| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakeshow03
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 3078
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
Of everyone in that video, why would you give HER the benefit of the doubt about being the one who says something privately or quietly? She clearly wanted to let everyone know her opinion; you're either the type to make a big ass scene like that or you're not, and she clearly was.
So not only is this person handicapped in some way (from serving the country apparently) but let's put them in the corner too like a pariah? If the dog was trying to snag some droppings from her table then maybe get crazy, but Service dogs are trained and mind their own; she should've taken some notes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | governator wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
Well, she's not the arbitor of who is and isn't abusing the service animal program is she? I mean, that's what drives me nuts.
If you feel that is happening, call the authorities.
And why he may be able bodied, perhaps it is an emotional need service dog? |
It's odd you consider the woman a representation of a society the enables those who are offended, but not the guy who needs a dog to get through a meal at a restaurant. |
I think in this case you give the veteran the benefit of the doubt (unless someone can prove he is abusing the system/lying about the therapy dog) while the woman, wouldn't even listen to explanation and was just straight rude. The law sides with the veteran in this case. If she is that upset about this circumstances then she should do it by challanging the law or the lax nature of it |
Maybe what triggered her was the fact that her husband was also a veteran and he's not being treated as special as the guy with the dog. |
you mean the veteran who went to a foreign hellhole and risked his life at the request of his country and now has nightmares, flashbacks, difficulty sleeping and anxiety that sometimes causes problems with his family, friends and co-workers? Yeah, not sure he should be rewarded with such special treatment as having a companion dog that may provide a slight reduction in those "mild" symptoms.  |
I won't speculate about his war history since I (nor you) know him. He is in fact receiving special treatment in regards to being allowed to have a dog sit with him in a restaurant that seemingly otherwise bans them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakeshow03
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 3078
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vanexelent wrote: | | adkindo wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | governator wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
Well, she's not the arbitor of who is and isn't abusing the service animal program is she? I mean, that's what drives me nuts.
If you feel that is happening, call the authorities.
And why he may be able bodied, perhaps it is an emotional need service dog? |
It's odd you consider the woman a representation of a society the enables those who are offended, but not the guy who needs a dog to get through a meal at a restaurant. |
I think in this case you give the veteran the benefit of the doubt (unless someone can prove he is abusing the system/lying about the therapy dog) while the woman, wouldn't even listen to explanation and was just straight rude. The law sides with the veteran in this case. If she is that upset about this circumstances then she should do it by challanging the law or the lax nature of it |
Maybe what triggered her was the fact that her husband was also a veteran and he's not being treated as special as the guy with the dog. |
you mean the veteran who went to a fore
ign hellhole and risked his life at the request of his country and now has nightmares, flashbacks, difficulty sleeping and anxiety that sometimes causes problems with his family, friends and co-workers? Yeah, not sure he should be rewarded with such special treatment as having a companion dog that may provide a slight reduction in those "mild" symptoms. |
I won't speculate about his war history since I (nor you) know him. He is in fact receiving special treatment in regards to being allowed to have a dog sit with him in a restaurant that seemingly otherwise bans them. |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67575
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vanexelent wrote: | | lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
I really hope you 2 are joshing. Even if so it's in poor taste.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
I really hope you 2 are joshing. Even if so it's in poor taste. |
of-course they're joking, but it's really ordinary "vanilla" humor. Not really that extreme or offensive |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67575
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lucky_Shot wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
I really hope you 2 are joshing. Even if so it's in poor taste. |
of-course they're joking, but it's really ordinary "vanilla" humor. Not really that extreme or offensive |
OK. Our sensitivity levels are different.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
What she is wishing for would be a violation of ADA. You cannot separate those with service animals in their own area. It's sweet that she wants to put all the disabled people in their own island, but that really isn't any different than thinking minorities are nasty and not wanting to eat or be around them.
If she doesn't want to eat near a service animal, she has every right to get up, take her food to go, and start working on a new protest movement against dogs cuz they are nasty.
But she does not have the right to interfere with a service animal. That, is a misdemeanor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakeshow03
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 3078
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
I really hope you 2 are joshing. Even if so it's in poor taste. |
It's satire. No one would ever say someone in a wheel chair has "special privileges " yet because someone has a condition of the mind some seem to think their aid is isn't warranted or should be secluded because of it which is insane |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thugnomoe
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 14660
Location: unfortunately not Los Angeles anymore
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
that lady is a crazy B.
the dude she's with needs to handle that crap.. he needs to sit her down and explain to her.. "look.. you're psycho.. I'm leaving you." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38771
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lets not forget that the TSA also employs service dogs as well, and I'm sure they walk around everywhere around the airport even the food service areas.
This lady obviously had something else going wrong in her life which is why she decided to lash out. The poor people in this situation just ended up on the wrong end of her that day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakeshow03 wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
Of everyone in that video, why would you give HER the benefit of the doubt about being the one who says something privately or quietly? She clearly wanted to let everyone know her opinion; you're either the type to make a big ass scene like that or you're not, and she clearly was.
So not only is this person handicapped in some way (from serving the country apparently) but let's put them in the corner too like a pariah? If the dog was trying to snag some droppings from her table then maybe get crazy, but Service dogs are trained and mind their own; she should've taken some notes |
i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
What she is wishing for would be a violation of ADA. You cannot separate those with service animals in their own area. It's sweet that she wants to put all the disabled people in their own island, but that really isn't any different than thinking minorities are nasty and not wanting to eat or be around them.
If she doesn't want to eat near a service animal, she has every right to get up, take her food to go, and start working on a new protest movement against dogs cuz they are nasty.
But she does not have the right to interfere with a service animal. That, is a misdemeanor. |
she doesnt want to put the people in their own area. she wants the dog to be places away from the people. dont try to make it about the people when its clear she aint feeling Snoopy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
What she is wishing for would be a violation of ADA. You cannot separate those with service animals in their own area. It's sweet that she wants to put all the disabled people in their own island, but that really isn't any different than thinking minorities are nasty and not wanting to eat or be around them.
If she doesn't want to eat near a service animal, she has every right to get up, take her food to go, and start working on a new protest movement against dogs cuz they are nasty.
But she does not have the right to interfere with a service animal. That, is a misdemeanor. |
she doesnt want to put the people in their own area. she wants the dog to be places away from the people. dont try to make it about the people when its clear she aint feeling Snoopy. |
Separating a service animal from its owner is a violation of ADA. There are glucose alert dogs for people suffering from diabetes, and seeing eye dogs for the blind, for instance as well.
She's entitled to have her opinion and feelings about dogs and she can think they are as nasty as she likes. I don't agree with her view, but I have no issues with her holding that opinion. And so if you feel that way, you're free to leave the premises. Same thing if you don't like a minority group. Hey, you don't like my people, you are free in this country to hate me for my skin color all you like, take your food to go, and leave.
It's unfortunate, but we've gotten to the point where the idea of being heard means simply being louder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67575
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakeshow03 wrote: | | jodeke wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | | lakeshow03 wrote: |
You know who also bothers me? Those people in special chairs with wheels, I mean cmon, the rest of us use our legs like suckers you should too! |
I hear you. It's Government overreach that forces businesses to install ramps. Leave it to the free market to decide if wheel chair ramps should be in restaurants. |
I really hope you 2 are joshing. Even if so it's in poor taste. |
It's satire. No one would ever say someone in a wheel chair has "special privileges " yet because someone has a condition of the mind some seem to think their aid is isn't warranted or should be secluded because of it which is insane |
OK, I refer you to my response to Lucky_Shot. Maybe I'm a little to sensitive when challenged people are the butt of satire.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | numero-ocho wrote: | She went overboard and maybe she IS just an a-- or maybe this is the result of being fed up with other people who abuse the service animal designation.
If you're required to have a placard to use a handicapped parking space why can't they come up with an ID for people who have a legitimate medical need for service animals? |
now looky there. someone with a full on legit comment that matches ALL of what happened. not some twist to suit his/her way of thinking. Thank you ocho. |
At no point did she accuse the man of abusing the service animal program though. Even in follow up interviews she didn't mention program abuse not even once.
She just said its her opinion that dogs are nasty (to her she repeated) and she doesn't think she should have to eat around them.
It's like the tantrum a child throws when they are told to go to bed. "But I don't wanna wahhh" |
who would even know if someone abused the service animal program aside from a vet that deals with service animals or someone that is a family member to a vet that has one? Or someone who works for that eatery or has their own eatery and they have all the rules lined out.
What the women did say is that she wished there was a setup where no dogs would be in the same place people eat. OR at least have a designated area for them..Service dogs or no service dogs. Thats what she felt. Did she have to go off about it? Probably not. But we have no idea who said what to the women to set her off. We have no idea how that conversation was going prior to the recording. We see her on fire going off, so it makes her look like the crazy one. How do we know if the lady wasnt leaving early and talking loud enough that someone could hear her but still under her breath "oh my gosh..i can't stand when people bring dogs into places where people eat..its just nast"
Then someone hears it.."What did you say? Mam, thats a service dog....You have no right....."
And all hell broke loose. i bet you thats exactly what happened. Because you could see she was up at the desk looking like she just completed paying for her meal(which she said was nasty too.) Now was the food actually nasty or did she say that because some folks that worked there were bothering her about her feelings on dogs and eateries? We will never know. |
What she is wishing for would be a violation of ADA. You cannot separate those with service animals in their own area. It's sweet that she wants to put all the disabled people in their own island, but that really isn't any different than thinking minorities are nasty and not wanting to eat or be around them.
If she doesn't want to eat near a service animal, she has every right to get up, take her food to go, and start working on a new protest movement against dogs cuz they are nasty.
But she does not have the right to interfere with a service animal. That, is a misdemeanor. |
she doesnt want to put the people in their own area. she wants the dog to be places away from the people. dont try to make it about the people when its clear she aint feeling Snoopy. |
Separating a service animal from its owner is a violation of ADA. There are glucose alert dogs for people suffering from diabetes, and seeing eye dogs for the blind, for instance as well.
She's entitled to have her opinion and feelings about dogs and she can think they are as nasty as she likes. I don't agree with her view, but I have no issues with her holding that opinion. And so if you feel that way, you're free to leave the premises. Same thing if you don't like a minority group. Hey, you don't like my people, you are free in this country to hate me for my skin color all you like, take your food to go, and leave.
It's unfortunate, but we've gotten to the point where the idea of being heard means simply being louder. |
you're still not listening. you're googling and pasting everything about the law. No where did i say this woman knew the actual law. she most likely does not know the laws regarding service dogs. MOST people dont. You have to have a family member/friend or you yourself need to have a dog in order to even be thinking about what laws apply to service dogs. thats not even something you google just cause. You need a reason to think about something like that. So save your fingers. No need to tell me or any of us about the laws. this woman did not know the laws. she was going off how she felt in the moment and how she felt about pets being where she eats. Thats it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
you are again talking about her vs a person. She's referring purely to the Animal. no she doesnt get how the animal and the person go hand in hand in this service dog scenario. she just wants the dog away from her while she's eating. thats it.
So no need to try to use bad analogies in reference to actual people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
you are again talking about her vs a person. She's referring purely to the Animal. no she doesnt get how the animal and the person go hand in hand in this service dog scenario. she just wants the dog away from her while she's eating. thats it.
So no need to try to use bad analogies in reference to actual people. |
So its okay for her to respond like that? If not what are we arguing here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
you are again talking about her vs a person. She's referring purely to the Animal. no she doesnt get how the animal and the person go hand in hand in this service dog scenario. she just wants the dog away from her while she's eating. thats it.
So no need to try to use bad analogies in reference to actual people. |
I don't agree it's a bad analogy at all, but ok, I'll play.
Let's say i'm a vegetarian and you're near me eating a hot dog. Is it acceptable for me to get in your face about how nasty meat is and suggest all meat eaters eat separately? I just want the meat away from me while I'm eating. That's it.
If that's what I want, isn't the proper course of action to take my kale and go somewhere else since that person is well within their right to eat a hot dog? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
you are again talking about her vs a person. She's referring purely to the Animal. no she doesnt get how the animal and the person go hand in hand in this service dog scenario. she just wants the dog away from her while she's eating. thats it.
So no need to try to use bad analogies in reference to actual people. |
I don't agree it's a bad analogy at all, but ok, I'll play.
Let's say i'm a vegetarian and you're near me eating a hot dog. Is it acceptable for me to get in your face about how nasty meat is and suggest all meat eaters eat separately? I just want the meat away from me while I'm eating. That's it.
If that's what I want, isn't the proper course of action to take my kale and go somewhere else since that person is well within their right to eat a hot dog? |
still a bad analogy.
a dog is not a person.
but some people view their dogs as if they were.
some people view dogs as if they're animals and dont need to be around humans while humans are eating.
a service dog might as well be a person since its a helper/assistant. So it to some degree gets person like rights. Everyone does not know this, nor do some people care because in their minds. no matter your reason for having that dog by your side i still dont want to be smelling dog, or wondering if some dog hair or dog fleas have hopped in my grits and hot cakes.
and why is no one talking about the fact the woman said the food was nasty too  (now was that true or was that said in anger?) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nickuku wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | i didnt really imply she said it quietly. i said she probably said it under her breath but loud enough for someone else to hear it. which got the blow up going. the other person said something to her about it and she went off...which is the part that the video caught. this is usually what happens in these type of situations when you see someone going off. something sparked it. doesnt mean what sparked it should've been a spark to begin with. But i was just saying we are not seeing the entire moment that lead to the moments on the video.
Hey thats her choice. If she doesnt like the idea of ANY animals(dogs) eating where she eats thats her business. doesn't mean her business will become the law. doesnt make it right either. you have to understand, everyone isnt in love with animals like some other people may be. some people see pets as just that pets, not a part of the family. some people would never in life kiss a dog/pet in the mouth but we know there are many who do and will. some people think thats beyond nasty. others think its ok and a good thing. some people will allow their dogs to sleep with them in the bed. others will not. some people allow their dogs to sleep in the house even when its not super cold/raining outside. Others do not, some of the others think dogs should be outside. |
No one has an issue with her opinion even if we disagree. The issue is how she chose to express it and the fact that what she would like to have happen, is currently against the law.
It's kind of interesting, because I feel like we had (and probably still have) this similar situation when we had people with HIV/AIDS in the same establishments. If someone thinks that is nasty, is it ok for them to respond in the manner that she did? |
you are again talking about her vs a person. She's referring purely to the Animal. no she doesnt get how the animal and the person go hand in hand in this service dog scenario. she just wants the dog away from her while she's eating. thats it.
So no need to try to use bad analogies in reference to actual people. |
So its okay for her to respond like that? If not what are we arguing here? |
i'm not arguing anything. Ring is bringing up analogies referring to people. she was not referring to the Vet at all. She was referring to an animal. she doesnt like animals next to her omelette. she thinks its nasty.
if this woman had a dog at home. she's the type of dog owner that would make her dog stay outside of her home. she would not allow her dog to be inside the house. the dog would be out in the back with a dog house. thats it. thats her viewpoint.
she knows nothing about Service dog rules. and almost doesnt care because at the bottom line she still feels its nasty. which means she wont be able to eat in any place when a blind person, a vet, etc has a service dog when they walk in. it is...what it is. she will have to get up and leave. Her blowing up most likely had to do with her making a statement that others heard but didnt like and they tried to get at her about the statement. Then she blew up and got loud. without that confrontation. She would've mumbled "I can't stand dogs by my food." paid her check and left. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
