I read a leash as maybe saying, "The owner doesn't trust this dog unleashed"; and no-leash as saying, "This is a well-behaved dog."

That's if I can assume that the dog-owner is competent.

IMO it's just as good (as using a leash) to demonstrate your control by giving "sit!" or "heel" or whatever else. Ideally your dog is looking to (looking at) you for instructions, in which case I can ignore the dog and talk to you. If the dog is looking at me and trying to make its own mind up, then maybe I'll avoid all y'all (so that the dog stays closer to you than to me).

The important thing (the only important thing) is to be safe. It doesn't matter so much whether I'm scared of the dog and/or want to talk with you, the most (or only) important thing is that I mustn't be attacked.

I tend to use a leash only for safety's sake (not to punish the dog, not to make people feel happy) and/or to comply with the law.

The other bit ("homeless, long hair, unshaven, muddy") is maybe a bit more important than the dogs.

I guess my message is that its possible to visibly control the dogs even without a leash. I cycle on a mixed-use tow-path and so cross paths with dozens of dogs per year. I ring my bell as I approach (so I can see what the dog's reaction to me will be while I'm still at a distance). Sometimes after an off-leash dog sees me, the owner "checks" the dog -- tells it to sit or just calls its name, at which point the dog might do a shoulder-check to the owner ("Hello, yes, I am still with you") -- as long as the dog is more interested in what the owner wants than it is in me then all's good (in my opinion). If the attention of the owner and the dog are on me and not on each other -- then I don't know.

I read a leash as maybe saying, "The owner doesn't trust this dog unleashed"; and no-leash as saying, "This is a well-behaved dog."

That's if I can assume that the dog-owner is competent.

IMO it's just as good (as using a leash) to demonstrate your control by giving "sit!" or "heel" or whatever else. Ideally your dog is looking to (looking at) you for instructions, in which case I can ignore the dog and talk to you. If the dog is looking at me and trying to make its own mind up, then maybe I'll avoid all y'all (so that the dog stays closer to you than to me).

The important thing (the only important thing) is to be safe. It doesn't matter so much whether I'm scared of the dog and/or want to talk with you, the most (or only) important thing is that I mustn't be attacked.

I tend to use a leash only for safety's sake (not to punish the dog, not to make people feel happy) and/or to comply with the law.

The other bit ("homeless, long hair, unshaven, muddy") is maybe a bit more important than the dogs.

I guess my message is that it's possible to visibly control the dogs even without a leash. I cycle on a mixed-use tow-path and so cross paths with dozens of dogs per year. I ring my bell as I approach (so I can see what the dog's reaction to me will be while I'm still at a distance). Sometimes after an off-leash dog sees me, the owner "checks" the dog -- tells it to sit or just calls its name, at which point the dog might do a shoulder-check to the owner ("Hello, yes, I am still with you") -- as long as the dog is more interested in what the owner wants than it is in me then all's good (in my opinion). If the attention of the owner and the dog are on me and not on each other -- then I don't know.

I read a leash as maybe saying, "The owner doesn't trust this dog unleashed"; and no-leash as saying, "This is a well-behaved dog."

That's if I can assume that the dog-owner is competent.

IMO it's just as good (as using a leash) to demonstrate your control by giving "sit!" or "heel" or whatever else. Ideally your dog is looking to (looking at) you for instructions, in which case I can ignore the dog and talk to you. If the dog is looking at me and trying to make its own mind up, then maybe I'll avoid all y'all (so that the dog stays closer to you than to me).

The important thing (the only important thing) is to be safe. It doesn't matter so much whether I'm scared of the dog and/or want to talk with you, the most (or only) important thing is that I mustn't be attacked.

I tend to use a leash only for safety's sake (not to punish the dog, not to make people feel happy) and/or to comply with the law.

The other bit ("homeless, long hair, unshaven, muddy") is maybe a bit more important than the dogs.

I read a leash as maybe saying, "The owner doesn't trust this dog unleashed"; and no-leash as saying, "This is a well-behaved dog."

That's if I can assume that the dog-owner is competent.

IMO it's just as good (as using a leash) to demonstrate your control by giving "sit!" or "heel" or whatever else. Ideally your dog is looking to (looking at) you for instructions, in which case I can ignore the dog and talk to you. If the dog is looking at me and trying to make its own mind up, then maybe I'll avoid all y'all (so that the dog stays closer to you than to me).

The important thing (the only important thing) is to be safe. It doesn't matter so much whether I'm scared of the dog and/or want to talk with you, the most (or only) important thing is that I mustn't be attacked.

I tend to use a leash only for safety's sake (not to punish the dog, not to make people feel happy) and/or to comply with the law.

The other bit ("homeless, long hair, unshaven, muddy") is maybe a bit more important than the dogs.

I guess my message is that its possible to visibly control the dogs even without a leash. I cycle on a mixed-use tow-path and so cross paths with dozens of dogs per year. I ring my bell as I approach (so I can see what the dog's reaction to me will be while I'm still at a distance). Sometimes after an off-leash dog sees me, the owner "checks" the dog -- tells it to sit or just calls its name, at which point the dog might do a shoulder-check to the owner ("Hello, yes, I am still with you") -- as long as the dog is more interested in what the owner wants than it is in me then all's good (in my opinion). If the attention of the owner and the dog are on me and not on each other -- then I don't know.