New Florida law addresses "fake" service animals with possible jail time

raymusiccity

raymusiccity

Well-Known Member
Disone said:
too ruff?
Click to expand...

......first scooters were slowing things down....Just wait until these service animals start catching on!!

image.jpeg
 
Thurp

Thurp

Member
raymusiccity said:
......first scooters were slowing things down....Just wait until these service animals start catching on!!

View attachment 116664
Click to expand...
"Miniature horses" were mentioned during a meeting about service animals, so I asked what the deal with them is. Apparently they are often used by people with balance issues.

Why that is better and less trouble than some sort of cane a la Carl Fredricksen from Up!, I do not know, but then I am not the expert.
 
wdisney9000

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
righttrack said:
This is a thing apparently: http://registerservicedogs.com/

Looks like you can get a nice official looking registration for any dog and they boast in the ads that you can "take your dog on vacation with you anywhere"
Click to expand...
Those "registration papers" are barely worth the paper they are printed on. These companies operate on peoples ignorance of the law, or lack thereof. The following is directly from the ADA website under the registration section:

"There are individuals and organizations that sell service animal certification or registration documents online. These documents do not convey any rights under the ADA and the Department of Justice does not recognize them as proof that the dog is a service animal. "

It shows the ignorance and arrogance many people have in bypassing the proper authorities (ADA) and their lack of truly making an effort to understand the law and requirements they should be aware of. Not only for themselves, but for the animal they seem to care so much about and want to bring everywhere with them. I dont mind if people bring the animals in the parks, but know the requirements, have your dog PROPERLY and PROFESSIONALLY trained so you dont put the animal at risk of biting a chilld holding their hand out. Its the animal that will suffer for he humans ignorance.

We have a 5 month old puppy that is currently going through training for protection and search and rescue. I bring her to the local Home Depot to desensitize her to loud noises and people roaming about. I spoke with management to let them know she is in training and to clarify the purpose of our visit. They were very appreciative of my asking and did not mind. As I was standing in the lumber section, my dog was sitting calmly between my legs in a proper position and on a VERY short leash. A supervisor approached to say she was impressed with the dog and how well behaved she was and how so many people bring their dogs in and claim they are service animals but the dogs are on long leashes and bark at people while the owners are oblivious and just shopping around. She said they recently had an incident where the owner was not paying attention and a child was almost bit. The dog was NOT wearing a vest or any decals displaying a "do not pet".

The Arrogance of these people will get their dogs/animals in trouble and thats what really ticks me off. You can always tell the difference in a true service dog by the behavior of the OWNER, not the animal.
 
wdisney9000

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
flynnibus said:
I never said anything to infer they are exempt, nor do I believe they are. But needing to comply such as providing accommodations such as accessibility, communication aids, etc as all gov agencies must do is not the same thing as determining what can be questioned when investigating a crime. This is the area that would need court interpretation.



So what.. in this scenario the police are not investigating or trying to enforce the ADA.



The ADA protects people from discrimination and being denied accommodations. It does not grant them, or their service animals, some blanket immunity from scrutiny. A police officer investigating a suspected crime is not interfering with the person receiving accommodation or altering what the public accommodation is doing. The grey area is how one determines probable cause given the lack of registration and the grey area with the ADA. Hence why ultimately a court will have to set the precedent.



The point was there is no federal standard to define who should get placards, so the federal vs state variation in definition is interesting. It's interesting how someone hasn't challenged the standard for requiring a placard - which could be argued is like a Scarlet Letter and a unnecessary burden if the DoJ argues that documentation for other disabilities would be discrimination, etc. Gaining access to such accommodation requires registration in a state regulated and operated program. The ADA defines 'accessible' parking, yet acknowledges and lets states limit access to them, even if the limitation would exclude someone who is disabled by definition of the ADA. So the states limit and force registration and proof to gain access to an accommodation dictated under the ADA. The DoJ acknowledges and allows states to define qualifications and enforcements that in effect limit access to an accommodation mandated by the ADA. Kind of like.. making it a crime to fake a service animal.



Which is exactly why the practice is to not check documentation - you can't use it as a defendable point to deny accommodation. So what does checking gain you? Nothing.. in fact it opens you to scrutiny in discriminating by requiring additional burdens. I don't see such a policy lasting and it goes against the DoJ's interpretations and findings. It would only take one activist to intentionally go in without documentation, be denied, and take them to court and win easily. It sets SixFlags up to fail and goes directly against DoJ interpretations. Doomed to fail. Disney's registration program already invites enough scrutiny... and it doesn't even risk denying access. Sixflag's idea is just begging for punishment.
Click to expand...
Bravo! My father is an attorney and as I read your post it was extremely similar to a discussion I had with him in regards to disabilities and theme park accommodations. Especially the part about opening yourself up to scrutiny and/or lawsuits. Is that you, Dad, posing as Flyn? lol

And in case anybody feels some desire to challenge my fathers professional legal opinion, he would be the first to point out, as Flyn touched upon, that these types of cases come down to a courts ruling and not what a lawyer says, as these types of lawsuits or situations leading to them are hardly ever the same.
 
wdisney9000

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
flynnibus said:
Like the people who say 'well there wasn't a SIGN saying I couldn't do it...". I wish we could send all selfish people to wilderness survival for 3months and condition them to respect other people and other people's stuff.
Click to expand...
Ive had friends or random people say that exact statement to me and I love their response when I ask, "there is no sign telling me I cant take your wallet by force so why shouldnt I? They usually respond with, "Well, thats illegal". Oh the irony.
 
A

arko

Well-Known Member
Mouse_Trap said:
That's the woman who appeared in the BBC program I mentioned months ago (back on the 1st or 2nd page).
Seemed a complete scam to be honest as she liked horses and was blaming her muslim faith for not having a dog.
Click to expand...
Its only a scam if she is faking a disability. The choice of a dog or a horse has nothing to do with it. Miniture horses qualify under slightly more rigid guidelines than dogs. So as long as her horse is properly trained and meets these requirements:
  • the miniature horse is housebroken
  • the miniature horse is under the owner’s control
  • the facility can accommodate the miniature horse’s type, size, and weight
  • the miniature horse’s presence will not compromise legitimate safety requirements necessary for the safe operation of the facility
(Miniature horses generally range in height from 24 inches to 34 inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 pounds.)

The main concern is whether the facility is capable of accommodating an animal that is usually larger than most dogs.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom