actually happened, I’d say that in a hypothetical situation in which a large dog is charging a police officer that officer is totally correct in using his firearm to stop the animal. There is absolutely no reason for him to risk personal injury by fighting the dog with a fucking club or using spray (the spray probably wouldn’t stop the animal at all). If a person is charging a cop with a knife I don’t want the cop to fuck around with a club or spray.