• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tightening the leash on fake service dogs

Risky Thicket said:
Staying with the topic of service dogs, what I am hearing Renae and a few others say is that you all would like more government involvement and you would support the additional funding it would require. Good on you for that.

There are TABs (*temporarily able bodied) people who do abuse the use of dogs (animals) as service animals for people with disabilities, yes. People who do that, non-disabled people, are likely to abuse any number of rights and/or privileges such as using the last stall, often the handicapped stall, in a public restroom when other stalls are available. It is a character flaw.

There are also people with disabilities who have service dogs that have been poorly trained. There are people with service dogs who are lax owners who do not or cannot maintain the level of training necessary for the dog to function as a service dog. There are many reasons that might be the case.

This is not a small topic.

*Many, perhaps most, people will have a disability before the die. Think about that. That means you and/or someone close to you, someone who means the world to you. With that in mind often people active in the disability community refer to people who have not yet received their disability or disabilities as TABs.

We are probably going to get a disability. We'd rather not think about that.

Three things you don't know is when it will be, how you will be disabled and how you will function in the world as a disabled person. Often when talking to an adventitiously disabled adult about their newly acquired disability you will hear them say, "I never thought this would happen to me."

What we do for others today we do for ourselves and people we love in the future.
Click to expand...

Worth repeating!

:applaud
 
Risky Thicket said:
Staying with the topic of service dogs, what I am hearing Renae and a few others say is that you all would like more government involvement and you would support the additional funding it would require. Good on you for that.

There are TABs (*temporarily able bodied) people who do abuse the use of dogs (animals) as service animals for people with disabilities, yes. People who do that, non-disabled people, are likely to abuse any number of rights and/or privileges such as using the last stall, often the handicapped stall, in a public restroom when other stalls are available. It is a character flaw.

There are also people with disabilities who have service dogs that have been poorly trained. There are people with service dogs who are lax owners who do not or cannot maintain the level of training necessary for the dog to function as a service dog. There are many reasons that might be the case.

This is not a small topic.



*Many, perhaps most, people will have a disability before the die. Think about that. That means you and/or someone close to you, someone who means the world to you. With that in mind often people active in the disability community refer to people who have not yet received their disability or disabilities as TABs.

We are probably going to get a disability. We'd rather not think about that.

Three things you don't know is when it will be, how you will be disabled and how you will function in the world as a disabled person. Often when talking to an adventitiously disabled adult about their newly acquired disability you will hear them say, "I never thought this would happen to me."

What we do for others today we do for ourselves and people we love in the future.
Click to expand...

So no standards, "cause it might be you" guilt tripping, a blathering attempt to play the "Ah ha hypocrite" card and basically nothing of substance.

The government has a role in our lives, when necessary. I've never said otherwise. In this case, ensuring the use of service dogs is proper, not abused and safe for all is a valid concern to public safety. The crackdown isn't on SERVICE DOGS, it's on people who just buy a "Service dog" vest and bring their pets into places.

This is not a good thing, it's bad for the dogs, bad for everyone.

It's obvious you are far more interested in trying to score some political points against me then to discuss the actual issue.

Why do I draw that conclusion?

You make this big play on about how "You never know when YOU'LL BE DISABLED!!!" No, really? I'd like to think that should that terrible moment arrive, a service dog, trained, and ready could be my companion, and that if I were out in public, my service dog wouldn't be attacked by Joe's pet he slapped a vest on. Or not welcome because others, abusing the system have made a business decide it's not worth the hassle.

You don't care about the issue, you just wanted some reason to try and rail against me, and it's foolishness.
 
Renae said:
Repeating what? A partisan off topic blather? If that's your cup of tea...
Click to expand...
/whispers having a disability and using rights afforded by the ADA isn't partisan

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
/whispers having a disability and using rights afforded by the ADA isn't partisan

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Uhm... what are you on about? I'm FOR protecting those rights... I get the suspicion someones not reading the OP at all..
 
Renae said:
Uhm... what are you on about? I'm FOR protecting those rights... I get the suspicion someones not reading the OP at all..
Click to expand...
No, I read it. I also noticed you labeled Risky's post as somehow partisan, when it's not.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
No, I read it. I also noticed you labeled Risky's post as somehow partisan, when it's not.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes it was, it was a blathering attack on me, see that first line. It meandered and wandered and ignored the reason for the crack down.
 
Renae said:
Yes it was, it was a blathering attack on me, see that first line. It meandered and wandered and ignored the reason for the crack down.
Click to expand...
So, I take it that an attack on you is an attack on the good name of the Republican Party and any reasonable concern for policy changes is boring?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
I don't see the point of increased regulation. If your dog bites somebody, whether it's a service animal or not is irrelevant.
 
APB212 said:
I don't see the point of increased regulation. If your dog bites somebody, whether it's a service animal or not is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

It's stopping people from claiming pets as service dogs.
 
I see the problem as being more the service animal (or comfort animal) thing in general. There is no standard on what actually qualifies as a service. My wife is an English Professor and they have to fight people bringing in obviously untrained service dogs, comfort cats, one guy even brought in an iguana. It can be disruptive...especially when the service animal is as high strung and unstable as their owner.

I dont know if anyone needs to get all spun up about it...but better definition and policy will definitely improve some circumstances.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Thanks, brother. I hope I don't trip getting off this soap box and break my leg. :shock:
Click to expand...

That’s always a risk that comes with expressing your beliefs and opinions. But the box also allows folks to share information. I personally think you need to keep your soap box and continue to use it. Some folks might learn from your comments and/or find them to be useful.
 
Renae said:
Did you not read the article?
Click to expand...

I skimmed it. Some woman's dog bit another dog. What does it matter if her dog was a real service dog or not?
 
APB212 said:
I skimmed it. Some woman's dog bit another dog. What does it matter if her dog was a real service dog or not?
Click to expand...

Right. So see, you have a service dog trained to do service dog things. Joe comes along with his pet, who attacks your dog. You don't see the problem here?
 
Renae said:
Right. So see, you have a service dog trained to do service dog things. Joe comes along with his pet, who attacks your dog. You don't see the problem here?
Click to expand...

Joe is an irresponsible pet owner. I don't see how being a service pet or not is relevant.
 
APB212 said:
Joe is an irresponsible pet owner. I don't see how being a service pet or not is relevant.
Click to expand...

A REAL service dog, is trained not to behave like that. Joe's dog isn't. Joe bought a 20 dollar vest, declared his dog a service dog, so he could take it everywhere, places service dogs are allowed in.
 
Renae said:
A REAL service dog, is trained not to behave like that. Joe's dog isn't. Joe bought a 20 dollar vest, declared his dog a service dog, so he could take it everywhere, places service dogs are allowed in.
Click to expand...

The problem is that Joe hasn't taught his dog to behave properly, not that he's put a fake service vest on it.
 
Renae said:
Do you like the idea of animals being abused?
Click to expand...

You realize this has nothing to do with animals, right? The seething hatred from the left towards anyone to the right of Karl Marx is all they have anymore. Total waste of time. How often do we see new membership here anymore? Libs are ruining this place.
 
Renae said:
So no standards, "cause it might be you" guilt tripping, a blathering attempt to play the "Ah ha hypocrite" card and basically nothing of substance.

The government has a role in our lives, when necessary. I've never said otherwise. In this case, ensuring the use of service dogs is proper, not abused and safe for all is a valid concern to public safety. The crackdown isn't on SERVICE DOGS, it's on people who just buy a "Service dog" vest and bring their pets into places.

This is not a good thing, it's bad for the dogs, bad for everyone.
Click to expand...

If you are out there dialing 1-800 SNITCH to report your neighbors and knocking on doors crusading to end this abuse of animals being misrepresented as service animals you must certainly be working with the ASPCA. I am certain they would have been one of the first organizations you called.

I can see you are really into this. Good, then be a positive part of change.

And a word of advice: DO NOT lead the parade. DO NOT do anything on behalf of people with disabilities without their requesting and/or approving your effort. By all means work WITH people with disabilities but NEVER without them.

What organizations of people with disabilities are you working with? What have your legal contacts said?

I'm also curious as to what Texas service dog training businesses you are working with.



It's obvious you are far more interested in trying to score some political points against me then to discuss the actual issue.
Click to expand...

It would be a terrible thing if service dogs ever became a partisan issue. As far as I know they never have. Maybe they are in San Antonio, but I am pretty certain service dogs are not a partisan issue in Texas.

You make this big play on about how "You never know when YOU'LL BE DISABLED!!!" No, really?
Click to expand...

Unless you are born with a disability or acquire one fairly early in life. In adulthood acquiring a disability is often unexpected and rarely prepared for. Do not make the assumption that you can understand what disabled people face in a non-disabled world. You cannot.

I'd like to think that should that terrible moment arrive, a service dog, trained, and ready could be my companion, and that if I were out in public, my service dog wouldn't be attacked by Joe's pet he slapped a vest on.
Click to expand...

As I am aware and in my experience the standard procedure is the that the person with the disability is assessed, approved or disapproved, assigned a dog and is trained with the dog and continually assessed before the dog is assigned. It is a process and depending on the person and the person's need from beginning to end it can be a lengthy process. Even then, and again depending on the person, the disability, and the dog, the disabled person and the dog may be reassessed at future dates, even years.

That is necessary, and I personally see the value in it and the need for it. It is not inexpensive.

IMHO and limited experience the most consistently and best trained service dogs are seeing eye dogs. I won't go into it but surely as you've looked into all this you might see (pun intended) why I am of that opinion.

I was once in a bookstore with a blind friend. She had a very well trained black lab. I suddenly found myself caught in a narrow isle between her dog and another blind person with a black lab. Two blind people who did not know each other with dogs walking down the same narrow isle toward each other in a book store. What were the odds? LOL. Of course neither blind person was aware of the other blind person until one of the dogs began to snarl.

I'm hard of hearing. I cannot tell sound direction unless I can see the source of the sound - and that's if I can hear it. I did hear the snarls but I couldn't tell which dog was snarling. Both blind owners responded to their dogs telling the to stop it as the pulled in their leashes. Neither owner knowing why their dog was snarling. I'm standing in between with my hands on my nuts trying to explain to my friend that there was another blind person with a another black lab.

Blind dogs and their masters are generally very well trained and the dogs are selected in part on lack of aggressive. But it happened. Bad training? Bad handlers? Me in the middle? I'll never know. **** happens even under the best of times.

To be continued.
 
Last edited:
Chris Slavin was in an elevator a couple years ago with Earle, her yellow Lab service dog, sitting calmly beside her wheelchair. The elevator doors opened and in walked a woman holding a purse. In the purse was a teacup poodle the color of apricots.

The doors closed just as the poodle spotted Earle. That's when the trouble started. In an instant, the poodle leaped from the purse, flung himself at Earle, and clamped his teeth into the bigger dog's snout, leaving Earle bleeding onto the elevator floor.
Click to expand...

Stupid woman, your dog is not a fashion accessory to just carry around in your purse. Keep your dog under control. At the very least she should be hit with the vet bill if Earle sustained injuries serious enough to require treatment.
 
Or not welcome because others, abusing the system have made a business decide it's not worth the hassle.

You don't care about the issue, you just wanted some reason to try and rail against me, and it's foolishness.
Click to expand...

Part II

Ever talked to a blind person who doesn't know you about their dog? I'm sure you have many times.

You've probably noticed that most - not all - but most blind people will at some point early in the conversation ask you to please not pet their dog. Those are well trained masters who know that as much as they love their dogs their dogs are working. Even lying still on the floor those dogs are working. A good handler/master understands that the it is very important that their dog fully understands the difference between work and play. Much work and much training history and research is behind all that.

Have you ever talked to a deaf or a hard of hearing person with a hearing dog? I am sure you have as well. You probably noticed that frequently their master/handler does ask you not to pet the dog. Some masters do, but in my experience deaf people or hard of hearing people are less strict with their dogs. Is it a matter of training or lack there of or a difference in disability? There are/have been many good discussion about it.

Blind dogs and hearing dogs and their training are most often funded differently. My money says the difference in behavior of dog and master may start there.

We can get into and perhaps should address other types of service dogs and service animals and their training.

We cannot address certification or uniform standards for all service dogs and their disabled owners until we've reviewed and discussed each and every facet of their unique needs, relationships, expectations, behaviors, assessments, trainings and fundings.

A service dog certified by the city of San Antonio might be expected to meet much higher standards than a service dog in Chicago. Throw different disabilities into the mix and different animals.

As a business owner you cannot deny me and my dog entry, with of course limited exceptions. If my dog pee on a bag of rice in Walmart you as the manager have a right to ask me to leave. You can deny me re-entry with my service dog.

If my dog sits quietly on the floor under my table in a restaurant you may not demand that my dog must leave.

Disabled people under federal law are not required to show you as a business proof of their disability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom