Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 59

Thread: Saw this on Fox 17

  1. #1
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490

    Saw this on Fox 17

    GRAND RAPIDS, Mich— The Kent County Sheriff's Department announced Friday afternoon that a former employee of Don Julio's restaurant was arrested on a charge stemming from a late 2011 incident in which a veteran's service dog was asked to leave the restaurant.
    http://www.fox17online.com/news/fox1...,5177074.story

    I realize this doesn't directly deal with someone OCing but it does relate to us. I saw the story posted on Fox 17's FB. Looking at the comments I'm astounded so many people are saying the girl should be arrested for what she did. I think my comment was the only one that said it should be that restaurants right to refuse service and that if I were that guy I wouldn't want to spend my money at such an establishment.

    ETA: I'm really not familiar with the laws regarding those disabled and having a dog with them in a restaurant. I also don't think the restaurant should have asked the dog to be put in the lobby but that they should have the right to do so.
    Last edited by xmanhockey7; 01-27-2012 at 06:54 PM.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  2. #2
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    I agree. A privately owned Public Accommodation should be able to turn away:

    • Dwarfs
    • Brown People
    • Midgets
    • Hobbits
    • Gays
    • Gun Carriers
    • Red Heads
    • Blonds
    • Mexicans
    • White People
    • People wearing ties
    • People wearing jeans
    • Women
    • Children
    • Poor People
    • Rich People


    OR ANYONE FOR ANY F*CKING REASON THEY WANT! IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.

    Now I'm going to report this thread for being off-topic
    Last edited by TheQ; 01-27-2012 at 07:14 PM.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  3. #3
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196

    ADA Requirements for Service Animals

    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    http://www.fox17online.com/news/fox1...,5177074.story

    I realize this doesn't directly deal with someone OCing but it does relate to us. I saw the story posted on Fox 17's FB. Looking at the comments I'm astounded so many people are saying the girl should be arrested for what she did. I think my comment was the only one that said it should be that restaurants right to refuse service and that if I were that guy I wouldn't want to spend my money at such an establishment.

    ETA: I'm really not familiar with the laws regarding those disabled and having a dog with them in a restaurant. I also don't think the restaurant should have asked the dog to be put in the lobby but that they should have the right to do so.
    I know nothing about MI State Law, but federal law is clear on this.

    All places of public accommodation must allow service dogs to accompany people with disabilities in all areas where members of the public are allowed to go. They cannot ask that the dog wait in the lobby.

    http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  4. #4
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    I know nothing about MI State Law, but federal law is clear on this.

    All places of public accommodation must allow service dogs to accompany people with disabilities in all areas where members of the public are allowed to go. They cannot ask that the dog wait in the lobby.

    http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm
    Yes, Federal Law isn't the point -- natural property rights are.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  5. #5
    Regular Member steve jaye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Plymouth
    Posts
    36
    I wonder if that customer was allergic to dogs, when does his rights stop and another’s begin.
    "A man with a briefcase can steal millions more than any man with a gun"
    Don Henley

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    A privately owned public accommodation should accept the rights the people come with. It's a free country, they have every right to become a private whatever they wish to call themselves. At which point, they can do what they please.

  7. #7
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    A privately owned public accommodation should accept the rights the people come with. It's a free country, they have every right to become a private whatever they wish to call themselves. At which point, they can do what they please.
    So -- screw their private property rights -- nice.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    So -- screw their private property rights -- nice.
    You are correct about your assertion over private property; however, until Michigan "allows" establishments to be open and serve food, liquor, etc 24/7 and until they repeal the state forced smoking ban and all that... it sure would be nice if gun owners could be a protected class for once.

    I tried to push that point in Arizona years ago. Since the state dictated liquor sales, smoking ban (doesn't matter if the voters passed it), and everything else, the state should be consistent and remove their ability to enforce trespass in public accommodations for weapon carriers.

    It's all about consistency and this is the problem when government singles out select groups and "protects" them at another property owners expense.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    So -- screw their private property rights -- nice.
    They knew about the rights when they opened the business. They still have the right to go private if they want to say screw the people, the history, the rights, the country and those who fight for it.

  10. #10
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    You are correct about your assertion over private property; however, until Michigan "allows" establishments to be open and serve food, liquor, etc 24/7 and until they repeal the state forced smoking ban and all that... it sure would be nice if gun owners could be a protected class for once.

    I tried to push that point in Arizona years ago. Since the state dictated liquor sales, smoking ban (doesn't matter if the voters passed it), and everything else, the state should be consistent and remove their ability to enforce trespass in public accommodations for weapon carriers.

    It's all about consistency and this is the problem when government singles out select groups and "protects" them at another property owners expense.
    I've heard some courts in some states have ruled that malls are "quasi" public spaces and have to allow free speech (CA), gun rights may take longer, though
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    They knew about the rights when they opened the business. They still have the right to go private if they want to say screw the people, the history, the rights, the country and those who fight for it.
    But they ARE private -- hence PRIVATE Property/PRIVATELY owned business.


    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by steve jaye View Post
    I wonder if that customer was allergic to dogs, when does his rights stop and another’s begin.
    Many people are allergic to fragrance and must make conscious efforts to avoid people that wear them, which is a helluva lot more people than those who have service animals. Should one insist someone else leaves because they wore too much perfume and it is literally making one ill?

    FWIW, I have trained my dogs to be acceptable service animals. Two of them are VERY good it. There is no licensing or certification of any kind required. It helps to put a badge on the dog. You can claim any dog as a service animal and it is illegal for a business to ask you what your disability is, though they are allowed to ask what the dog's ability is. An answer such as "he can detect potential medical problems" is legally sufficient. I have one dog that is KNOWN to be able to detect a seizure several minutes before symptoms. I found out incidentally when he kept whining and would not relax, to my embarrassment at a large public gathering. Only ten minutes later when a man two rows behind me had a seizure did we all understand what the dog was trying to tell me. I've taken my dogs into many public places. I have had some problems with ignorant employees. I've never had a problem caused by the dog.

    I am of the opinion that dogs should be "service animals" in the aspect of providing security, much the same way as OC. But it takes good owners for this to be a possibility.
    Last edited by MAC702; 01-27-2012 at 11:13 PM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    No, your home is private.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    I've heard some courts in some states have ruled that malls are "quasi" public spaces and have to allow free speech (CA), gun rights may take longer, though
    You are referring to the Pruneyard Shopping Center case in California. Although it was a federal case that went to SCOTUS, the merits of the case and the decision was based upon the California State Constitution. If I recall, the CA constitution allows for 1st amendment activity in public accommodations, such as mall parking lots. It's been a decade since I've read that case so I'm a bit foggy on it.

  15. #15
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    You are referring to the Pruneyard Shopping Center case in California. Although it was a federal case that went to SCOTUS, the merits of the case and the decision was based upon the California State Constitution. If I recall, the CA constitution allows for 1st amendment activity in public accommodations, such as mall parking lots. It's been a decade since I've read that case so I'm a bit foggy on it.
    Thanks...it has been a long time since I'd read it. I didn't recall it being based upon CA Constitution but I did remember SCOTUS was involved, so maybe I "misremebered". Anyway, I guess it's a moot issue for our discussion here.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    You are referring to the Pruneyard Shopping Center case in California. Although it was a federal case that went to SCOTUS, the merits of the case and the decision was based upon the California State Constitution. If I recall, the CA constitution allows for 1st amendment activity in public accommodations, such as mall parking lots. It's been a decade since I've read that case so I'm a bit foggy on it.
    I know nothing about that case at all, but am just thinking. That bothers me because if the parking lot is consider public accommodations, what other property rights are lost? If the owner cannot stop somebody from exercising 1st amendment activity, does that mean they cannot ask them to leave the property if they want them to? Or can they just not ask them to leave for exercising the rights? What is considered a public accommodation? If I live in a suburban neighborhood, with mostly similar size housing plots and the plot next to mine is part of my yard instead of having another house, and I have a mini park/playground there that everybody in the neighborhood uses but is still on my residential property would that be considered a public accommodation? It seems like a slippery slope to me I don't really like the idea.

  17. #17
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    it is illegal for a business to ask you what your disability is
    Maybe we'd all be safer if the government made it illegal for us to talk to one another at all.

    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    They are trying.

  19. #19
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    So -- screw their private property rights -- nice.
    I know, you have that Libertarian belief which states that defending private property is central to the philosophy. Although libertarianism wants to advance principles of property, it should in no way defend all property which now is called "private". Much of this property is of questionable title intertwined with a coercive state which has condoned, built on, and profited from extracting money from taxpayers who fail to see the way in which private companies have used government as a tool to their own ends. The idea that a mom-and-pop hotel should be able to do as it pleases is all well and good... but where are these types of places?
    What we ACTUALLY have are corporations pushing out the competition through governmental interference in the market. In almost all major areas of commerce, the large corporation has become the norm... all with the help of our politicians. Since corporate ownership of businesses, land, etc has only been possible as a direct result of gaming the system, perhaps we need to consider the degree to which government has facilitated the corporate ownership of the particular property in question.

    My thought is that since most large, privately owned places such as malls, chain hotels, etc are direct recipients of tax-payer funded money, perhaps we could expand the notion of "publicly owned" to those business entities whose very existence relies on governmental interference in a supposedly "free market". I would argue that the "right to carry"on some "private property" could be considered the same as any other publicly owned (read governmental) property in Michigan: OC would be protected under preemption.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  20. #20
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Sangre View Post
    I know nothing about that case at all, but am just thinking. That bothers me because if the parking lot is consider public accommodations, what other property rights are lost? If the owner cannot stop somebody from exercising 1st amendment activity, does that mean they cannot ask them to leave the property if they want them to? Or can they just not ask them to leave for exercising the rights? What is considered a public accommodation? If I live in a suburban neighborhood, with mostly similar size housing plots and the plot next to mine is part of my yard instead of having another house, and I have a mini park/playground there that everybody in the neighborhood uses but is still on my residential property would that be considered a public accommodation? It seems like a slippery slope to me I don't really like the idea.
    Perhaps further gone than you realize. This was a local story here in Grand Rapids, may be the same type of law in your area too:

    http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapi...to_post_a.html
    Last edited by DrTodd; 01-28-2012 at 12:26 AM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  21. #21
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Good DrTodd. I believe you and I can stand together in opposition to Fascism, which is what you elude to.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  22. #22
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    Good DrTodd. I believe you and I can stand together in opposition to Fascism, which is what you elude to.
    Most certainly. I'm not alluding to it as some future probability... it's here. In fact, I think Fascism is a much more prevalent strain in american political thought than socialism or Communism ever really was or is. The outcome for men and women who love freedom and cherish the 2nd Amendment is the same with either philosophy, though. Interesting, however, most people who extol the virtues of the "free market" fail to see the fascism that is present in the current system. Especially in the last few years, it has become much more noticeable that people actually believe that business can be "too big too fail"... which really means that taxpayers should pay for a company's poor decisions. I've also seen many average people on the news lately actually extol the idea of wealth that is, far, far removed from actual labor. Investors above all others...

    Hopefully, OCers can be one of the groups on the forefront of freedom against both government and corporate "slavery"... the 2nd Amendment as a check to both government and corporate manipulation/ enslavement..
    Last edited by DrTodd; 01-28-2012 at 01:18 AM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  23. #23
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    While fascism is certainly present, I don't think we can fairly say all private businesses are in existence and thriving because of fascism. We could debate on what the percentage is. However, when in doubt, I'd prefer to caution on the side of Liberty and Valuing Property rights.

    Of course, there are clear examples of Fascism. GE is one that comes to mind.
    Last edited by TheQ; 01-28-2012 at 01:17 AM.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    The second amendment is only a check, when those powers thingk it might be used against them. They know the simple fact, that it wont be used as it was meant to be.

    The check and balance system is broken. Each of the 3 branches of government is supposed to check each others power, they don't, they enable each other.

    For example. The police and courts are supposed to use their power to stop the legislative branch when it passes a law that runs against the constitution. Needing a CPL to carry in a car for instance. The officer took an oath to protect the rights of the citizen under the constitution, and to enforce the law. When the law goes against the constitution, as this one does, then the officer would choose to enforce the supreme law, the constitution, in honor of the oath (promise) he took. In so doing, the police officer, as a part of the judicial system, has upheld his honorable duty, in being a check and balance for the legislative branch. The whole country is stronger for it. Instead, the officer breaks his oath, charges the person with a felony, and the person loses a right not given by the .gov. The whole system breaks down, and the country falls into failure.

    Unfortunately, the police don't understand this very 8th grade concept anymore, and have not for several decades.
    Last edited by stainless1911; 01-28-2012 at 01:26 AM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    221
    So you are okay with banning Blacks and Jews?


    A public place is not private, that is a complete distortion of the Constitution. If the property is private then there is no issue, but a public business is just that, they wanted the public in the business then guess what they get the public with all rights intact. I fail to understand the lack of mental powers of those who think a Corporation is a person. Corporations are not human so they have no rights of people. This Dark ages thinking needs to go back to Europe where it came from.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    So -- screw their private property rights -- nice.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •