6 ms·

Better to get rid of pet ban :) most are impractical. Animals are our friends and often family

bombcar 2y ago
It's not the good pet owners that are the problem, it's the bad ones. The local hardware store used to allow pets in (mainly dogs) because they have a relatively large pet section. They've stopped this after too many incidents with the dogs relieving themselves on the merchandise.
- eadmund 2y ago
  > They've stopped this after too many incidents with the dogs relieving themselves on the merchandise. Out of curiosity, how does one housetrain a dog such that it respects building interiors other than its own home? Every dog I’ve ever know was very good about knowing not to relieve itself in its own building, but considered every other building fair play.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    I think you train the owners, not the dog. Even I, as untrained as I am, have been able to recognize a dog in the "needs to go". As for marking, that's a separate issue; it's correctly pack training the dog so it doesn't feel the need to mark everything.
  - swatcoder 2y ago
    I don't share your experience. It's usually about surfaces and smells, not home vs away. The misbehaving dogs that the GP mentions are probably not terribly well-behaved around home either.
  - giantg2 2y ago
    "Every dog I’ve ever know was very good about knowing not to relieve itself in its own building, but considered every other building fair play" That's absolutely wild. Every dog I've known, except for a few with issues, seems to know not to relieve themselves in any building if they know not to relieve themselves in their own building. No specialized training, just regular house training.
    - silverquiet 2y ago
      Yeah, I had the same thought - clearly dogs understand the concept of inside/outside which is interesting on its own (I've read that they "din" animals which means it is somewhat instinctual). The only dogs I've ever had were found street dogs and I also never had to housebreak them.
      - bryanlarsen 2y ago
        Do you mean "den animals"? That they instinctually know not to urinate in their den? That makes sense -- pigs instinctually urinate on one side of their pen so I'm sure other animals have similar instincts. Perhaps a hardware store is too big and too non-den like that some dogs don't consider it a den.
        giantg2 2y ago
        I haven't had trouble in stores either though. I've noticed they like to eliminate on grass or grass-like stuff. It's actually hard to get my dog to go on concrete. Also if she gets sick in the house, it's always on the carpet and not on the hard flooring surfaces.
  - ohnoitsahuman 2y ago
    When you bring the dog to a new environment, you watch it like a hawk. As soon as the they get curious about any corner, you correct them immediately. Only take a few hours of this to fix the behavior.
pdonis 2y ago
The problem is, first, many people don't share that attitude towards pets, and second, many places (such as grocery stores and restaurants) find reasons to ban pets that get codified in law, so getting rid of the bans becomes much more difficult.
eyelidlessness 2y ago
Yeah. In the author’s words, it’s the pet bans that are a “racket” and a “disguised class system, where anyone rich and savvy enough to engage with the gatekeeping process gets extra rights”. Ultimately pet bans, in most cases, reduce to a proxy for limiting damage and repair costs. In some cases they reduce to more general liability reduction. In all those cases there is a much more straightforward way to address the intent: insurance. Renter’s insurance, travel insurance, whatever. The only valid cases for banning pets is “you’d be introducing an allergen into a place shared by people with allergies” or “an existing pet is already present and introducing a new one would cause conflicts with the incumbent pet”.
- giantg2 2y ago
  Or contamination vector for food service areas.
  - eyelidlessness 2y ago
    Yeah good point, although I think it may be applied too heavy handed in some cases. Like… foot traffic-only areas of the breakfast service at a hotel that otherwise accepts pets? That’s not meaningfully limiting contamination, it’s just making it harder for pet owners to get a cup of coffee.
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  > a place shared by people with allergies Any public place?
  - eyelidlessness 2y ago
    If by “public place” you mean “place providing services to the public”, sure. Most such places have at least the right to refuse service and no one generally objects to that excluding non-service pets. If you mean publicly owned spaces, I think it’s reasonable to discuss indoor restrictions. Outdoor? Probably not beyond certain specific circumstances and accommodations.
swatcoder 2y ago
That'd work great if people were earnestly considerate and felt like they were part of a community that they understood whose implicit norms they might consider. You don't need bans for stuff like that if people are attentive and thoughtful. People with pets consider other customers in a shop, shopkeepers consider people who are deeply troubled without the support of their pets, and a locally appropriate and nuanced equilibrium shakes out. Unfortunately, we've largely allowed that prerequisite sense of community to erode in many people and many social interactions have become a game of Hungry Hungry Hippos, so formal and rigid policies have to take the place of subjective consideration.
- kiliantics 2y ago
  Your point is valid but if it's a good reason to stick with the ban then maybe we should be employing it to enforce other rules that would have a far greater impact. Not enough people are attentive and thoughtful and yet we allow them to operate massive machines in public spaces which kill tens of thousands per year. I don't think allowing pets on planes and in restaurants could ever have such a magnitude of impact as we have allowed by letting nearly anyone drive a car.
YurgenJurgensen 2y ago
My friends don't shit on my lawn.
johnea 2y ago
"Our family" that was kidnapped off of it's suckling mother's tit? The hypocrisy of pet "ownership" is blatant...

It's not the good pet owners that are the problem, it's the bad ones. The local hardware store used to allow pets in (mainly dogs) because they have a relatively large pet section. They've stopped this after too many incidents with the dogs relieving themselves on the merchandise.

eadmund 2y ago
> They've stopped this after too many incidents with the dogs relieving themselves on the merchandise. Out of curiosity, how does one housetrain a dog such that it respects building interiors other than its own home? Every dog I’ve ever know was very good about knowing not to relieve itself in its own building, but considered every other building fair play.
- bombcar 2y ago
  I think you train the owners, not the dog. Even I, as untrained as I am, have been able to recognize a dog in the "needs to go". As for marking, that's a separate issue; it's correctly pack training the dog so it doesn't feel the need to mark everything.
- swatcoder 2y ago
  I don't share your experience. It's usually about surfaces and smells, not home vs away. The misbehaving dogs that the GP mentions are probably not terribly well-behaved around home either.
- giantg2 2y ago
  "Every dog I’ve ever know was very good about knowing not to relieve itself in its own building, but considered every other building fair play" That's absolutely wild. Every dog I've known, except for a few with issues, seems to know not to relieve themselves in any building if they know not to relieve themselves in their own building. No specialized training, just regular house training.
  - silverquiet 2y ago
    Yeah, I had the same thought - clearly dogs understand the concept of inside/outside which is interesting on its own (I've read that they "din" animals which means it is somewhat instinctual). The only dogs I've ever had were found street dogs and I also never had to housebreak them.
    - bryanlarsen 2y ago
      Do you mean "den animals"? That they instinctually know not to urinate in their den? That makes sense -- pigs instinctually urinate on one side of their pen so I'm sure other animals have similar instincts. Perhaps a hardware store is too big and too non-den like that some dogs don't consider it a den.
      - giantg2 2y ago
        I haven't had trouble in stores either though. I've noticed they like to eliminate on grass or grass-like stuff. It's actually hard to get my dog to go on concrete. Also if she gets sick in the house, it's always on the carpet and not on the hard flooring surfaces.
- ohnoitsahuman 2y ago
  When you bring the dog to a new environment, you watch it like a hawk. As soon as the they get curious about any corner, you correct them immediately. Only take a few hours of this to fix the behavior.

pdonis 2y ago

The problem is, first, many people don't share that attitude towards pets, and second, many places (such as grocery stores and restaurants) find reasons to ban pets that get codified in law, so getting rid of the bans becomes much more difficult.

eyelidlessness 2y ago

Yeah. In the author’s words, it’s the pet bans that are a “racket” and a “disguised class system, where anyone rich and savvy enough to engage with the gatekeeping process gets extra rights”. Ultimately pet bans, in most cases, reduce to a proxy for limiting damage and repair costs. In some cases they reduce to more general liability reduction. In all those cases there is a much more straightforward way to address the intent: insurance. Renter’s insurance, travel insurance, whatever. The only valid cases for banning pets is “you’d be introducing an allergen into a place shared by people with allergies” or “an existing pet is already present and introducing a new one would cause conflicts with the incumbent pet”.

giantg2 2y ago
Or contamination vector for food service areas.
- eyelidlessness 2y ago
  Yeah good point, although I think it may be applied too heavy handed in some cases. Like… foot traffic-only areas of the breakfast service at a hotel that otherwise accepts pets? That’s not meaningfully limiting contamination, it’s just making it harder for pet owners to get a cup of coffee.
pseudalopex 2y ago
> a place shared by people with allergies Any public place?
- eyelidlessness 2y ago
  If by “public place” you mean “place providing services to the public”, sure. Most such places have at least the right to refuse service and no one generally objects to that excluding non-service pets. If you mean publicly owned spaces, I think it’s reasonable to discuss indoor restrictions. Outdoor? Probably not beyond certain specific circumstances and accommodations.

swatcoder 2y ago

That'd work great if people were earnestly considerate and felt like they were part of a community that they understood whose implicit norms they might consider. You don't need bans for stuff like that if people are attentive and thoughtful. People with pets consider other customers in a shop, shopkeepers consider people who are deeply troubled without the support of their pets, and a locally appropriate and nuanced equilibrium shakes out. Unfortunately, we've largely allowed that prerequisite sense of community to erode in many people and many social interactions have become a game of Hungry Hungry Hippos, so formal and rigid policies have to take the place of subjective consideration.

kiliantics 2y ago
Your point is valid but if it's a good reason to stick with the ban then maybe we should be employing it to enforce other rules that would have a far greater impact. Not enough people are attentive and thoughtful and yet we allow them to operate massive machines in public spaces which kill tens of thousands per year. I don't think allowing pets on planes and in restaurants could ever have such a magnitude of impact as we have allowed by letting nearly anyone drive a car.

YurgenJurgensen 2y ago

My friends don't shit on my lawn.

johnea 2y ago

"Our family" that was kidnapped off of it's suckling mother's tit? The hypocrisy of pet "ownership" is blatant...