lol sorry I just had to laugh at this!!

Dervel are you seriously suggesting our dogs are more dangerous than tigers

not many people keep pet tigers though thank goodness
imagine if they did, i wouldnt walk the streets at all

What a horrible old woman Dani

Well I do undestand you guys saying how nasty it is when puppy owners pick their dogs up, but I have to admit I'm always cautious when I see a dog I don't know and I'm with Archie. Whether it's a Malamute, a Rottie or a Chihuahua, I ALWAYS ask if it's friendly with puppies. I made the mistake of letting my guard down a bit yesterday and Archie nearly got mauled by an Afghan, who was off lead .

It's just about being careful really, sad as it is not all dogs are friendly and you can't always tell from looking at them. However I do think it's rude to just pick up your pup and go without asking, I try never to miss an opportunity to socialise Archie with other dogs, and the second a person says their dog is friendly, Archie is on the floor saying hello

Only because theres more dogs than tigers in the UK so therefore statistics would show a dog as more dangerous

Ah but they wouldn't! You see that might suggest you have more chance of being mauled/bitten by one, but since when does that equate to the standard by which you measure the dangerous nature of that particular animal?

Thats like saying a car is more lethal than a HGV Lorry! I know which one I'd really rather not get run over by!!

Good Point Lel

Good Point Azz!!!

What? .....

if you are collecting data regarding animals that bite humans etc then a dog would surely show higher in the ratings than a tiger (at least in the UK anyway)
Therefore if it bites more than it is percieved as more dangerous so stop trying to be clever or I'll set Libby on to you smart a*se

i know what dervel was trying to say but i think it maybe came out wrong
anyway, this thread is about brundogs bad experience with the old woman and peoples perceptions of some breeds of dogs i dont think its really about tigers, theres not much chance of it becoming legal to have them as pets so i think dervel was just usiong it as a bit of an extreme example

Any dog owner can get grief for even owning a dog, but for those of us who own perceived dangerous dogs, the event is greatly exaccerbated. People who would normally (foolishly) run up and greet a lab, collie or cross-breed often drag their kids kicking and screaming if you walk your dog anywhere near their general vicinity.

A lot of us love our dogs as much or almost as much as we do our children - I would not tolerate anyone's irrational and offensive outburst towards a young relative of mine, so likewise I will not tolerate it towards any dog of mine. It can be extremely hurtful when you've spent time, effort and dedication in bringing up, socialising and training your dog, only to have some vacuous individual rant and rave at you for no reason. We wouldn't tolerate abuse for the clothes we wear, our hairstyles, the cars we drive, so why should we be expected to tolerate abuse over our dogs?

I think many people here feel aggrieved because we expect humans to have more cognitive reasoning than a dog - a dog may growl at another dog instictively, but we're not dogs and we should have the intelligence to appreciate a dog that is well-behaved and under control, and therefore not a threat. It's just not on to behave like that - if some had once been hit by a car, is it justifiable to rant at any car driver in the street, regardless of what they're doing?

I don't really understand this. If the same amount of people owned a tiger as own a dog, we'd have carnage! Of course a tiger is more dangerous than a dog!

Becs