Petition · Stop harassing war vets with service dogs. · Change.org

Please take go take a look at this petition:



Petition · Stop harassing war vets. · Change.org:

My PTSD service dog Gander and I have been shooed out of at least 5 different Starbucks in the past year. This is not only humiliating, its illegal. I want Starbucks to educate their staff about the American with Disabilities Act regulations and stop harassing war vets and others with disabilities who need service animals...

I'll never get it. Why don't businesses train their employees about service dogs? Besides the basic moral decency issue, it's a legal issue, not to mention huge PR problem to refuse to allow a service dog.



And why do the individuals who work in these places get all worked up and rush to kick them out? Maybe they think they are going to get in trouble for letting a dog in? Maybe they're not sure if they really qualify under ADA rule?



Personally, if I were trying to "err on the side of caution" I would rather take the chance of wrongly allowing a dog who wasn't legit than possibly kicking out a service dog.



But the blame here falls on the businesses that do not bother to learn the law or don't bother to train their employees.

For more on the service dogs and the law you can view my post Service Animals: Yes You Do Have to Let Them in Whether You Like it of Not. You can also see what the ADA says about service dogs.


You might also enjoy checking out Veteran Traveler and Gander the Service Dog's Facebook page.





'via Blog this'

Wow! It Just Became Legal for Parisian Women to Wear Pants...

I just came acrossthis article:

It Just Became Legal for Parisian Women to Wear Pants - Megan Garber - The Atlantic

Amazing! According to the article, the law first went on the books in 1799. It was amended a couple of times, and then (my bold) ...

 In 2010, a group of Green Party lawmakers introduced a bill in the National Assembly to strike down the law (and to fight, more generally, other aspects of France's "judicial archaeology"). The Paris Prefecture, the ancestor of the body that had enacted the decree in the first place, responded that, the law being comically outmoded, it wasn't worth the effort to remove from the books.

We still have some "comically outmoded" laws on the books in the U.S., too. For instance, it is still a crime for unwed couples to live together in four states, including Virginia.

Although, not criminally enforcable, because it just won't hold up in court due to constitutional issues, the Virginia law still serves as a legal excuse for discrimination by landlords and licensing agencies. It may soon be struck down by the proposed "Love Shack" bill.

So, what kind of weird, antequated laws have you had to deal with lately?

Did You Know that DUI Checkpoints Are Illegal in 12 States?

For the uninitiated, DUI checkpoints, also known as sobriety checkpoints, are roadblocks set up by the police under the auspices of catching for drunk drivers. Yes, the kind of thing you expect to encounter during a manhunt when a serial killer escapes from prison or maybe when a child is kidnapped.

When I say these roadblocks are set up “under the auspices of catching drunk drivers” I am referring to the fact that the majority of tickets, arrests and impounds resulting from many of these checkpoint are for infractions other than intoxication. Sobriety checkpoints are an excuse to stop every driver without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

Even if you never personally encounter a sobriety checkpoint, you are still affected. DUI roadblocks are huge revenue generators. Local governments make all kinds of money off of the tickets and impounds that result from the non-dui infractions, and they receive federal grants to conduct the checkpoints. So, even if you live in a state which does not allow sobriety checkpoints, your tax dollars still go to fund them.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that even though these checkpoints violate our constitutional rights, it’s just a small violation and offset by the need to stop drunk drivers, so it’s permissible. Some states, however, have taken a stand for your most basic rights and made their own laws or declared that it is against state constitutions to conduct the vile roadblocks.

You can learn more and find out if you live in one of these states by reading my article DUI Checkpoints Are Illegal in 12 States.

Service Animals: Yes, You Do Have to Let Them in Whether You Like it or Not.

Full disclosure? I think that people who try to turn away people with service animals are assholes. Major assholes. Special place in Hell assholes. I am also not so stupid, rigid, or naïve as to think that there aren’t special circumstances, as in the rare unruly service animal causing a real problem, that should constitute an exception. I guess I chalk it up to basic common courtesy with no special exceptions for the disabled or otherwise disadvantaged. If you let your kid, your drunk spouse, or your service animal poop on the floor, scream a lot, or attack someone, you’re out of there!

Now that we got that out of the way… The McDonalds pit bull PR faux pas has spawned a flurry of stories about much more serious real life incidents of discrimination by McDonalds against people with disabilities and their service animals, sick children and their companions, and pit bulls in general. This isn’t new. There were stories before. Sometimes it is individuals who happen to work at McDonalds committing these crimes (including assault, not just discrimination), rather than company policy.

McDonalds aside, maybe some of you need to know the law on this. It’s actually very, very simple. Just like you can’t keep people out based on their race, ugliness, or bad haircut, you can’t bar service animals from your establishment. This is from the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section, Commonly Asked Questions:

1. Q: What are the laws that apply to my business?

A: Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), privately owned businesses that serve the public, such as restaurants, hotels, retail stores, taxicabs, theaters, concert halls, and sports facilities, are prohibited from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. The ADA requires these businesses to allow people with disabilities to bring their service animals onto business premises in whatever areas customers are generally allowed.

2. Q: What is a service animal?

A: The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.

5. Q: I have always had a clearly posted "no pets" policy at my establishment. Do I still have to allow service animals in?

A: Yes. A service animal is not a pet…

6. Q: My county health department has told me that only a guide dog has to be admitted. If I follow those regulations, am I violating the ADA?

A: Yes, if you refuse to admit any other type of service animal on the basis of local health department regulations or other state or local laws. The ADA provides greater protection for individuals with disabilities and so it takes priority over the local or state laws or regulations.

10. Q: What if a service animal barks or growls at other people, or otherwise acts out of control?

A: You may exclude any animal, including a service animal, from your facility when that animal's behavior poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others. For example, any service animal that displays vicious behavior towards other guests or customers may be excluded. You may not make assumptions, however, about how a particular animal is likely to behave based on your past experience with other animals. Each situation must be considered individually.

If you have personal experience with service animals you know that they display better behavior and hygiene than your average “hairless ape”. And their presence creates a more congenial atmosphere, and actually makes you look better as a business.

Want to Send Your Parents to Jail? Show Up Late for School a Whole Bunch of Times.

OK. I could have said “frequently” or “on a regular basis” but I chose “a whole bunch of times” because I love the line in Freeway when Vanessa (Reese Witherspoon) asks Bob (Kiefer Sutherland) if he wants to get shot “a whole bunch of times.” I don’t know if that is a coincidence or if it was my subconscious making the connection between the poor results of public education not-so-subtly hinted at in the movie and the stupidity of bringing criminal charges against parents whose kids are late for school.

I have to say from the beginning that I have some mixed feelings about some of what is going on here. When I was late for school, I was the one who got punished even when my mom was to blame and took responsibility by send a note saying as much. I didn’t think that was right and neither did she. But, criminal charges were not involved, for either of us.

The Loudoun County Public Schools, of Virginia, are taking tardiness to a new level. This year, one mother was arrested and charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and another couple was issued a court summons on a Class 3 misdemeanor, due to their children being repeatedly late for school.

We’re not talking about being massively late and missing a significant amount of school time, either. In most cases the kids were three minutes late or less, and in some cases they slid in just as the bell rang, but still got cited for tardiness.

I am also curious as to why the couple was issued a summons, when the other mother was dragged off to jail on a Saturday night while, away from watching her own kids and other people’s kids during a sleepover, requiring her to call on other adults to come fill in.

When I read the comments on the various news articles about this subject, I see a lot of people who think the parents should be held responsible. They think this is a very big deal and a huge distraction, taking away from the quality of education that these late kids’ classmates receive.

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, I’ll spell it out for you: I agree that the parents should be held responsible. My problem is turning it into a criminal offense. And what really freaks me out is how flippant some people are about that.

It is a big deal. It is a very big deal to convert this from an infraction of school rules to a legal issue putting parents at risk of losing their liberty, and ultimately their jobs, homes, and families, and putting children at risk of being ripped from their homes and placed in foster care, and otherwise having their lives destroyed.

 
If it is really that important to the education of their classmates, then expel the late kids after multiple infractions. Make their parents deal with it that way.

Due Process?

In 2006 I wrote an article called Due Process of The Law – What Does it Mean? The Changing Face of Due Process in the Anti-Terrorism Era for what was then Associated Content and is now Yahoo! Voices. It has always been, and still is, my most popular article on the site.

Now, six years later, I’m wondering if it is time to revisit the subject. To examine what has changed since I wrote the original article. And, I am also trying to decide if the subject needs more than an article. Possibly an eBook.

What do you think?