Just a bizarre encounter / conversation I had the other day which I have been mulling over. I often take Kilo to a busy park for socialisation purposes and we went the other day when I knew it would be jam packed full of kids with their new bikes etc and people out for a walk. I was stopped with Kilo as he was reading some pee mails and a man came by with two poms on flexis. One of them shot over and sniffed him, which was OK although made him jump as it approached from behind, but the other shot over and started baring it's teeth, barking, snarling and darting in for the odd nip. Kilo didn't like this (funnily enough!) and just mustered one enormous bark which spurred the man to reel his dogs back in :thumbup1:. However he then said "you should have that dog muzzled". We had a fairly long and polite conversation the gist of which is that large dogs should be muzzled in case they bite small dogs that are aggressive towards them - the old 'mine are tiny so can't do any damage' argument which seems to be a universal excuse for not addressing issues with tiny dogs. There seems to be a perception that large dogs need to be calm and steady and take anything thrown at them by smaller ones who are just being 'feisty'. Where did this commonly - held belief stem from I wonder? I know many, many responsible small dog owners and this is NOT a rant against small dogs but why does there seem to be this minority of owners who refuse to take any responsibility for their dogs at all simply because of their size? The only two dogs to have ever attacked Kilo and drawn blood have been a border terrier and a JRT - both owners shrugged it off with the JRT owner saying "Oh, she always does that" :frown2:.