Are dogs allowed on restaurant patio’s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd make a complaint about the dogs and not return to that restaurant. It's disgusting when people bring their dogs inside stores and restaurants. Leave them at home!

And you’d be laughed at. But you do you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nor do I want your kids with their runny noses and dirty hands running and screaming around my table or bumping into me or grabbing my legs.

Keep your animals at home, they don't belong inside any business.

No. They belong anywhere they are allowed by the establishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the restaurant. Some allow it. Yes, it's disgusting but a private company can set its parameters. If I know that a restaurant or hotel is pet-friendly, I will avoid it. That's about the best that you can do.

I was in a Whole Foods last week and a patron was wandering around the veggies/fruits with her dog in tow. I was disgusted. I mean, come on. So, I left. I didn't have much to get and was just running through but I will never understand dogs in grocery stores.

Pet owners are a-holes.

I mean, if you're gonna let a dog drive you out of a grocery store, well, that one's on you.

Typical pet owner response. Self righteous, entitled, with zero sense of respect for community or those around you. Because it's all about ME.

Whole Foods does have a "no pets" policy in place. But typical dog owners didn't respect the rules and regulations of the private business.....because rules don't apply to them. I left because their large shepherd was shedding all over the produce. It was disgusting. Done.

Yawwwwn. And you created more work for yourself. You must be so proud. LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do know that if a dirty snotty-nosed kid comes up to me, be it to bite, lick or sniff, I am kicking it. I am not leaving it up to the owner to interpret what the kid will do to me.

Oh, OK. You’re one of those people who equates your dog to a child.

I pity you.

There is a link between serial killers and animal abuse. It's just an exaggerated response to a stupid declaration.

Thank you. Yes, this is what is was getting at. Who would go around kicking dogs?
Of course I wouldn't actually kick a child, however, I have on more than one occasion, been kicked, grabbed or otherwise groped by small children that I did not know.
I was just making a statement that your prodigy does not always act like an angel and there are people who would be annoyed at some of the things your kid does in a restaurant.

No. That isn’t “just” what you were doing. Not on this thread, and not with the stupid parallel you set up earlier. You were signalling that people annoyed by dogs in restaurants and people annoyed by children in restaurants are equally unreasonable. That is what you were doing.

And I pity you because you truly see your dog as equal to a child. You feel that a dog has the same rights as a child to be in a place where unrelated humans go to eat.

You will probably reply that of course you have children, but I believe you are childless as well. I pity you.

DP here. You're gonna have to convince us that the typical dog is less sanitary than a typical child in a restaurant. Because they clearly are not. Little kids spill, slobber, and throw food all over the place. Dogs don't.

By the way, I LOVE kids. I'm just telling it like it is.

No, you just don’t get it. It doesn’t matter if a dog is more sanitary than a child in a restaurant. Children are allowed there because they are PEOPLE. Dogs are not as important as people, so the fact that some people might not appreciate the dog being there means…dogs can’t be there.

It is disturbing and kind of sick that you keep bleating on about whether or not a dog is more sanitary or less annoying than a child, as if that makes a difference in this context.

Nobody gives a crap about your kids except you. Dogs are allowed. Cope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do know that if a dirty snotty-nosed kid comes up to me, be it to bite, lick or sniff, I am kicking it. I am not leaving it up to the owner to interpret what the kid will do to me.

Oh, OK. You’re one of those people who equates your dog to a child.

I pity you.

There is a link between serial killers and animal abuse. It's just an exaggerated response to a stupid declaration.

Thank you. Yes, this is what is was getting at. Who would go around kicking dogs?
Of course I wouldn't actually kick a child, however, I have on more than one occasion, been kicked, grabbed or otherwise groped by small children that I did not know.
I was just making a statement that your prodigy does not always act like an angel and there are people who would be annoyed at some of the things your kid does in a restaurant.

No. That isn’t “just” what you were doing. Not on this thread, and not with the stupid parallel you set up earlier. You were signalling that people annoyed by dogs in restaurants and people annoyed by children in restaurants are equally unreasonable. That is what you were doing.



And I pity you because you truly see your dog as equal to a child. You feel that a dog has the same rights as a child to be in a place where unrelated humans go to eat.

You will probably reply that of course you have children, but I believe you are childless as well. I pity you.

DP here. You're gonna have to convince us that the typical dog is less sanitary than a typical child in a restaurant. Because they clearly are not. Little kids spill, slobber, and throw food all over the place. Dogs don't.

By the way, I LOVE kids. I'm just telling it like it is.

No, you just don’t get it. It doesn’t matter if a dog is more sanitary than a child in a restaurant. Children are allowed there because they are PEOPLE. Dogs are not as important as people, so the fact that some people might not appreciate the dog being there means…dogs can’t be there.

It is disturbing and kind of sick that you keep bleating on about whether or not a dog is more sanitary or less annoying than a child, as if that makes a difference in this context.

Not to mention that there is no dog that is more sanitary than a child. They may not spread food around, but their paws, butt and drool are definitely not more sanitary. And they cause allergies and anxiety in many people. AND some people object to them for religious reasons.

You don't need to eat with your dog unless you are blind.

And yet, you don’t get to decide what others “need” to do or not. It burns your muffins, I know.

[Anonymous]

Yes, unless the management prohibits it. My dog has a drink named after him at one of our local restaurants. He's beloved by the owner and GM and they've made ot clear of you have a problem with him laying there calmly you can leave.

[Anonymous]

I have had two dogs run up to me and bite me. Totally unprovoked. Both owners said I don’t know how that happened, my dog is so friendly. So I guess I have to become a recluse, since dog owners seem to rule the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have had two dogs run up to me and bite me. Totally unprovoked. Both owners said I don’t know how that happened, my dog is so friendly. So I guess I have to become a recluse, since dog owners seem to rule the world.

You have been bitten twice on restaurant patios?