-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2007/06/07/question-of-the-day-330/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
If you want to eat with your dog at the table, eat at home.
-- SCAM
That being said, in response to SCAM's comment, if you don't want to eat at a cafe that allows dogs, then eat at home (or a cafe that doesn't allow them).
Miller left out an interesting note to this:
Alderman Reilly got a lot of support in 42 from dog owners. He came through for them immediately, co-sponsoring the ordinance. It was a great way to start. It is what government should be doing -- responding to the ward, and at the same time, being pro-business. Nice work, Alderman Reilly. The 42nd Ward noticed. Our Alderman actually listened to us. That is the first time in over thirty years.
SCAM -- What about a "working dog" who is not on duty? I could support that. German Sheps, Belg. Malinois, Dobermans, and the occasional Lab only. Not a working lines dog? Go elsewhere. An outdoor cafe filled with high-drive GSDs and a bunch of owners barking the ocassional "PLOTZ!". What a nice place that would be. If it was in the 42nd, I would drop by for a drink every night.
Besides, dog bacteria is generally benign to humans. Your more at risk from bacteria on another human. http://www.nsnews.com/issues98/w110998/mouth.html if this is the fear, we need cafes which prohibit human interaction. Hand sanitizer and plasticwear would protect us more from each other then from a dog, so why is public health not already demanding these? Looks like some kind of scare tactic or extreme exagertaion from public health.
Regardless of how much we heap affection on them.
Lets keep our priorities in order.
Public restaurants are for people.
Working dogs excepted.
Now Ferrets! That would enliven a cafe!
Could you flesh that idea out a bit?
If, as you say, dogs are unsanitary around food, why allow seeing eye dogs? Are they somehow cleaner than other dogs?
If we are all going to get a terrible illness from these animals, shouldn't it be a complete ban? Why the partial ban?
Are you telling me that the ADA requires me to get violently ill just so somebody else can enjoy a meal? I thought the ADA just required a reasonable accomodation. A restaurant certainly could bar a client with typhoid, couldn't it?
If the situation is as bad as you say it is, it is perfectly reasonable to bar all dogs and in doing so, prevent an outbreak of disease.
I'm also not worried about getting some atrocious and deadly dog-flu.
I think the best part about this is that it would prevent some of the uber-trendy Chicago fashonistas (sp?) from bringing their little purse-dogs to the hip outdoor cafe and setting them on the table and giving it little bits of foie gras while they talk about their new Gucci sweater or whatever.
In related news, Paris Hilton is supposedly out of jail. Perhaps she'll come to Chicago for a fun lunch with her little rat dog.
Birds take dumps on cafe tables every day, and no one seems to care.
As for whether dogs should be allowed in streetside cafes in Chicago, I think that's ultimately up to each business owner.
And it ain't just about Paris, pickles!!
Dogs are allowed INSIDE every pub in Great Britain, Ireland. They're common place in street cafes in Greece.
Their also permitted in outdoor cafes in New York City, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Denver, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, Boston, St. Louis and Las Vegas. Even Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis allow dogs in their street side cafes.
Do we really want to be stuck behind Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis?
BTW, the "hip cafes" that used to allow dogs in their outdoor cafes included Wishbone, Corner Bakery, Costello's Sandwich on Lincoln, and Parline's in Ravenswood. In St. Louis, you can bring your dog to the very chic Quizno's.
My God, I'm actually in agreement with Skeeter on something! I need a drink.
Plus when you think about it, people with dogs will most likely only visit their local restaurants with their dogs. They are not going to bring their dogs all across town. This means more people will spend money in their own neighborhood.
I'm guessing that people who bring their dogs to dinner, generally have well groomed dogs. I wonder how many people don't wash their hands after the restroom, which spreads much more disease than fido.
Keep in mind that it's not like restaurants are like sanitary wards in hospitals. We already allow large mammals in restaurants that do carry human diseases (Homo sapiens). And it's policy not to deny diseased Homo sapiens in restaurants.
So, I'm having a hard time buying that allowing dogs in restaurants provides significant new disease vectors that don't already exist.
It seems like this is largely an aesthetic issue. Therefore, I'm inclined to support allowing the restaurant owners to establish their preferred aesthetics at their restaurants.
That guy's dog just bit me!
Yeah, that one. The one that is fighting and barking with that other one at table 7.
Watch out!
Don't trip over that leash!
Hey!
Who brought the Ferret?!
You just described people.
Things I'd rather see banned:
Children under 12 in movie theatres for showtimes starting after 8 pm.
Cell phones in restaurants.
Cell phones in Wrigley.
Bulk mail.
"Dibs" on shoveled parking spots.
I've been taking my Germ. Shep. to cafes for three years and have never had the slightest problem (although the dog did once start crying very loudly one day when my wife walked away for a minute -- luckily the high pitched screech didn't do any lasting harm).
Humans are a different matter. In those years I've seen plenty of dangerous drunks. Better to ban all alcohol than to ban dogs.
What's great about dogs in cafes -- for those of you not luckily enough to live in an area with them -- is the social aspect. People sit outside with their dogs and talk to neighbors as they walk by. There is a real sense of community, and the dogs play an important role. Without the dogs a lot of the people would never have met.
Bottom line: Don't like dogs? Find another cafe. If you are that uptight we probably don't want you hanging around near us anyway.
So there!
Don't get me wrong, I love dogs (I wish I had a big enough apartment to get a Boxer), but they are not appropriate at a dining establishment. Too many dogs aren't trained well enough to resist the temptation to get at food.
Plus, dogs occasionally get in fights with one another, even well behaved ones. There's a risk of bites as well. Not to mention urine and feces.
And yes, were it possible, I'd be more than happy to have pigeons banned from outdoor cafes. Pigeons are nastier than dogs. But at least a pigeon isn't likely to go after your food or start a fight with another pigeon.
Restaurants are for people. If a restaurant wants to have a pole away from the dining area for people to tether their dogs to, that's fine. But not in the seating area.
This is just another example of anal, puritanical American mentality. Topless beaches? Oh no! That will turn everybody into rapists and molesters. Dogs in outdoor cafes or pubs. Oh my God! I might be bothered by Fido lying quietly under a table.
I would rather eat next to someones dog than ride public transportation in Chicago. Morons sneezing on the back of your head, or in your face, yahoo's coughing up loogies and spewing God knows what.
I would rather lick a toilet seat than a hand rail on the CTA.
Sorry for digressing.
You should try going to White Sox Dog Day sometime --- Granted, you need to sign a zillion wavers that your dog won't hurt anyone, you won't sue the Sox if something happens, etc. I've been going for 8 years and have never seen an incident, and that's with 600 dogs in one place. Thank god they've stopped the fireworks for that game though!
Don't want a well-behaved dog near you in a cafe? Go somewhere else. YOU can eat at home!
AND Don't start dissing us 'yuppies'. If it wasn't for us, Chicago would be a ghost town. Who do you think has helped bring back this city so the tourists and suburbanites can visit safely? Not the Stepford-ville residents with their 'precious babies' that try to act 'street' the second Mommy + Daddy aren't looking. If it wasn't for Yuppies helping revive the city, Illinois would be Iowa.
We dine out a lot, and always ask for the 'non-shrieking' section --- I can't tell you how many times my dinner has been ruined by some obnoxious, pampered snot-nosed brat that mommy + daddy can't control.
Now if they would only ban the obnoxious children, homeless people and pigeons from the outdoor spots, life would be good.
Arg!
And if they were not behaving in public, we took them home, which more parents SHOULD do.
They should pass a law like they have in Europe, all dogs in public places have to wear a muzzle.