The 46-year-old said: “I went into the café in Mill Road with a friend last Wednesday. The waitress came up and said you can’t have any dogs in here.”
He asked to speak to the manager, who came out and said he had to go.
Mr Lee said: “I said ‘Did you know it is against the law? He has got a legal right to come in.’ He said ‘I don’t care for English law’.”Yes, it's 'Ignore the law, throw out the blind guy with the guide dog and then fall back on mysterious allergies as an excuse when the press come asking questions' day.
Again.
Understand now?
Head waiter Osman Dogor was in charge of the Tudor Rose on Wednesday and spoke to Mr Lee.Let me help you out, there. It IS against the law, and you SHOULD know...
He said: “The staff are scared of dogs and I have allergies to animals, especially dogs. I came to him and told him we can’t have dogs in the café because I’m allergic to them.
He told me it’s a guide dog, I told him it’s not about the guide dog, I have allergies, it’s not because I’m against animals.
I just politely told him to leave, it may be against the law, I don’t know.”
“I don’t feel like a rude person.”No, you don't sound like one, you just sound like an ignorant little waste of oxygen that should have your license to trade revoked for a penalty period (or perhaps our cousins across the pond might have the right idea?), and then see if your attidude adjusts to align with this country's laws.
“He is welcome to sit near the door and leave the dog outside.”No, you misunderstand; he's welcome to sit in your cafe with his guide dog by law. And if you still can't grasp that fact, you're not welcome in this country.
Understand now?
Strict Libertarians will no doubt disagree, and see this as the State making unreasonable demands of business owners on behalf of identity groups. Now, I don't want to get into that; we are where we are with the law, and until (if) it's repealed, I believe it should be applicable to all.
21 comments:
I don't like dogs. At all. I'm not remotely comfortable around them.
I'd rather close my business than be forced to allow them onto my property. Thankfully I work at home so it shouldn't ever be an issue.
You don't seem to like a lot of the verdicts given out by our judicial system but you fully support my arrest if I won't let "man's best friend" onto my property.
I take it your version of liberty comes from the modern definition of "liberal" then - do exactly as I tell you, or else.
Nice.
You clearly misread the bit where I said that the issue of whether it should be law was moot.
You seem to have a very British name. Tell me, do you think if it'd been YOUR cafe that there would have been such a lack of response from the local council?
Also, if you don't like dogs, don't open a business where you are obliged to serve the oublic. There! Problem solved!
I clearly misread it?
No, I read and fully understood it - I just chose to ignore it.
Because a large proportion of your posts seem to be mocking the legal system's lack of effectiveness.
Yet he's an issue you seemingly support (guide dogs) and suddenly an illiberal law is just fine and dandy.
I believe you wrote your little disclaimer as you know your personal prejudice has trumped your sense of liberty.
If you're happy with the law, think it should always be obeyed and that our lords and masters are always right then why bother keeping your blog going?
Regarding my name, you're quite right. And I'm completely aware of what that means and I'm not sure it has anything to do with the issue at hand.
But then I'm one of the "strict libertarians" you mention. As far as I can see Mr. Dogor wasn't hurting anyone or stealing anything so he's free to do as he pleases. Why you want to hold a gun to his head until he acts "correctly" I don't know...
"I believe you wrote your little disclaimer as you know your personal prejudice has trumped your sense of liberty."
No, I wrote my little footnote because regardless of how I feel about disability laws, they have been passed, and so shod be obeyed by everyone in business.
No exemptions, no fudging, no dragging of council feet or shying away of 'difficult issues' when suddenly someone with a stronger hand at Victimhood Poker says 'Damned if your law applies to me!'.
That's the issue here.
Strict Libertarians will no doubt disagree. Myself included, and for the reasons you stated.
I also dont go for the 'dont open a business' line either. You are not obliged to serve members of the public, they are guests at your invitation and only for as long as you agree to extend that invitation.
Similarly, your guests do not need to accept your invitation. If you want to take your dog in a cafe, go to one where they are welcome. If you object to a premesis that doesn't allow guide dogs, boycott the place.
Let the market decide. In this day, folk who discriminate against custom may be running a risk of not being in business for long.
" Why you want to hold a gun to his head until he acts "correctly" I don't know..."
You do, you just don't want to admit it. It's because if that gun's going to be held to my head, I'm damned if anyone else is going to get an exemption!
"Let the market decide. In this day, folk who discriminate against custom may be running a risk of not being in business for long."
You can't 'let the Market decide' where there's no level playing field, where Mr Smith feels the full wrath of the disability pressure group and the letter writers in the kocal paper, and everone tiptoes round Mr Dogor on account of his 'religious sensibilities' and 'cultural background'...
"You do, you just don't want to admit it. It's because if that gun's going to be held to my head, I'm damned if anyone else is going to get an exemption!"
Honestly, I hadn't thought of that.
But I still wouldn't even consider it.
I'd rather fight to get rid of these laws rather than try to make sure they apply to everyone.
Sure, I'm a vindictive and petty bastard, just like everyone else. But I'm not that vindictive.
Better no one suffers than anyone or everyone.
And I do find it amusing (tragically so) that when I talk with the left, or any big government types, I'm usually branded a racist. Now I finally comment on a "real" liberal blog it's suggested I'm quite the opposite. Looks like I can't win :)
(Word verification - dessents. Damn right I do.)
"... Now I finally comment on a "real" liberal blog..."
What liberal blog? Where?
:)
I'm not really interested in disability pressure groups and cultural sensibilities, just custom. That's what keeps a business going.
Use his cafe or don't.
Besides, I admire anyone who says no to a law that is wrong, from the man who refuses dogs in his cafe to the man who allows smokers in his pubs.
It may be the law, but laws that are wrong must be resisted.
In the same paper a couple days later, another guy a bit further down the same road was in trouble for putting up a notice on his shop banning disability scooters.
I've a little bit of sympathy for both of them, it must make running a business harder. There was also a little too much howling outrage from the offended parties (especially in the second story), though they were in the right.
I must admit I was disinclined to believe Mr Dogor has a genuine allergy. I suspect he just doesn't like dogs. His ‘I don’t care for English law' sounds sneering and unpleasant. Added to that, the comment that 'his staff' are apparently terrified of dogs gives a clue as to what's going on here. What a bizzare coincidence that all his staff should suffer from cynophobia.
Fortunately I've the perfect solution for managers with a dog allergy: instead of dogs, why not use guide pigs instead? They've successfully trained them to detect explosives, which suggests they could carry out much the same tasks. I'm sure that'd get round the problem.
Hordes of blind people with their dogs should descend on this person's business, in the same way gays do to B+B owners who do not allow bumming, until he either goes bust or agrees to abide by the law.
Before libertarians start bleating, I'm not a libertarian.
Osman Dogor = Turkish descent = probable Muslim = dogs are unclean because the prophet decided they were.
Victimhood poker, I think Muslim trumps disabled.
The Quiet Man nails it.
Mr Osman has a right to his opinion about who should be in his restaurant, I have a right to my opinion about who should be in my country.
Oh wait, no I don't!
This struck a chord with me. My mother's confined to a wheelchair, and that life sucks. So be it.
But now, if you want to renovate practically anything, you must provide disabled access/disabled lavatories and so on. It's a fucking pain because the cost of these seldom-used amenities are passed on to everybody else.
In an ideal world, you'd be able to turn this accessibility into a feature, much as businesses can be child, aged, or shirt-lifter friendly (or in the case of some places, all three).
As much as I admire someone who ignores a stupid law, I'm with Julia on this. He's a foreigner for a start (so am I) and playing that card, which elegantly trumps the Libertarian ace of Spades - it's his business, he can do what he likes.
It would be fun to flashmob Obdog with sunglasses and Rottweilers, but I am unsure whether blind people can twitter.
ObTastelessJoke:
Why couldn't Helen Keller use the Internet?
Because she was a girl.
"It may be the law, but laws that are wrong must be resisted."
If we had a level playing field, I might agree. But some are more equal than others in this regard.
"Fortunately I've the perfect solution for managers with a dog allergy: instead of dogs, why not use guide pigs instead?"
:D
"Victimhood poker, I think Muslim trumps disabled."
Yes, I think you're right. Clearly, it even trumps 'gay' now, at least in Tower Hamlets, anyway...
"It would be fun to flashmob Obdog with sunglasses and Rottweilers, but I am unsure whether blind people can twitter."
Sure they can, if they have screenreader addons!
A small clarification from a Curmudge resident: the Tudor Rose, somewhat bizarrely, is currently a Dervish Turkish Restaurant: http://www.localsecrets.com/showreview.cfm?id=13133~review-rate-special-offers-dervish+restaurant+and+tudor+rose+cafe-cambridge-restaurant-cafe-cafe+food
And it is indeed about a level playing field. "Please leave, i don't like your dog" and "Please, leave, I don't like your wife's headscarf": both OK or both not OK.
I like dogs but I don't like *ogs.
Our local Thai restaurant has dispassionately opted for a number system to deal with these hang ups. It serves dogs when you ask for 161 and illegal immigrant chow mein has always been 335.
Post a Comment