Restaurant refuses Iraq War Veteran and service dog

reply to post by HomerinNC

What the what? Over a dog really? Because he didn't believe it was actually a service dog? Yea the whole thing is, kind of more then stupid. The guy said he would allow legitimate service dogs/animals in but he believed that was not the case in this particular case and so got worked up over that. This thing belongs in the funny papers more then anything else. I mean don't know if that is discrimination or just a bad case of mistaken identity or who the hell knows. In any case it escalated way farther then it should of.

reply to post by InhaleExhale


Your consistency to pick out small phrases and ignore the phrases within and after them is really incredibly adolescent. I'm not even going to entertain more of your silly posts with a reply beyond this:

I clearly said that I don't see how it's neccessary to have a service dog unless someone can explained to me how it's not possible for someone with PTSD to eat breakfast without one. It's amazing how that part of the statement was magically removed when you quoted it. Why can't it be tied up outside? Is the real problem that you don't have an answer

Your facetious remarks, leaving out sections of quotes, and some emoticons isn't going to explain anything about it to me, sorry.

I can almost guarantee you that I have a lot more traumatic stress in my life than this war veteran and I don't require a canine companion to eat breakfast in a privately-owned restaurant that refuses admittance of animals.

reply to post by HomerinNC


The guy is a #ing jerk, no question.

In a free country though, we should have the right to make stupid decisions like this.

reply to post by purplemer

No this is a thread about a disabled person.. The thread plays on the fact that he is a veteran like he deserves something extra because of that... Simple as.....

NO that is the WHO, in the "who what why where and when."

its called journalism. I doubt the journalists covering the story wanted to make it all mysterious. What can we do, ignore the facts as presented?

"Some where, someone, who had some sort of disability, had a conflict over something with some one else........oooohhh aahhhh"

The mystery unfolds as we make you guess what was happening to who and why......oooohh ..

Carmen Sandiago style news coverage...I love it.

reply to post by beezzer


I never expected relies to start with. Without the VETERAN TAG on this story.....it's a non-story. Period the end. Restaurants refuse service to people on the dailey all over the nation. As stated, the vet tag rose this story up and nothing else.

Here's a news flash: Stop the wars & the talk of wars. Bring the troops home to protect OUR border not some one else's. Then we want have a need for service animals or Veterans. Just a damn abstract thought I had called PEACE.

The reason I posted the story is because I'm a veteran MYSELF, and it boils my blood when someone treats one of my brothers like crap.
Do I believe we should be treated better then anyone else? No, but I dont think we should be treated like crap or dismissed out of hand.
WE are the ones that put our life on the line when asked to in service of this country. ALL of us would die gladly if it saves ONE AMERICAN.
WE are the ones that stand on the line during our enlistments so you can armchair quarterback and talk about how 'bad' you have it here. You might THINK its REAL BAD here, but we still have SOME freedoms. The right to have firearms hasnt been taken away YET, but go to some other countries, you cannot OWN a firearm.
In some countries, you cant be vocal about your country's leadership, where here, the leadership is trashed nightly on late night talk. Let me give you an example: In Thailand, you CANNOT talk bad about the Imperial family, or you will go to jail.'
In some communist countries, you just disappear in the middle of the night.
In this country, you are free to choose what religion that you desire to follow, and be free from persecution. Try that in the mid-east.
The reasons why you have all these freedoms are because of people like myself, the person mentioned in the OP, and other members here that served in our military.
I know haters are gonna hate, and many of you are furiously typing out your response, talking about how the military serves the corporations, the govt is taking away all our freedoms, etc. That's okay, you have the right to talk half baked nonsense. But do you know who made that possible? The soldiers, sailors, soldiers and marines of this nation.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by HomerinNC

 

What the what? Over a dog really? Because he didn't believe it was actually a service dog? Yea the whole thing is, kind of more then stupid. The guy said he would allow legitimate service dogs/animals in but he believed that was not the case in this particular case and so got worked up over that. This thing belongs in the funny papers more then anything else. I mean don't know if that is discrimination or just a bad case of mistaken identity or who the hell knows. In any case it escalated way farther then it should of.

No mistaken identity here, he had the paperwork with him stating it was a service animal. The rest. owner decided it wasnt legitimate, as if he had the right to pick and choose what he thinks is legitimate.

I dont think the armed forces on any western antion has made human rights possible.
It's the civilians who work tirelessly to promote equlaity and fairness that do this.
the people in the military dont do that.

reply to post by HomerinNC


Come down off the Veteran high horse Homer. You joined. There's no draft. You joined. For what ever reason you joined...you joined them, they did not join you. I do not fear an enemy that is invisable. I do however fear our Government and the way the conduct their wars. The correct word here is "occupation" not war. Want real invaders? 25million illegals simply walked across our southern border. How dare any of you say the military is protecting us. If those 25 million illegals that are already here were the boggey men you and so many others worry is gonna get us. We are already got......because the enemy is inside the gates. Not an eneny living in a damn cave eating rocks and dirt.

We as a country have laid waste to two other countries in the past 20 years and you all are proud of that fact. When will you all get it. It aint about security it;s about controll. Them controlling us...all of us.

Originally posted by WilsonWilson
I dont think the armed forces on any western antion has made human rights possible.
It's the civilians who work tirelessly to promote equlaity and fairness that do this.
the people in the military dont do that.

I guess that little military fracas in the British Colonies in the late 18th century was not responsible for the creation of the United States then? I guess (according to you) the soldiers and sailors that risked being hung by the neck for treason by the British King George III had no bearing on the outcome then?

Do you actually read what you write, or actually believe that?

Human mouths rarely come into contact with external bacteria. Dogs' mouths, in contrast, are rarely cleaned in most cases. Dogs also have a tendency to sniff around and eat bacteria-filled waste — including rancid food and feces — whenever they are given the opportunity to do so. Contrary to popular belief, dogs' mouths are far dirtier than the mouths of the typical human being.

EDIT: Lost most of my post...oh well.

My point is that dogs are not that clean. Definitely no cleaner than human beings. A little research will tell you that. Hell, if you let them they'll put their face in their own feces. You want that in a place that serves food???

reply to post by HomerinNC


Ya like I said the whole thing is weird, there saying that he personally didn't believe that the guy in question and his service dog were the actual thing and so proceeded to kick them out. It had more to do with the fact not about veterans or there service dogs. But this whole scenario in particular. In the vid I think he even said he has nothing against veterans or people but he did it because he believed the guy was faking it, or who knows what was really going on....So there you go.

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

i was referencing it to make a point, refusing to take the pictures because they are a Same sex couple is discrimination under law, and multiple people said a store has the right to refuse service,

a man gets told to leave a restaurant because his animal, so that would mean this restaurant has the right to refuse service?

Ah, but you are blurring the lines of both instances.

The state the photographer was working in does not legalize gay marriage. She was punished, and precedent set, for 'discrimination' against a gay wedding (not the people, but the event), when her own state has not validated gay weddings. That was injust, in my opinion. Nothing to do with her opinion or their gayness, everything to do with demanding a business proactively obey a policy that does not even exist in their state.

In this case, the man has valid documentation of the dog as a disability companion and the state the restaurant owner was working validates disability laws. Nothing to do with his opinion or the dog, everything to do with demanding a business proactively obey a policy that DOES exist in their state.

If it's a law for business, you obey it if you wish to stay in business. If it is not a law, there is no reason to have to obey it. By shifting the focus to this being an issue of the business owner's "opinion" -- rather than the business owner's requirement to abide by the state's own policies -- you create a comparison between these two events, but that is not the point which should be under debate in either case.

Every individual has the right to their opinion. A business entity granted license by the state is required to abide by the state's policies for business. That is all.

*

PS#1: Separately though I think anybody refusing a veteran with a service dog deserves to be shunned by social response even if the law does nothing.

PS#2: But I agree dogs are not ideal in food environments. But it is the law. So, just like it costs a lot more money to arrange ramps and large bathrooms for wheelchairs and prime parking spaces, perhaps a restaurant should arrange one seat in a far back corner in case of guide dogs. The law is the law, as inconvenient as it may be.

reply to post by LightOrange

I clearly said that I don't see how it's neccessary to have a service dog unless someone can explained to me how it's not possible for someone with PTSD to eat breakfast without one.

why not educate yourself on what a person suffering might need.

It's amazing how that part of the statement was magically removed when you quoted it. Why can't it be tied up outside? Is the real problem that you don't have an answer

NO, no magic, I quote what I want to reply too.


The dog could have been tied up outside, maybe the owner wanted his companion with him, maybe he was just being smart ass.

I can almost guarantee you that I have a lot more traumatic stress in my life than this war veteran and I don't require a canine companion to eat breakfast in a privately-owned restaurant that refuses admittance of animals.

How can you do that?

Your not very bright are you?


Take care

Again, I also don't see why he would have died or suffered a break down if he just tied his mutt outside while he ate. This guy is a drama queen and an embarrassment to everyone who has worn the uniform. Before I enlisted, as a teenager I was a gang member and I saw some real traumatic sh---. I was stabbed in the face and I still have a 4 inch scar on my left side to remind me of those lovely days...every time I look in the mirror. Couple that with the action I saw in Iraq and I bet this nancy has not seen half the things I went through. Believe me, he does not NEED a dog to do anything. Stupid soft/sensitive therapists and fellow enablers out there make him think he does.

Originally posted by LogicalRazor
Again, I also don't see why he would have died or suffered a break down if he just tied his mutt outside while he ate.

You really couldn't do this yourself?

This guy is a drama queen and an embarrassment to everyone who has worn the uniform.

According to who? You? As if your opinion makes it so. I haven't seen any movement of veterans against this guy.

Before I enlisted, as a teenager I was a gang member and I saw some real traumatic sh---. I was stabbed in the face and I still have a 4 inch scar on my left side to remind me of those lovely days...every time I look in the mirror. Couple that with the action I saw in Iraq and I bet this nancy has not seen half the things I went through.

Oh really tough. As if any of this is relevant in any way.

Believe me, he does not NEED a dog to do anything. Stupid soft/sensitive therapists and fellow enablers out there make him think he does.

So now you're his shrink? You apparently know how he thinks. How he feels. Are you psychic? I mean unless you're him and bashing yourself for kicks you are just making bs up.

I think shifting this to a debate about whether a veteran is an emotional pansy does a great disservice to veterans as well as to the OP and the thread itself.

It is not relevant whether or not he could have left the dog outside. What is relevant is that he has legal documentation, the restaurant is a legal business, and they are required to provide for/allow those with legal status as disabled to have guide animals.

Who by the way are often cleaner than half the children I've known.

Originally posted by RedCairo
I think shifting this to a debate about whether a veteran is an emotional pansy does a great disservice to veterans as well as to the OP and the thread itself.

It is not relevant whether or not he could have left the dog outside. What is relevant is that he has legal documentation, the restaurant is a legal business, and they are required to provide for/allow those with legal status as disabled to have guide animals.

Oh well in that case we should stop disservicing "the OP and thread itself" and stop talking altogether, because as long as we just say "law is law" there is no discussion on this topic.

Some of us, however, think the law is pretty near-sighted and strange and would like to discuss it. How foolish of us to think that an online forum would be a place to express a multitude of opinions that may or may not concatenate with federal law.

The complaint was the insult of the individual and the validity of his PTSD.

The rest was merely opinion, such as you describe everyone having.