It's Not Just Gays They Refuse To Serve

[bianco]

This is but the latest in a string of refusals to allow service dogs to accompany veterans with mental disabilities like depression or PTSD. Last August, police in New Jersey kicked Jared Goering and his service dog, Gator, off the boardwalk, mockingly asking him if “all veterans get service dogs.”

No worries, sack the cops and ship them off to the latest warzone.
Then pay the mocked veteran $100,000 in compensation.

 

[Katzndogz]

This is but the latest in a string of refusals to allow service dogs to accompany veterans with mental disabilities like depression or PTSD. Last August, police in New Jersey kicked Jared Goering and his service dog, Gator, off the boardwalk, mockingly asking him if “all veterans get service dogs.”

No worries, sack the cops and ship them off to the latest warzone.
Then pay the mocked veteran $100,000 in compensation.

This issue is a vet not in a warzone but too frightened to go to a restaurant.

 

[bodecea]

This is but the latest in a string of refusals to allow service dogs to accompany veterans with mental disabilities like depression or PTSD. Last August, police in New Jersey kicked Jared Goering and his service dog, Gator, off the boardwalk, mockingly asking him if “all veterans get service dogs.”

No worries, sack the cops and ship them off to the latest warzone.
Then pay the mocked veteran $100,000 in compensation.

This issue is a vet not in a warzone but too frightened to go to a restaurant.

What?

 

[JOSweetHeart]

To me, the restaurant should get a new manager.

God bless you and our troops always!!!

Holly

 

[R.C. Christian]

It's a good thing he left or those dudes would have eventually killed the dog and put it on the menu.

 

[Coyote]

It's disabled veterans with guide dogs too!

This is a completely unrelated issue to Arizona's SB1062 bill. This, is a matter of Federal law long on the books. Service animals are federally protected and can accompany their owners ANYWHERE, even onto airplanes.

That is not quite what the law says. It specifically states that the owner has to have complete control over him, and that the business can ask what service it performs. I would assume that the last question gives them an option of not allowing it if they can make a solid case that the service will not be necessary inside the premises of the business.

I would also point out that, if the business owner, or an employee, is allergic to dogs they can ban even service animals because their health has to be a factor in the equation.

It is not up to them to determine whether or not the service is necessary in a facility and bar the animal on that basis and no they can not ban service animals on the basis of an allergy. Not by law.

If the animal is not under control however - that is another matter.

 

[Tresha91203]

I'm allergic to dogs. A dog in a restaurant ... that's just a dealbreaker to me. I'd have to leave. I do not begrudge the vet and I'm grateful for his service but dog cooties travel far and usually straight to me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is a completely unrelated issue to Arizona's SB1062 bill. This, is a matter of Federal law long on the books. Service animals are federally protected and can accompany their owners ANYWHERE, even onto airplanes.

That is not quite what the law says. It specifically states that the owner has to have complete control over him, and that the business can ask what service it performs. I would assume that the last question gives them an option of not allowing it if they can make a solid case that the service will not be necessary inside the premises of the business.

I would also point out that, if the business owner, or an employee, is allergic to dogs they can ban even service animals because their health has to be a factor in the equation.

It is not up to them to determine whether or not the service is necessary in a facility and bar the animal on that basis and no they can not ban service animals on the basis of an allergy. Not by law.

If the animal is not under control however - that is another matter.

Why is the question permissible then? If they can ask it, there has to be a reason.

 

[whitehall]

You have to cut them some slack. The illegal aliens that restaurants hire aren't familiar with dogs that aren't out to eat their asses as they cross the border.

 

[Kondor3]

Worst horseshit excuse for a Hetereosexual (and Conservative?) -bashing thread I've seen in quite some time...

 

[emilynghiem]

It's disabled veterans with guide dogs too!

Thai restaurant, which is owned, and staffed, by Asian immigrants. Sounds like a bunch of Democrats to me.

Fuckin gooks

Maybe they were afraid someone might EAT the dog?
JK, me bad!

If people are IGNORANT of the law and how service dogs are used,
THAT was the problem here, IGNORANCE.

Thanks to everyone here for posting more information, so others like me can learn
who have never run into a situation like this.
So I don't go out and make a similar mistake.

I hope they corrected this, and it helps others to prevent recurrences.
Better to publicize it and raise awareness, than to let it keep happening.

 

[bianco]

This is but the latest in a string of refusals to allow service dogs to accompany veterans with mental disabilities like depression or PTSD. Last August, police in New Jersey kicked Jared Goering and his service dog, Gator, off the boardwalk, mockingly asking him if “all veterans get service dogs.”

No worries, sack the cops and ship them off to the latest warzone.
Then pay the mocked veteran $100,000 in compensation.

This issue is a vet not in a warzone but too frightened to go to a restaurant.

Yes I know.
Some time in a warzone might wake up the mocking cops.
A dose of depression and PTSD on return for example.