I can remember when I was a kid that some stores would have a notice posted on the front door or window that dogs were not allowed in the store except for guide dogs leading the blind. Like any kid, I thought it would be a cool thing to be able to see one of these dogs, but I don’t remember having ever seen one.
I have noticed in recent years the proliferation, not of guide dogs leading the blind, but of service dogs accompanying what appear to be perfectly healthy people. Now, if you have some disability or handicap and feel you need one of these service dogs to help you cope, get around, live a relatively normal life, etc., then I mean no offense.
But not only am I seeing these dogs everywhere, I have noticed that people shopping with one or more of their friends or family members still have their service dogs with them. I have even seen a husband and wife together each with their own service dog.
I admit it: I am not a dog person. I don’t own a dog, don’t like to pet dogs, don’t like to hear my neighbor’s dog barking, don’t like to sit next to someone with a dog on an airplane, and certainly don’t like to see dogs in stores while I am shopping.
However, I believe in personal freedom and a free society. If someone wants to own a dog, then fine. If someone wants to take his dog on a cross-country trip in his car, then fine. If someone wants to spend thousands of dollars getting his dog’s hip replaced, then fine. If someone wants to treat his dog better than his children, then fine. If someone wants to give his dog an elaborate funeral and burial, then fine.
The issue of service dogs is a good a way as any to look at life in a free society.
I should begin by saying that Americans don’t live in a free society, although most of them think they do. True, we live in a relatively free society. Americans are relatively free compared to the citizens of North Korea, Cuba, Myanmar, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. But this doesn’t mean that we live in a free society. Not when you need a permit to have a garage sale, not when you need a salt-water fishing license, not when you can go to jail for purchasing too much Sudafed to relieve your stuffy nose, not when you need a license to cut hair, not when you can be arrested for reselling a concert ticket, not when the government reads your e-mails and listens to your phone calls.
A free society is a libertarian society, a free-market society, a private property society.
It is not a society where chaos reigns and everyone just does what he pleases. It is not a “war of all against all” where life is “nasty, brutish, and short.” A free society is a society where property rights are supreme and respected.
In a free society, dog lovers, dog haters, and everyone in between—including those who rely on service dogs—can get along just fine. It is what we have now that results in conflict.
Just this month, at a Whole Foods store in Texas, a man claims he was humiliated after he and his service dog were kicked out of the store. The police were called when the man supposedly refused to leave the store. According to a spokesperson for Whole Foods, the company
has a “no pets” policy, but welcomes service animals and complies with all applicable ADA guidelines. We immediately contacted our local store once notified of the situation and learned the customer informed our store team that the dog was a “search and rescue” animal. Since our policy only permits service animals to accompany shoppers, the customer’s dog was not allowed inside our store. We’ve reached out to the customer directly to see if there was a misunderstanding.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has standards that relate to service dogs. The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section, asks and answers 37 questions in its “Frequently Asked Questions about Service Animals and the ADA.” Evidently, a person can bring a service dog with him through a salad bar or other self-service food line, not be restricted to “pet-friendly” rooms in hotels, bring more than one service animal into a public place, bring a service dog with him in an ambulance, and file a complaint with the Justice Department as well as a private lawsuit in federal court if they feel they have been discriminated against for having a service dog.
In a free society, it is property owners who decide whether they will allow guide dogs leading the blind to enter their property—not the government.
In a free society, it is property owners who decide whether they will allow service dogs to enter their property—not the government.
In a free society, it is property owners who decide whether they will allow any other dogs to enter their property—not the government.
It doesn’t matter if someone suffers from some mental or physical aliment, impairment, disability, or handicap: Even if someone is blind or an injured war veteran, there is no natural right for anyone to bring a dog with him on someone else’s property—or breastfeed a child, use profanity, wear a shirt with an offensive message, smoke a cigarette, or be scantily clad.
Not in a free society.
This is because—in a free society based on respect for property rights— no one has a natural right to enter anyone else’s property even if he is childless, has impeccable manners, is modestly dressed, doesn’t smoke, and doesn’t have a dog with him.
This is what people don’t get. But freedom of association, discrimination, and partiality are part and parcel of a free society. And it doesn’t just apply to individuals. In a free society, business, which are owned by individuals or groups of individuals, would have the same property rights as individuals—including the rights to refuse service and establish a dress code and standards of conduct for employees and customers that are on their property.
The domain of government regulation of service dogs and anything else should be strictly limited to public; that is, government property, like parks, schools, libraries, and pools that are owned and operated by the government. Business establishments open to the public are not “public places” or “public facilities” or “public accommodations.” They are still private property. It is an illegitimate purpose of government to regulate private businesses.
But it should be pointed out that even a business owner who hates all manner of dogs—guide, service, or otherwise—might not choose to prohibit them in his stores. In fact, he might advertise that all dogs are welcome in his stores.
This is the beauty of the free market. In a free society, business owners would have to weigh the costs and benefits of allowing or not allowing in their places of business guide dogs for the blind, service dogs for the disabled, and dogs in general.
What characterizes a free society? In a free society, individuals and businesses make their own decisions based on customs, traditions, preferences, and the market. In an authoritarian society, the government makes the decisions based on lobbying, complaints, and the caprice of bureaucrats—and enforces its decisions with badges and guns.
By the way, I still don’t think I have ever seen a guide dog leading the blind.