I wanted to insert my thoughts on the matter in the current thread on Service Dogs, but didn’t see any junctures in there to start off on this tangent, nor want to start a hijack there, so I’ve started a new one.
The issue with identifying service animals that are allowed in esstablishments could be solved easily by just cutting the animals and their people some slack, and changing the default assumption to one that responsible humans with well trained, well behaved animals should be allowed to bring those animals into businesses etc. without being challenged. As long as the animals are well trained and behaved, not doing anything to objectively bother someone else, like barking, or shitting in a no-shit area, or begging food off strangers, or being aggressive, their presence under human control should be acceptable in any place where it isn’t clearly and objectively detrimental, like maybe hospitals and restaurant kitchens. This would make life easier on the animals and their humans without disconveniencing anyone other than those people who are just convinced that animals just don’t belong in public (and that attitude is pretty much unjustified in most situations). Are we going to need a whole society-wide change of opinion about animal companions and individual freedom to allow us to relax about it? If that’s the case, I say bring it on.
If the humans in the equation don’t act in a responsible manner, then sure, throw those individuals and their animals out. Come down as hard as you wish on them legally. Businesses already have the right to eject disruptive persons from their premises, and could use that on a case by case basis. But it’s harsh and unfair to just assume beforehand that a given non-human critter will behave badly, or that the critter’s human will allow it to do so, and lay down a blanket ban on animals on the basis off that assumption.
This is the crux of the issue. Until a pet owner is already in the establishment with their pet, there’s absolutely no way to distinguish between “responsible humans with well trained, well behaved animals” and “irresponsible humans with untrained, poorly-behaved animals.”
You wouldn’t be able to enforce your proposal until after the pet causes an issue – and I would suspect that, in many cases, the irresponsible pet owner will create as much of an issue as their pet does when management moves to kick them out.
The current assumption is that we don’t have inconsiderate jerk pet owners coming into restaurants (or wherever) with manic, jumpy, barky dogs (or yowling cats, or squawking pooping parrots, etc.), because it’s not allowed. Yes, the current assumption also bans the wise owners with wonderful, well-behaved pets, but not every private establishment needs to be open season for bringing your pet, and not every patron wants to be around other people’s animals.
Some people are allergic to animals. The few times I’ve had to make accommodations for service animals at work (I’m in HR), I’ve had to make sure nobody in the area was allergic to dogs. It’s not been an issue so far.
But let’s say I run a private business open to the public. Do I really want to deal with animals at all? No. I don’t want to have to deal with pets coming into my establishment so it’s just easier for me to bar them. Service animals would be welcome, as is required by law, but keep the rest of them away.
Well, should very good drivers, no accidents, seat belt on, safe vehicle be allowed to drive without drivers lisc, registration and insurance?
I love all animals. I love my pets. I would never Not train them, vaccinate them, vet them regularly. And never foist their idiosyncrasies on others in the general public.
If a state or federal mandate or law came down, I might lisc. them. I still don’t think I’d take them to a restaurant or a store.
In case of extreme emergency and I needed to avail myself and family of shelter I would take them, anyway.
I don’t think this needs any more than people being responsible and courteous citizens.
That’s the thing. There will always be those who think they have rights, others be damned.
As much as I would love to see animals in more public places, I realize it would be bad for a lot of people.
But I really would love it - again. When I first joined a credit union years ago they had cats that lived there. It was wonderful! Kids who were bored to be on a bank errand with their folks had something novel to see, and their presence just lightened the mood of the whole place. Sometimes one of the cats would sit in a teller window and I’d go up and pretend to be exasperated while attempting to conduct a transaction. “Manager! I’m trying to make a deposit and she just keeps grooming herself!”
Cats in an unexpected place like that gave me such joy. But of course, the credit union was taken over by a larger entity and the very first thing they did was get rid of the cats. What a shame.
There are plenty of poorly-trained humans out there, it’s true. But even poorly-trained humans probably won’t poop on your floor or pee on the shelves.
Keep the damned livestock on farms and out of supposedly civilized public. People who want to be surrounded by animals should live rural and stay there. Nobody wants to be surrounded by other irresponsible peoples’ irresponsible animals.
Thank the stars.
Supposedly responsible parents throw dirty diapers in parking lots.
There should be lisc. to buy disposable diapers it’s so bad.
Bad manners, enough?
If there are humans. And there is need to be responsible and respect others there will be those who do not. Always. Add animals and it will just be worse.
Communities can’t even abide by leash laws, and poop bagging.
Even at PetSmart, well-trained dogs pee and poop on the floor. A store owner shouldn’t have to deal with that. Pet owners aren’t likely to clean it up as completely as it needs to be cleaned up.
Also, lots of owners think their dog is well trained when they aren’t. The same ones who think their precious little children aren’t hellions.
I would go so far as to say that badly behaved animals should be allowed in more places, too. I’ve read that a good jolt of adrenaline once every day or two is good for the body, and a foot-long iguana on the bus would do wonders.
This door got briefly opened a couple years ago. Then people wanted peacocks and miniature horses on airplanes.
It won’t end with well behaved cute widdle lap doggies.
Persons have no ability to self limit or regulate anymore.
It’s not a good idea.
Makes it hard on the disabled, allergic or fearful.
You mean Americans don’t. In Germany dogs are allowed on buses - there are even doggie fares for them. Does not seem to be a problem. But around these parts I agree with you.
Usually when we go somewhere to browse the shops, we settle the dog at home and leave her there for a couple of hours snoozing; that works fine at home, but when we are away on holiday (staying in a dog-friendly hotel or holiday cottage), we can’t leave her in an unfamiliar place.
So on last year’s holiday we took the dog with us on a shopping trip, resolving that one of us would stand outside of any given shop, with the dog, while the other went in.
We quickly discovered that a lot of shops are actually dog-friendly, and a shop assistant saw me waiting outside with the dog and invited me in. Bakeries, groceries, butcher shops and anything else with a food context, still had a ‘no dogs except guide/assistance dogs’ policy, but the majority of other places were fine with the dog coming in (indeed, had ‘dogs welcome’ signs on the door, and/or actively invited me to bring the dog in).
Indeed but this is the UK, where dogs are allowed on buses and trains, and in shops, restaurants, offices and pubs, at the managers’ discretion. It really doesn’t cause problems but rather brings a little joy to most people’s days.
Sure, but the point is: it wasn’t always like this - I think I am right in remembering ‘no dogs except guide dogs’ being pretty much a blanket policy in all shops and probably most cafes and restaurants that weren’t pub-restaurants (dogs have been welcome in pubs forever, I think).
At some point, the UK quietly transitioned from ‘no dogs’ to ‘actually, it’s fine’, without the world ending, and all of this, somehow, without the floors of shops becoming awash with excrement and urine.
Yes I think that’s true. My Dad (aged 96) remembers that dogs weren’t even allowed in houses when he was a lad. Of course, people also back then thought training dogs involved treating them badly, resulting in lots of frightened, badly behaved and vicious dogs. Perhaps the new social enlightenment coincides with positive training methods.