[INTPenis]

I like the author's positive outlook on life. Because when I see a dog act like that, especially in a family where a child has taken focus, I mostly see a prisoner longing for freedom.

Me and my dog have been exclusive for almost a decade now. We have traveled across europe, always by my side. Off leash even, I have always wanted to give my dog the most freedom possible. To heck with human rules.

I've mostly worked remotely during my dog's entire life, so I've always been there, and we've always been able to take a long walk outside.

But at the end of the day we have to go home, and I have to fall asleep on the couch after dinner, and I have to work for hours and hours from home, or remote workspaces.

So even with all the freedom my dog enjoys, I still feel like it would want more. We have lived in houses with yards, and my dog has lazily spent every single moment outside, in the sun, in the grass. But I still feel like it's insufficient.

I have claimed this dog as mine, so it goes where I go, not where it wants to go.

If my dog could decide it would have probably died a harsh death in the streets a long time ago. But the dog doesn't understand that. I believe a dog values freedom more than its immediate personal safety.

[rootusrootus]

> Off leash even, I have always wanted to give my dog the most freedom possible. To heck with human rules.

I regularly meet people like that when I'm camping. I find it pretty frustrating. So many rules like that have basis in reality, they are not just meant to annoy.

[gretch]

As a dog owner, I agree with you.

I KNOW that my dog would never hurt anyone.

But I also know that no one else in the world has spent hundreds of hours with my dog, and to them he is a strange and large animal. Inevitably some of these ppl probably have some kind of childhood trauma related to dogs.

So I always have him leashed where the rules are to have a leash.

[Fomite]

This. As a dog owner, my dog remains on a leash. I don't know you. I don't know your dog.

More than once, I've been put in the position where my dog is getting agitated because they're on leash, their dog can't be controlled because they're off leash, and we're rapidly approaching the "Swift kick or risk injury" stage.

"My dog is off leash because I want them to have freedom" is a profoundly selfish decision if you're in a place to encounter other dogs.

[bartread]

> "My dog is off leash because I want them to have freedom" is a profoundly selfish decision if you're in a place to encounter other dogs.

This is cultural, I think. In the UK at least it’s often the norm for dogs to be off leash in open areas like commons (public land, usually grassy or wooded, or a mix of the two), or in other settings where they’re away from roads and won’t encounter livestock.

On public footpaths in the countryside farmers will put up signs indicating where livestock are and where dogs need to be kept on leash. The rest of the time, again, most dogs will be off leash.

Compliance is really high, with almost all dog owners I see following these rules.

There’s a deterrent as well: if your dog is bothering farm animals the farmer is within their rights to shoot the dog.

I do think the post you’re responding to has a very naive view of dog psychology though. Thousands of years of selective breeding means that dogs are fundamentally not wild animals, and as such their behaviours and needs are quite different from their wild relations, such as wolves. Many breeds of dog are so far removed that they would very likely be incapable of surviving in the wild: I’m thinking principally of designer breeds like pugs which, overall, I strongly disapprove of.

[darby_nine]

Interesting that livestock is the primary concern—I'd imagine interactions with other dogs (which can be highly stressful, though this varies a lot from dog to dog) would be the primary issue these days.

[wizzwizz4]

Livestock haven't gone away.

[bartread]

What is this world that some of you seem to live in where interactions with other dogs are, apparently, incredibly problematic?

Dogs encounter eachother all the time when you're out on a walk and it's... fine (again, I'm talking UK here). What's the worst thing that happens that you're all paranoid about your dog meeting, gasp, the horror... another dog?

This makes no sense to me.

[Unearned5161]

this video corroborates your cultural hypothesis

https://youtu.be/3GRSbr0EYYU?si=Q15kFkFBE-aW2ail

[bartread]

That remains, in some ways, one of the funniest videos on the internet[0], but the dog owner was and is an absolute moron. Imagine letting your dog off the lead near a herd of deer. That incident took place in a literal deer park. They're not livestock, per se, but, no surprise, the outcome is about the same as letting your dog off the lead in a field of sheep, and the consequences could have been much more serious.

[0] To the point where we briefly considered naming a dog Fenton, but then realised the humour would wear off pretty quickly and it wouldn't really be fair on the dog.

[mhb]

I realize this question is likely not to be appreciated by many, but do you not know whether your dog is male or female?

[amanaplanacanal]

I must be stupid. Try as I might, I can’t figure out what prompted this question. What am I missing?

[mhb]

The use of the gender-neutral plural pronoun to refer to the dog instead of he/she/him/her.

...my dog is getting agitated because they're on leash...

[jjtheblunt]

My un-favorite is the people with dogs on the spring loaded extending leashes, who let their little crazy dog come running at my feral-parents dog from a distance, announcing "don't worry...my dog is friendly.".

The people _never_ ask if my dog on her 2 meter leash (the law in Arizona, btw) is friendly, dangerous, anything. They just announce that their dog isn't dangerous to us.

So often the small dog runs up to my dog's face full speed, centimeter from her nose, gets satan-barked at and driven away from us. she's sensibly trying to protect me and her from the little barely tethered full speed maniac.

The people ask if my dog was abused. Nope: had her since she was three months old, the feral mom and others were all adopted. They just don't seem to consider that _they_ were aggressive, in dog body language. And that's hopefully eye opening for them.

[imoverclocked]

Just yell back “Mine isn’t!” Then you both get a little bit of an adrenaline rush…

On a serious note, I miss the wide open spaces I could bring my dogs to in AZ. Where I live in NorCal it’s practically impossible and even if I could let my dog off leash in some places, the poison oak often stops me from even considering it.

[jjtheblunt]

Yeah, that's what works, even though she is friendly, just guards her pack. Like you surmised, it's often amusing watching the reactions.

Be glad in NorCal there aren't the ubiquitous rattlesnakes and babies this time of year. And of course the heat is an outdoors dealbreaker still for a few more weeks, except at dawn. Canine cabin fever. But i sure miss the more pleasant outdoorsy weather in NorCal.

[cafard]

I get along with most of the many dogs in my neighborhood quite well. But my experience has said that there are owners whose confidence in a dog considerably outruns any basis for it.

[_yb2s]

I adopt older rescue dogs which tend to be anxious and reactive with strange dogs. Sometimes when I go to a public place where dogs are required to be leashed, an unleashed dog will charge or approach my leashed dog who reacts violently and I have to intervene- often lifting my dog in the air while trying to fight off the unleashed dog with my legs. These off leash dog people are creating a huge hazard, and making it unsafe for people to walk reactive or anxious dogs. There are also many people that are terrified of even a “friendly” off leash dog, and are being terrorized and unable to escape. They will chant “he’s friendly, he’s friendly” instead of getting control of their dog.

Even the most friendly and easygoing dog becomes violent when they approach another dog and it lashes out.

If I have to kill or harm your “friendly” illegally unleashed dog to keep me and my dog safe I will- luckily I have not had to. Please leash your dog.

[carom]

I go to campsites and wilderness areas where dogs are allowed off leash. It is pretty much the best thing I can do for my dog. She mostly sleeps in the dirt all day after a morning hike when we are camping. I have a radio collar and a directional antenna so I can find her if she runs off, but she never has. Even on long backpacking trips she has always been within a few hundred feet. Obviously, make sure your dog's temperament is correct for the situation, but camping and hiking with a dog off leash is a joy.

[fyt2024]

"I go to campsites and wilderness areas where dogs are allowed off leash." In the US?

I move with my golden retriever back to the states. Should someone have a dog friendly place to rent in NJ close to NYC, Hoboken....

[jxcl]

In the US, wilderness area is a specific legal term[1], which have very restrictive rules about what visitors are allowed to do. Very specifically, dogs are _not_ allowed off-leash in wilderness areas, because they can disturb the local wildlife, and the stated goal of wilderness areas is to protect the local wildlife to the highest extent possible.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness#United_States

[williamstein]

The laws are more nuanced than you suggest. Here is a government website [1] that mentions dogs and says “Dogs must be under control at all times. Dogs can harass, stress, injure or kill wildlife; annoy fellow hikers and introduce disease. Some wilderness areas require dogs be leashed at all times.”

I have recently been in Mount Baker’s wilderness where dogs off leash away from trailheads are fine and also in Mount Shasta wilderness where pet dogs are not allowed even on leash. There is latitude for local tweaks to the rules in specific wilderness areas across the US. The US also has vast swaths of BLM and other lands where all kinds of fun recreation (hunting, dogs off leash, OHV’s, and all kinds of other things are allowed).

[1] https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/psicc/specialplaces/?cid=stel...

[williamstein]

In some situations a leash can be dangerous. Eg, a woman died today because her dog was on a leash.

[1] https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/woman-drowns-kings-ri...

[carom]

Ansel Adams Wilderness allows off leash dogs.

[Gormo]

I just spent two weeks in Germany and noticed that almost nobody there keeps their dog on a leash. Dogs are loose on city streets, in open parks, pretty much everywhere. No one seemed to have an issue with it, and none of the dogs were misbehaving -- all of them were keeping up with their owners and not disturbing anyone else.

Maybe this is a cultural thing, both in terms of people's expectations of encountering dogs in public places, and in terms of the way dogs are trained and conditioned to respond to stimuli. Maybe keeping dogs on leashes prevents them from learning the skills they need to be off-leash reliably.

[mock-possum]

Unfortunately these rules punish dogs and good owners, while they’re smugly ignored by bad owners.

A well behaved dog off-leash is not a problem - but the rule isn’t against badly behaved dogs or inattentive owners - the rule is against off-leash, period. It isn’t fair to the good ones.

[danielschreber]

A good dog prefers to be on a leash.

c.f. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_Bark

[INTPenis]

I think we treat dogs wrong. Dogs are capable of resolving out most situations on their own, unless they're leashed. The leash changes everything and makes dogs more aggressive. Probably because they're scared about being attached to something when encountering a stressful situation like meeting other dogs.

The only reason we emphasize the leash is because any idiot is allowed to get a dog and mistreat it. So we leash them for the owner's sake really, not for any inherent fault of the dog.

So I can't argue with the rules to keep dogs leashed, I just refuse to do it.

Mine is tiny, it flies in the cabin on planes even because it's under 8kg.

But I've seen people with huge belgian malonois off leash, and they make a point of showing everyone around them how well trained it is. It walks next to them the whole time, they regularly give it commands to follow on their walk. So you have a responsibility with a big dog, because it can do more damage, and I think it's a good idea to demonstrate to any doubters around you that you can control it.

But if you just let a pittie go and then stare at your phone, you shouldn't be allowed to handle an animal.

But yeah this is a very hot topic because why should responsible people and good dogs be punished collectively because there are morons? I want more regulations in getting an animal. I see sooo many of them mistreated, neglected, when a child is born for example, now they're just being dragged along after the pram. Common human condition to be short sighted and get a dog as a fun item, but it lives for maybe 15 years. It's a huge commitment.

[jholman]

My sense is that dogs prioritize pack/family togetherness ahead of freedom. They don't value all other people (and to a dog, "people" means dogs, humans, and sometimes other species), but also they do not only value their "owner". They value their family, their pack. They want to be with those they want to be with, in action and in rest.

After that, they value things like food, exercise, curiousity, and the absence of immediate pain.

Most dogs, that haven't been traumatized, seem to have a pretty reasonable attitude toward personal safety: you mustn't let fear rule you. But some dogs, that have been traumatized, can be inordinately concerned with what they perceive to be their personal safety, in some cases to the point of (understandable, tragic) derangement.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

> I believe a dog values freedom more than its immediate personal safety

Think you're underestimating how much your dog probably likes you...

Dogs have a different relationship to their owner than people do with their best friends or parents.

It's like the best parts of each relationship wrapped into one for dogs.

[amrocha]

And sometimes relationships are toxic. Yes, the dog stays with its owner, most times at a detriment to its own health.

[itishappy]

> Off leash even, I have always wanted to give my dog the most freedom possible.

> I believe a dog values freedom more than its immediate personal safety.

I'm sure you're convinced your dog would never hurt anyone, but are you really sure everyone else you encounter will feel the same? That's a huge amount of trust to put on both strangers and your dog, and I'd argue it has not been earned. I've never encountered an out of control dog, and I pray I don't have to, but I have friends who have. They broke ribs. Eyes would have been next. Please don't make me or anybody else hurt your dog.

[_yb2s]

I doubt your dog actually values or desires unlimited freedom in that way… most dogs seem to value family connection and are comforted by an owner calmly directing them and spending time with them. They usually prefer exploring outdoors with their family rather than alone.

A lot of country/ farm dogs for example, who have limitless land to explore, will still follow their owners all day, and if the owner is gone tend to just sleep until they return.

[Satam]

I think you're right that for a dog to live its best life it needs the ability to spend a lot of time outdoors with relative freedom. Our labrador had the chance to live like that in an excessively very large garden for his last 4 years. I'm glad he got that, I think it made his life much better. Looking back, when he stayed with us in an apartment he must've been depressed.

[gretch]

In the US, people tend to look at me weird when I tell them my dog lives outside. Some of them probably think I’m a heartless or uncaring dog owner.

When I first adopted him, I tried inside first, and he was unhappy and anxious, and so much of that went away when he was chillin outside.

I think humans often wrongly project their own preferences onto dogs.

[vundercind]

Totally normal in the country, in the US. No fence or anything, either, if you’ve got enough land.

[mejutoco]

Not saying it is your case, but I want to add:

I think it also depends on the mental stimulation. Hiking I see many country houses big gardens. The dogs in them are rarely walked, and bark at anything that passes in ftont of the house all day long.

I think a dog that lives in a house but gets proper stimulation and walks is happier that thosr garden dogs.

[grahamjameson]

I would like to expand on this and suggest that this applies to humans as well.

[zoklet-enjoyer]

My roommates' dog got attacked by the neighbor dog 2 days ago. The dog ran across the street into our yard to attack him. There's a reason for leashes.

[spike021]

> Off leash even, I have always wanted to give my dog the most freedom possible. To heck with human rules.

All it takes is one time to ruin that for you and probably other people too.

[dyauspitr]

>I mostly see a prisoner longing for freedom.

Honestly, I think the dog would rather have a pack in a family (wife, kids etc.) than a single person to essentially spend the rest of their life with. My dog has so much more energy when the whole family is in the same room.

[pdonis]

> I believe a dog values freedom more than its immediate personal safety.

Why do you believe that? Bear in mind that our domesticated dogs of today are very different from their wild ancestors (or from wolves, their closest wild relatives).

[yencabulator]

Wolves value their pack too. The only lone wolves tend to be young males that were pushed out of their pack and are looking to find/start a new pack. Wolf pack is family, and stays together.

[omayomay]

Do you, by any chance, deep down, feel like a prisoner longing for freedom? reflecting your internal state in the dog?

[BatFastard]

I believe you are projecting your feeling onto the dog. My dogs(2) favorite place in the world is curled up in the crook of my legs. But I do think solo dogs are lonely.

[amrocha]

How is the original comment projecting, but yours isn’t?

[ecshafer]

> Off leash even, I have always wanted to give my dog the most freedom possible. To heck with human rules.

Having dogs off of leashes is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible. The amount of children killed or injured by poorly restrained dogs is very high. A dog should be fenced in or on a leash if they are outside, full stop. Dog ownership should really have a license requirement.

[jholman]

> The amount of children killed or injured by poorly restrained dogs is very high.

This claim is interesting, if true. Can you back it up? I spent 15 minutes on research, and my preliminary findings, using US statistics (I'm not American but it's just easier to google American stuff) suggest that:

a) about 42 Americans die to dog attacks per year (about 0.13 per 100k population) (very high confidence)

b) it looks like about half of those are kids under 17, with ages 1-4 over-represented (very high confidence)

c) most of those kids-dying-to-dogs deaths are not due to unrestrained dogs in public, but rather infants in their family homes, dying to dogs owned by the child's parents (low to medium confidence)

For example, WP gathers media/journal reports on dog fatalities, and has 16 records for 2023 (so presumably about 1/3 of the fatalities for that year). 6 of those are children. Of those 6 children, 4 died to the family pet, the other 2 died to neighbours' dogs while in their own home. Extrapolating from that that suggests that the number of American children killed by poorly restrained dogs, other than their own family, is roughly 6. Out of around 10k child fatalities per year in the US.

That doesn't seem "very high" to me, but that's just a matter of opinion. Do you have data that shows a different pattern?

[vundercind]

Injuries are way more common than death.

[edit] Forbes: an estimated 800,000 people each year must seek medical attention after a bite. Hospital bills can be very expensive, and an ER visit could necessitate a dog bite lawsuit in order to recover monetary compensation for damages.

https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-b...

My sister in law was one of them, when she was five or so. Unprovoked run-up-and-bite from an off-leash dog. Had to have a tear duct rerouted and other work on her face. Messed up their finances really bad for a couple years, like “parents not eating dinner tonight, because there’s only one can of spaghetti-o’s” bad (they were fairly poor to begin with)

[jholman]

Yikes, that's a grim story.

Yeah, the injury stats are way higher than death. I just couldn't find a fast way to disambiguate serious injuries from not-so-serious-but-we-still-care injuries from the sort of bite that really just merits a fake apology and everyone gets on with their lives.

At the other extreme, I've had first-hand knowledge of a case where someone taunted a dog repeatedly over many months (stupid kid, stupid dog-owners, lots of mistakes were made), eventually the kid got bit, didn't even need stitches, but they called animal control.

So. Non-fatal dog-attacks have a very wide range of impact, and I had no idea how to disentangle those.

Oh, after all that writing I just did, I went back and re-read your source. In 2022 there were 17,500 home insurance claims related to dog bites, at an average cost of $64k. That sounds like a pretty reasonable proxy for serious injury due to injuries from dog bites from pets, the sort of pets that could plausibly have been inappropriately not-on-leash (remember we're discussing whether or not it's "incredibly dangerous and irresponsible" to ever have your dog unrestrained).

[vundercind]

Sure, I agree that 800,000-hospital-visits number isn’t really a great picture of what’s going on. The deaths number was just so very far under what I was sure was the serious-harm figure that I thought it worth bringing in the non-death attacks, and a (probably reasonable-ish) estimate of cases that prompted treatment was first thing I saw that looked close to what I was looking for.

The 17.5k stat’s interesting—I think you’re right that it may at least be in the ballpark for an estimate of unrestrained dog attacks. Some would generate a claim, some wouldn’t, some claims wouldn’t be for unrestrained dogs… yeah, probably a good starting point. I like that one, good eye.

I’d guess most attacks of that 800k aren’t from strangers’ dogs at all, but friends and family’s dogs. Simple matter of opportunity and time exposed.

[snozolli]

I'm not the other guy, and I don't have data, but the risk might be far higher outside the US.

These days, Americans mostly treat their dog like a family member. If you travel to developing nations, you're far more likely to run into packs of dogs roaming around. Packs of dogs will do things that a solo dog might never consider.

It still happens in developed countries, but it's far more common these days to see it in poor, developing countries. They probably don't have the infrastructure to collect relevant statistics, either.

[jholman]

Yes, I agree with you, and poorly-fed dogs might do things that a privileged pet might never consider. And, a fortiori, packs of poorly-fed dogs.

But the comment I was responding to was from a commenter whose bio says they're in Philidelphia, responding to a comment that I think was probably pretty developed-country, on a story from a Brit living in America. So I think we're talking about the developed-country context.

I'm not disagreeing with the text of what you wrote, though.

[chucksta]

What would a license solve?