My dog was off the leash and this lady screamed at me...

[MagicJ]

Well if an unleashed dog came and barked/jumped up at me i might be tempted to kick it, perhaps the old bag deserved a kick too.....

[OwnARottie]

To answer the post:

– First of all, I am NOT the original poster. My dog is leashed - as needed. And no, I am a guy and despite recent news in the media about male pregnancy, am not pregnant.

– Two, well spoken, just like a remarkable percentage of the ignoramuses that one encounters everyday, i.e. no knowledge, no idea, and yet enough words, i.e. I am referring to "Rotweilers are known to attack without provocation". Really??? And you can say that because...? You are an experienced animal behavior specialist? Certified trainer from the Schutzhund clubs perhaps? Ever owned a Rottweiler? You can start a debate with me on this topic, and at the end of it, you'll despair and show it by pulling off your golden locks and I don't mean from your head! And in the poster's situation, the provocation was what exactly? Intelligence & the post definitely are a contradiction in terms.

- *** READ *** my previous post, like I said, I support dogs being leashed. I am not in support for unleashed uncontrolled dogs. She *could* have called the authorities, who would have handled it more *** appropriately *** considering the circumstances. She could have done it right away. She has/had NO rights to threaten or intimidate anyone else. Period. Your peeing in your pants, worrying that you are gonna get bitten while in a car etc. gives you no authority to threaten anybody no more than you have the right kill or maim. Ever notice the cops? They are quite professional and decent. She was NOT!

- LASTLY, if the likes of you ever come across me with me dog, please, call the cops. You'll be better off. The previous post from MagicJ - Touché!

[OwnARottie]

Strange... the post from Goldilocks to which I replied in my above post disappeared! I.e. the her part of the post.

[Tiwaz]

I agree, dogs must be leashed. BUT

- The main issue of contention here: The lady acted incorrectly. If she was bothered, she could have called the authorities if she wanted to who would have handled it correctly and appropriately under the circumstances, she has NO RIGHT to threaten or intimidate. Considering the circumstances, a fine would be okay; scaring or threatening a person this way is NOT. That idiot ought to thank her stars it wasn't somebody else with a tit for tat!

You mean people may not tell other people, who are in process of breaking a law, that they plan to report them to the police?

From what I read that is what happened. She did not threathen OP physically or other way, yelled yes and was rude but this rude lady did no crime.

- What part of the nowheremäki part do you not understand? The poster says it is not part of the populated area, then the law is clear.

Guess what, most of nowheremäki is taajama as well. Not to mention that without proper authorisation and during this time NO DOG MAY BE OUTSIDE DESIGNATED AREAS/CLOSED YARDS UNLEASHED.
What the hell is so difficult with that concept?

- This idiot wasn't even on the same path, but in her car. I maintain my view: "Ja mikä vaivasi on? Pidätekö itse julkisena viranomaisena? Kuule ä--ä, pidä t----si kiinni ja huolehdi omista ----- asioistasi!" in no uncertain words.

And then she calls the cops and police issues fine and warning to OP.
Her being in car is irrelevant. Her being rude is irrelevant. Only one party to my understanding was actually doing something punishable in this case.
Which is not, surprise surprise, the rude lady.

Would you prefer if people interfered with unleashed dogs if your kids were playing around or would you prefer to trust that every owner can control their Fifi or Fluffy without any danger to your offspring?

- And to the sorts of Goldilocks here: I am not arguing against the law. The law is there, to create an order of sorts, not to cater to every individuals reason for peeing in their pants. That being said, laws are always applied in context. I have my personal fears and dislikes too, what part of the law caters for that? I demand that such a "lady" (not so) should be leashed and muzzled too. If the law provided for that, I demand that all people showing a level of stupidity be banned from the public without their mouths taped shut. So, no, not spot on. She could have politely asked or even said it or demanded it.

She demanded it. In rude way yes, but she committed no crime. She even warned that continuation of breaking law may result in police being called in.
There are no laws against any ladies with bad mouth, there is law against dogs not being in the leash.



Antstar:
Rather the opposite. Finns are rather dog friendly people. But idiots who own dogs give dogs bad reputation. Not cleaning up droppings (which is something dog can't do) and letting them run without leash.

Also, over here there is also allergy and hygiene issue. Dogs and animals are not permitted within premises where food is served except in exceptional cases. (dogs escorting blind people)

[Goldie]

- LASTLY, if the likes of you ever come across me with me dog, please, call the cops. You'll be better off.

What are you implying…that you would sic your dog on me!?

[antstar]

Antstar:
Rather the opposite. Finns are rather dog friendly people.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree, as i have found that look at at distrust rather than open pleasure when seeing my dog and he's a friendly Labrador. of course there are exceptions. but in general a big diffence from the UK or France.

[Tiwaz]

Antstar:
Rather the opposite. Finns are rather dog friendly people.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree, as i have found that look at at distrust rather than open pleasure when seeing my dog and he's a friendly Labrador. of course there are exceptions. but in general a big diffence from the UK or France.

Some people dislike dogs on principle yes. And they are often problematic around cities. People tend not to like dogs barking in apartments keeping whole house awake. But amount of dogs is rather indicative that they are hardly disliked. Biggest problem are idiot owners who cause most problems in my opinion. Getting dog they have no ability to train and own, or getting dog which requires lots of exercise into small three room apartment...

But off on the countryside you will notice quite different attitude. Over there it's the cats which tend to be disliked. At least where I have been. Some people hate cats to point of shooting them and it has been in former years kind of tolerated. But if anyone shot dog of another house, shooter would be socially isolated by whole community.

Hell, even my SO who is not big dog fan always goes "Oiiii! Look at that cuddly dog!" When some smaller dog goes by. She specially likes corgies.

[OwnARottie]

Fair enough!

- The issue of contention is the overall circumstance. Again, read my post: She could have told in a polite or a firm way (including that she may report it to the authorities). Shouting, threatening, NO WAY. Or then, If one thinks that rudeness and such behavior (while uncalled for) is appropriate, my response: Answer bricks with stones. Rudeness begets more rudeness. Just in case, you are not aware, difference in tones can be perceived as threats, even by law. And then again, read the original poster's posting, i.e.

then goes away and then comes back again and does the same

Oh threatening it is! What part of that did you not get?

Part II

Her being in car is irrelevant. Her being rude is irrelevant

Simply incorrect. Laws are always applied in context. In that sense, she was not in any way affected. So, if I am standing in my balcony and see a person smoking at the bus-stop that is visible to me, gives me a right to shout at them? What nonsense. Yes, the original poster should have had the dog on the leash (and from a careful reading, seems it WAS so, till she needed a little rest). And the idiot could have simply being polite and firm and requested. If not adhered to, she could have informed the authorities. If not, see the latter part of point 1. I would have given her tit (pun intended) for tat.

Would you prefer if people interfered with unleashed dogs if your kids were playing around or would you prefer to trust that every owner can control their Fifi or Fluffy without any danger to your offspring?

That being said, although, while I respect it, the whole leash law IMVHO, lacks sense. What happens if the dog, let's say a large one, fully leashed, ravishes children in an aggravated manner simply because the owner cannot control it.

Goldilocks: I am rarely at a loss of words, so if the likes of you were to scream at me for no reason or where it is uncalled for, you might get a nice barrage of words as a return gift, double the level of politeness that you use. Let's take Tiwaz's word for it that I would be acting legally! It would be at least self- defense. My dog, on the other hand, is better trained and would ignore you completely! Sheesh, I had to even explain that? Seems like you antenna doesn't pick up all the channels. PS: Why would I turn my dog on you? It doesn't like stale meat! And why did you delete the rest of your post? Didn't agree with yourself?

[antstar]

Antstar:
Rather the opposite. Finns are rather dog friendly people.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree, as i have found that look at at distrust rather than open pleasure when seeing my dog and he's a friendly Labrador. of course there are exceptions. but in general a big diffence from the UK or France.

Some people dislike dogs on principle yes. And they are often problematic around cities. People tend not to like dogs barking in apartments keeping whole house awake. But amount of dogs is rather indicative that they are hardly disliked. Biggest problem are idiot owners who cause most problems in my opinion. Getting dog they have no ability to train and own, or getting dog which requires lots of exercise into small three room apartment...

But off on the countryside you will notice quite different attitude. Over there it's the cats which tend to be disliked. At least where I have been. Some people hate cats to point of shooting them and it has been in former years kind of tolerated. But if anyone shot dog of another house, shooter would be socially isolated by whole community.

Hell, even my SO who is not big dog fan always goes "Oiiii! Look at that cuddly dog!" When some smaller dog goes by. She specially likes corgies.

Well i think you just misunderstand me, "I" as a dog owner feel that the general people are not as dog friendly as other places i have been to. Of course Finland has dog lovers, and also these other countrys have dog haters and dogs that foul and bite and bark at cats!...

you have your opinion and i have mine, thats called agreeing to disagree. and you would like my dog as he knows as much Finnish as he does English,

[Tiwaz]

Fair enough!

- The issue of contention is the overall circumstance. Again, read my post: She could have told in a polite or a firm way (including that she may report it to the authorities). Shouting, threatening, NO WAY. Or then, If one thinks that rudeness and such behavior (while uncalled for) is appropriate, my response: Answer bricks with stones. Rudeness begets more rudeness. Just in case, you are not aware, difference in tones can be perceived as threats, even by law. And then again, read the original poster's posting, i.e.

If OP has case to claim that she had good grounds to assume her personal safety was in danger she would have a case.
How was this rude woman threathening her personal safety?

then goes away and then comes back again and does the same

Oh threatening it is! What part of that did you not get?

So going to car and coming back is threathening?

Her being in car is irrelevant. Her being rude is irrelevant

Simply incorrect. Laws are always applied in context. In that sense, she was not in any way affected. So, if I am standing in my balcony and see a person smoking at the bus-stop that is visible to me, gives me a right to shout at them? What nonsense. Yes, the original poster should have had the dog on the leash (and from a careful reading, seems it WAS so, till she needed a little rest). And the idiot could have simply being polite and firm and requested. If not adhered to, she could have informed the authorities. If not, see the latter part of point 1. I would have given her tit (pun intended) for tat.

Shouting is not forbidden. Telling person who is committing crime that they should stop or may be reported to police is not illegal.
Law does not see them as offenses, unless there are good reasons to feel that there is real threat to ones own safety.
I am not saying rude woman was acting the way people should act, but her point was valid even if delivered poorly.

There is no escape clause in law that you have to keep dog leashed unless you want to rest. You keep it leashed, always. If that is not possible, perhaps one should consider giving away the dog or figure out alternative solutions.

Over here law is as law reads. At least most of the time fortunately.

Would you prefer if people interfered with unleashed dogs if your kids were playing around or would you prefer to trust that every owner can control their Fifi or Fluffy without any danger to your offspring?

That being said, although, while I respect it, the whole leash law is nonsense. What happens if the dog, let's say a large one, fully leashed, ravishes children in an aggravated manner simply because the owner cannot control it.

Then it is an idiot owning a dog. Does not change fact that dog which would attack children if unleashed could not be stopped even if owner had physical strength to do so. If dog was in leash, it could be stopped.


Antstar:

Well i think you just misunderstand me, "I" as a dog owner feel that the general people are not as dog friendly as other places i have been to. Of course Finland has dog lovers, and also these other countrys have dog haters and dogs that foul and bite and bark at cats!...

you have your opinion and i have mine, thats called agreeing to disagree. and you would like my dog as he knows as much Finnish as he does English,

You travel in wrong places then perchance? Some people dislike dogs around running tracks and such. Usually to my knowledge there are general areas which dog owners prefer to use.

And I love dogs, my family owns one. She lives with my mother. Wrath of rabbits... But bloody fluffy eared tree-eaters seem to know when time to keep her in leash starts and come to yard to annoy her. Poor doggy... But when autumn comes every long eared troublemaker gives our yard wide berth.

[Goldie]

My dog, on the other hand, is better trained and would ignore you completely! Sheesh, I had to even explain that? Seems like you antenna doesn't pick up all the channels.

To bad you weren't able to use some of that training on your WOMAN!!

[rob34]

Bitches must be on leashes.

[antstar]

Tiwaz your like a dog with bone, no more!

[OwnARottie]

Hi Tiwaz!

Not arguing that the original poster should have had the dog on the leash. And no doubt, I agree, it is a sad fact that no law exists to leash up the idiots.

Depending on what actually happened, yes, the act can be perceived as threatening. Don't know all the details, but e.g. if the driver got ought of the car, then it is a definite yes. In the US, when you are pulled over by the cops, your getting out of the car before you are asked to can get you shot. The concept of "threat" worldwide is legally a perceived notion and dependent on the overall circumstance. Sure, examples are often used. Maybe its just me, I would have returned the words with love (not so).

Goldie: I use my talents indiscriminately! That being said, your comment did not make much sense to me. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

[Goldie]

Goldie: I use my talents indiscriminately! That being said, your comment did not make much sense to me. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

Your clouded judgment in women and your current situation with not knowing who's the father of your SO child, understandably has put you on edge. So I take no offense to your melodramatic posts, as this forum is probably the only place in your life in which you have control.