270 Comment

  • People are allergic to dogs. Lots of people. Keep your dogs at home people, you don’t need them in Walgreens with you. And before you mention some asinine thing about peanuts or some other allergy, please give me an example of dozens of people toting around bags of peanuts and rubbing them all over people and I’ll take you seriously.

    • Tsar of Truxton

      How about pollen? More people are allergic to pollen than dogs. Should we rid the planet of all plants? Should stores not be allowed to have plants inside?

      • justinbc

        You can control plants. You can’t control dogs. Some people might have better control over their dogs than others, but a store can’t put a sign up that says “only nice, well behaved dogs allowed”, because everyone thinks their dog is a perfect little angel.

        • Tsar of Truxton

          Oooooh, so that is why pollen levels in DC never get crazy. We are controlling the plants. Thanks for clarifying and forgive me.

          • justinbc

            I’m sorry, I thought we were having a discussion about what should happen within a store. I didn’t realize there were signs saying “no dogs allowed outside anywhere in the country”, but continue to make nonsensical segues to reinforce your viewpoint.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            No, the point is that people have to deal with all sorts of allergies in all walks of life. We (society) make them deal with them, so arguing that allergies is the reason a dog should not be allowed in a store is dumb. You say you can “control” plants but that doesn’t mean every store owner does anything to mitigate pollen. What if my dog is hypoallergenic? Would she be allowed in the store then?

          • lighten up, francis. big practical distinction between pollen floating around the air and dogs being allowed in buildings. i’m glad that you don’t have problems with dog allergies but for those that do, it’s a simple act that would make being in the store a bit easier. chill out and do the right thing

          • Tsar of Truxton

            If you don’t like it or have allergies, don’t shop I’m the store. It’s as simple as that.

          • This is the worst argument I think i’ve ever seen.

          • Anonomnom

            +1 to Thomas. My jaw honestly kept dropping as I continued reading this. The reasoning actually hurts.

          • To anonymous 9:13, “if you have allergies, don’t shop at the store.” It’s a PHARMACY. People with allergies are their target market. It makes much more sense for them to ban dogs.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            Actually, the question was “should dogs be allowed in stores.” The picture is a pharmacy, but I have not made the argument that dogs should be allowed everywhere. I simply believe that dogs should be allowed in stores at the store-owners discretion.

        • We can predict when pollen levels are going to get high. I know I need to start taking my allergy meds in March to get ready for Spring allergies. I have no idea when I’m going to see your precious Pumpernickel when I’m out buying toothpaste or what he’s rubbed himself or slobbered on that I’m then going to touch. Sheesh, not everyone thinks your pup is an adorable little angel that smells like roses. You basically have run of the rest of the city. Let us have the Walgreens.

          • Two of my neighbors’ “adorable little angels” got in a huge fight yesterday. Took the owners several minutes (and a lot of yelling at each other about how the other dog was the problem) to get them separated. Yeah, don’t need that in a drug store.

        • And I got a debilitating migraine the other day because someone’s kid was screaming on the Metro. There are a lot of things that can make certain people ill that can’t always be controlled.

          • Propagating human species =/= preference of some people to bring animals into stores.
            “Can’t always be controlled” =/= no reason to have a discussion about when that preference of some people to bring animals into stores should be accommodated.

          • I should have read the rest of the thread before using kids as an example. Any erratic screeching noise will do.

        • People have dogs. A lot of people have dogs. Most are well behaved. People need to walk dogs, they can walk them around and put them back in the house or walk them to an errand like picking up something at Walgreens or Staples. If we allow dogs in stores (except food grocery stores) maybe more people will walk to their errands instead of driving. Maybe more dogs will be well behaved b/c they will be out with their owners more (which makes dogs super happy). Maybe people will be happier b/c they will be less stressed. I think there is a lot of good that comes from allowing well behaved dogs in as many places as possible. It happens in Europe, and I have never heard of any sort of allergy problem, or dog attack problem in any European country.

    • This is nothing to joke about. I knew a woman who had intimate relations with Mr. Peanut, and she died as a result.

    • You sound like my neighbor who was complaining that the cute orange cat that roams the neighborhood was triggering his allergies. Regardless of what your feelings are about outdoor cats, animals are going to be outside of your house whether you like it or not and you’ll need to find a way to deal with it.

      • Yeah, but outdoors isn’t indoors.

        • Does it matter? My girlfriend’s very allergic to cats, but she can tolerate being in the same vicinity as them as long as she doesn’t come in direct contact.

          • justinbc

            Unless your girlfriend is the baseline standard for allergic reactions in the US or something I’m not sure that really matters. Everyone suffers differently, that’s why there’s a scale to measure it. Contact is not always something that can be controlled with an animal in a confined space either, especially if it’s a large dog who’s unruly.

          • I thought that was standard (and why would it differ in the US versus other places)? And if so many people have severe allergic reactions just by being in the same room as a dog, why do service dogs get a pass?

          • One can control whether they come into contact with animals much more easily outdoors than indoors. And not just in relation to allergies. …also, I’m arguing about whether outdoors is different than indoors? I think I need to take a break from popville, lol.

          • It’s like being allergic to bee stings. Does it really matter if the bee is outside or stuck inside Giant with you?

          • There are legal issues with trying to ban service animals.

          • dcgator

            Oh man, Jo, I almost spit my water out at your last two lines. Hilarious.

    • Dogs, cats, trees, flowers, peanuts, and children are things that bring joy to most people’s lives, so they are a part of the environment even if they cause distress for some. Some of us do have negative physical or psychological reactions to one or more of these things, but we have ways of coping with them. I don’t see why dogs in particular should be villainized.

  • This thread will probably get a few comments. I am in the no dogs in stores camp for allergic and hygenic reasons. Plus I have been bitten by allegedly nice dogs, so there’s that. I can see why a store would restrict them for liability reasons, as well as to maintain comfort for all guests.

    • +1

      I’m always a bit freaked out by people who think their pet should be afforded the same rights as people.

      • +7 dog-votes

      • Couldn’t agree more. I think the issue should be less one of banning pets in stores and more one of banning people deluded enough to think their pet is now their child. Why does everyone these days seem so entitled to exactly what *they* want and so much less considerate of what *everyone else* has to put up as a result of their unhinged psychological transference?

  • While we are at it can we also have no kids in stores?

    • I’m cool if they’re leashed.
      It’s funny to see the parents pull a Scorpion brutality move on their own harnessed child, lol

    • I think there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking a parent with a demon child to take it outside. And no, I don’t mean a kid who’s fussy or crying, I mean the ones who run up and down the aisle grab things off of shelves, throw stuff, all while the parent is patiently trying to decide between the Maybelline or Covergirl lip stain.

    • While we’re at it – lets get rid of the “Shopper In Training” carts at Safeway. Parents let their kids run wild with those.

      • No thanks. My kids love “helping out” using those.
        #sorrynotsorry that we get in your way.

        • I got stuck at Harris Teeter last night during “rush hour” (6:30pm) because every single time I would turn to go down an aisle, the SAME kid with the tiny cart was there. AT EVERY SINGLE AISLE I TURNED DOWN. The first three times I didn’t mind, but the parents clearly didn’t care and were letting him take his sweet time. By the 9th time of them not asking him to move aside to let other shoppers in, I didn’t wait and went around him only for the mother to utter “DO YOU MIND?!” Yes, I do mind, actually, its inconsiderate.

          • That’s a really frustrating situation to be in. You know what else is frustrating? Everyone else crammed into the supermarket at “rush hour”. Perhaps if I can teach my kids to be considerate, then they won’t grow up to be adults who are inconsiderate. It’s our store to use also.

            You probably sit in traffic and wish that everyone else would get out of your way…

          • austindc

            Seems like also you had nine opportunities to say “excuse me, may I please get by?” before you decided to shove past without a word. Pull yourself together.

          • First of all, I didn’t shove by, I went around the child instead of waiting for him. I ALSO said excuse me EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. It is everyone’s store to use, which is why I don’t understand people who are inconsiderate. That goes for adults who stand on the phone blocking the entire pasta section, and don’t move when people ask, too. Not waging a war on children, I’m saying it is inconsiderate to hold others up. I take care of my nieces and nephews 2 days a week to help their mother, I’m not unsympathetic to the plight of caretaking for small children. But its also good to teach them that the world does not revolve around them, and that they should also sometimes let others go in front of them, which these people didn’t seem to believe in. Oh, and nice try, I always let cars and cyclists in, AND I wave.

          • And to be clear, this is the very first time I have ever had a complaint about one of those carts. Again, not taking an issue with the carts, just the phrase “#sorrynotsorry that we get in your way.” I’m sure the couple I encountered wasn’t you (unless you were at the Yard’s Park HT last night), but that was their attitude and after saying “pardon me” with a smile nine times I think that’s an absurd and inconsiderate attitude that they took on.

          • You’re welcome to complain about people being jerks. I responded initially to the other poster, Dan, who suggested getting rid of those carts because some people aren’t careful with them. That’s a BS suggestion.

      • Grocery stores sell shelf space and there are two areas that command a premium–adult eye level and kid eye level. They want as many children as possible.

      • +10000!

      • Dan, that is really insensitive. Safeway is providing a valuable tool to help parents cope with the harsh realities of living in DC.

        You could always just look ahead of you an avoid the little tykes helping their parents put food on the table.

    • Perhaps you can go back in time first and ban yourself as a child from all real life experiences. But that would probably just make you more of a jerk today.

      • Thank you. I realize most people don’t remember anything before the age of 4 or so, but trust me, we were all little a-holes. Best to remember that when making comments about banning children because they annoy you. And then thank your parents for putting up with your annoying self at that age.

        • I was a horrible screaming baby, so I don’t complain about horrible screaming babies. I just try to get away from them because I don’t want to spend the rest of the day in a dark room clutching my head and vomiting.

  • Overall, I have had better interactions w stranger’s dogs than stranger’s children. I like both dogs and children. But I have never understood the “No Dogs” thing. Some dogs are bad. Some children are bad. That’s life. But anyone who says children are more “hygenic” than dogs has never been around either. My dogs are 10 and 15 and have no teeth and no infectious diseases. I have gotten two colds in the last year directly attributable to the child of a stranger. No contest who I’d rather shop with in Walgreens.

    • justinbc

      There’s a thing called hierarchy in this world, and whether you like it or not humans are at the top of that pyramid. Dogs, fish, orangutans, or any other animal will never be viewed in the same light or afforded the same luxuries as humans, whether they are infants, teens, adults, or elderly. Personally, I don’t like kids either, but I would never argue that animals be treated more favorably than another human, no matter what their stage of development.

      • Tsar of Truxton

        This hierarchy you speak of is a human creation, and this type of thinking is exactly why animals are extinct and endangered. As someone pointed out, it’s not a hierarchy in the world anyway. In Europe this is not a problem.

        • justinbc

          If you think that humans are not above dogs in Europe you’ve clearly never traveled there and seen how they’re treated. And of course the hierarchy is a human creation. Once other animals become self-aware and able to communicate with us I’m sure we’ll value their opinion on the matter as well. Please do not compare “no dogs allowed in the grocery store” with rhinos going extinct. Hyperbole is not your friend in this situation.

        • False. Just outright false. Europe has plenty of places dogs (and cats) are welcome, and PLENTY OF OTHER PLACES IN WHICH THEY ARE NOT. Just like cities throughout the US. I love Europe. I love animals. But this idea that somehow Europe (which is a continent full of highly varying countries and people groups and attitudes, by the way, not one homogeneous unit!) has it all figured out when it comes to animals and people is asinine.

          • justinbc

            +1, I always find it hilarious when someone wants to make an argument and it’s simply, “but in Europe they do it!”

          • You know, it’s funny… I lived for four years in Germany and 3 years in the UK, and I never recall walking into Boots and seeing a dog once.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            I was in France a few months ago, and there were dogs in bars and restaurants all over. I didn’t see anyone keel over and die.

          • +100
            No way in hell they would allow animals inside medical or food service venues in any Germanic country (Germany, Switzerland, Austria). They are waaaaaaaaaaaaay too OCD about cleanliness.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            Dogs are most definitely allowed in restaurants in Germany, and they are allowed on public transit.

          • But in a pharmacy? A place where they are perhaps administering medical care (for example, if they offer flu shots or some sort of “minute clinic”). I’m definitely not against dogs in bars, and really, if a shop owner wants to allow dogs in their store, go for it. But are you guys forgetting that Walgreens is a pharmacy and not just another retail store? There are actual licensing requirements for pharmacies. This is probably a matter of maintaining their pharmacy license.

        • Yes, but so is the store. The dogs can keep people out of their Walgreens when they build one.

      • No one is talking about whether fish should have all the rights and luxuries as humans. We were talking about whether some people’s completely hysterical response to dogs, as if they will keel over and die of “allergies” and “hygiene” if exposed, may be a tad bit of an overreaction. Especially given all the other things in daily life that people aren’t empowered to ban. Like kids. Like other allergens. Try to keep up.

        • justinbc

          Comparing kids to dogs is a non-starter as an argument though, based solely on the fact that one is human and the other is not. Who here has made the argument that someone will “keel over and die” if they come into contact with a dog?

          • “Comparing kids to dogs is a non-starter as an argument though, based solely on the fact that one is human and the other is not.”
            There aren’t enough +1s for this. It’s a little horrifying that it has to be repeated, over and over, throughout this thread.
            “Well, we can’t do X with kids, so we shouldn’t do it to dogs.” If that makes sense to you, you should seek an assessment.
            I am starting to agree with Cortland Milloy.

          • Justinbc – uh, actually, folks talking about how they should not have to “risk their lives” by encountering a dog in a store.

      • The hierarchy pyramid you speak of has no existence outside your own head. Dogs, fish, and orangutans ARE viewed in the same light as humans by many people. What view the law chooses to reflect is very much up for debate, and different societies arrive at very different answers to this question. You need to distinguish between your personal preferences and objective reality.

        • justinbc

          So you would be OK with issuing a dog a drivers license? Voting for a dog for President? If not, please don’t tell me they are viewed as equals. One species is intellectually superior (although some blog posts call this into question) and therefore capable of dominating and dictating the acceptable behavior of the others.

          • Children can’t get drivers licenses or become President either. Just saying…

          • My cousin has epilepsy; that means he can’t get a driver’s license. It doesn’t mean he has less intrinsic worth. Nor are retarded people, who are certainly “intellectual inferior,” and not capable of dominating the acceptable behavior of others. Should we ban them from public spaces too? The might makes right argument–which is what you seem to be making here–leads to very ugly places.

  • First – if you’re worried about hygiene & allergies, don’t even think about all the pounds of cat and dog hair people bring into grocery stores every day with their re-usable bags! Second – dogs are allowed in stores and restaurants all over Europe, so it should be easy to determine if there is an actual disease hazard. But third – too many dog owners are just dumb and don’t realize when their dog is being a problem, so I mostly vote no. (Even though I would love to be able to run in for an occasional errand with my well-behaved dog while out on a walk.)

  • I have a dog, and the answer is no. It sucks sometimes, but it is the best policy for everyone.

    • Me too – since when we’re dogs allowed in stores? I’ve been floored by the type of dog people think is ok to bring into a store. I think it’s extremely presumptuous of dog owners thinking “their dog” is OK. I love my pup and he’s sitting right here with me but he doesn’t need to come to West Elm with me to pick out a new coffee table.

      • Tsar of Truxton

        Almost every store on 14th is dog-friendly. It has noting to to with people presuming they can take dogs places; it has to do with store owners having policies that welcome dogs.

        • But this where the confusion starts. Whether dogs should be allowed or not is up to the store owner. While lots of stores allow dogs, not all do and owners who get accustomed to taking their dogs in stores (like those on 14th) don’t stop and think about other whether dogs are allowed in other stores.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            And if the store owner does not want dogs, they can kindly ask that person to leave. Problem solved. I would never take my dog into a store unless I knew it was dog friendly, so I think your statement that people assume stores allow pets is off base. There may be some inconsiderate people who do, but there are inconsiderate people who leave trash next to trash cans and inconsiderate people who take up two seats on the metro. Making arguments based on a few jerks is stupid because they will do what they want no matter the rules.

          • Its pretty easy to just ask. If I’m not sure I always just try to find an employee at the front of the store and check. Though maybe I’m in the minority and don’t just presume my dog is allowed in the store.

          • I would never presume my dog is allowed in a store. But if the store has a sign saying dogs are welcome, or if I know from previous experience that this is the case, I will absolutely bring my dog in with me.

      • It’s really funny that you specifically mention West Elm. West Elm on 14th St hosts numerous dog friendly events. They’ve done several photo contests where they encourage you to use their store as a backdrop. They’re even doing a holiday one coming up! https://www.facebook.com/events/693047944162921/

    • Agreed – Not everyone likes dogs. What if you’re deathly afraid of dogs from a traumatic incident and there’s one in the narrow aisle you need to get something from?

      Or like other said, you may be allergic.

      Or you might just not like them. You have the right to be a monster.

      Either way, my desire to have my dog with me shouldn’t outweigh other people’s rights and desires. We live in a society.

      • Tsar of Truxton

        They have a right to shop elsewhere or wait a minute until the dog leaves the aisle. It must be tough for these people to walk around DC where dogs are everywhere. They must live in constant fear, everywhere they go.

        • you’re still saying that one person’s desire to have his / her dog with them trumps the potential health (physical, emotional, etc)and safety of others. No. Just, no.

          • I think that one person’s desire to have their dog with them has equal weight as another person’s speculative physical/emotional/safety concerns. It doesn’t trump such concerns, but it is on the same plane, and thus up to the owner of the store to decide.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            Show me the proof that there is a health and safety issue, and I’ll agree with you.

          • Anonymous – Dogs can bite people and may respond unpredictable to other people/animals/stimuli. There is your health and safety issue. Thank you for being reasonable and agreeable.

          • 14th St – I agree it should be up to the store owner to decide, I’m totally ok with that.

            Anonymous – clearly nothing I or anyone else on here says is going to dissuade you from spouting nonsense, so I’m just going to leave it up to you to google or to imagine the ways in which a dog could cause a health and/or safety issue.

          • Tsar of Truxton

            And people can hit pedestrians with their cars and someone with a mental health issue may act in an unpredictable manner. I am talking about real data that shows that a dog in a store is a public health issue. It doesn’t exist. Quite frankly, I think you will see laws loosen up on this issue, not tighten in the future, so you might as well get used to it. As a dog owner, I personally don’t bring my dog to stores except petco because I think it is annoying to have to deal with, but these cries about health and safety issues are so off base, it is ridiculous.

          • Actually, you’re right about the laws loosening – NYC just legalized dogs on restaurant patios this week.
            gothamist. com/2015/10/27/dogs_have_their_day.php

          • So, real, true life here. I have a neighbor who is afraid of dogs. She has done everything short of suing me to try to prevent me from having my dog in my own yard or walking my dog past her house. This includes calling the police, siccing animal control on me with allegations of neglect, filing a complaint with my condo association, calling our building’s management company, and, once, tampering with our yard gate to make it look like the latch was broken (it wasn’t, and I was able to snap it back into place in a second and use the yard).
            Who’s rights are being violated here? Does her emotional health trump my right to use (my own) private and public property in a legal manner? I’m not actually weighing in on this particular fight about dogs in stores, but the argument that someone who is afraid of dogs shouldn’t be put through the “misery” of being near them is a VERY slippery slope that ends with my dog having to be muzzled and on a 4′ or shorter leash any time he leaves the interior of my house…

          • justinbc

            @JoDa, your neighbor certainly sounds overzealous. That doesn’t sound afraid of dogs, it sounds spiteful. I don’t think anyone would advocate going to the lengths of controlling what you do in your own yard, that’s not even on the table here.

          • This argument applies just the same to dogs outside as in: what you’re in effect arguing is that because some people are afraid of dogs, they shouldn’t be allowed in public.

          • Justin, I agree that she is a bully and well off her rocker, but it *has* been suggested here that dogs should be forbidden in all stores (well, most, I would imagine pet stores would be excepted) by force of law. If our rationale behind that is “someone might be afraid,” those concerns carry over into other public spaces. Maybe not sidewalks, since that would cause a major uproar, but the same argument certainly has been made for some parks. The (public) park near my house explicitly bans dogs. When I asked a neighbor involved with the park what was up with that (I could see a notice that all dogs must be leashed and to scoop or be fined, even a ban on dogs inside the playground space (about 1/4 of the park) but a total ban seems a bridge too far), she said “we didn’t want any kids getting bit.” That’s literally the same argument (oh, it uses different words, but it’s a fear-based argument nonetheless), and my dog is therefore banned from public property built and maintained by tax dollars even if I’m following the letter of all other laws (leashing, supervising, and scooping…and, yes, I do have a proper dog license, as well). I’d love to use the grills & tables in the park for get-togethers (I don’t have a lot of space, and the grilling/eating space in the park is rather large (also about 1/4 of the park)), but it seems a little off to me to invite a bunch of people my dog knows and likes (and vice-versa) over to enjoy the outdoors in an open, public space and leave him cooped up inside and alone.

          • JoDa, I agree with Justinbc as far as your neighbor sounding spiteful… but wanted to point out that the 4-foot maximum leash length actually applies to _all_ dogs:
            900.3 No person owning, keeping, or having custody of a dog in the District shall permit the dog to be on any public space in the District, other than a dog park established by section 9a of the Animal Control Act of 1979, passed on 2nd reading on September 20, 2005 (Enrolled version of Bill 16-28), unless the dog is firmly secured by a substantial leash. The leash shall be held by a person capable of managing the dog.
            900.4 The length of the leash required under § 900.3 shall not exceed four feet (4 ft.).

          • justinbc

            @JoDa, I just want to make one important distinction based on your last comment. You rightly point out that you pay taxes that support the park. The key thing there is that you pay the taxes, not your dog. Nobody is prohibiting you from using the park in a lawful manner, however if the laws for the park state no dogs it would be no different than saying no drugs, weapons, etc. As much as we love our pets they are still considered property, and using them in ways the law prohibits shouldn’t be rationalized because the dog is “ok” with it. An easy example of this can be seen at Lincoln Park in Capitol Hill on a daily basis. It’s not a dog park, it’s a park, but it’s viewed by dog owners as the official off leash park of the neighborhood for some reason (probably due to lax police enforcement) and so you routinely see dogs running up to people who have no interest in being jumped on, slobbered on, or possibly bitten, and the owner really can’t do anything to prevent it once they’re off the leash.

          • Justin, I’m not arguing that a public park that is not a dog park should be exempt from the other laws applying to dog owners (I did not know that a 4′ leash was required, but, lo and behold, that’s how long my leash is since that’s a recommended length by most professionals), but instead pointing out that special rules were made for a public (in every way) space because of a small group of people’s fear (the “Friends of” organization is 5 board members and a half-dozen people in the community…would be more, but “rocking the boat” is, um, “discouraged” in that organization, so many people are chased off). Saying no guns or drugs is just reinforcing existing laws (with the possible exception of recent developments regarding concealed carry laws and the *minor* caveat of simply *possessing* a small amount of weed inside said park, carrying a gun, using drugs, or selling drugs in a park would be illegal under regular DC laws). The organization that helped get this park developed sought and received an “enhancement” to DC laws, to not just require (and perhaps remind) what is already required of dog owners in public parks (leashes, supervision, and scooping), but to outright ban them. While the owners that allow their dogs off leash in public parks that are not dog parks certainly are breaking the existing laws, this park received a SPECIAL RULE that prohibits me from entering it with my dog under circumstances that would be legal in all other public parks.
            Bonus, you called people out earlier for comparing dogs to children, and then went ahead and, inappropriately, compared my dog to guns and drugs.
            If he were dangerous (he’s not), other restrictions could be placed on ME specifically, possibly including a prohibition on bringing him to public parks. As it stands, neighbors of Lincoln Park could (perfectly legally), put their dog on a waist leash (or any leash, really, but a waist leash is the best option when you want to do something like that) and go have a picnic, whereas I cannot unless I travel over a mile to the next-closest public park. All because a few people were afraid. If that can happen in one park, it could happen in more, as well as other public spaces.

          • text, the reason why I mentioned the leash length is based on her harassment and the potential of leash laws extending to my own yard should a small minority of people who are afraid “get everything they want,” which, in said crazy neighbor’s case, would likely mean a requirement to keep my dog on a short leash even on my own (fenced) property. I am fortunate to have a decent-sized yard (not huge, but sufficient for him to get a decent run on given that he’s on the small side), but unfortunate enough to live pretty far from an official dog park. While even just walking on the outer edge of the sidewalk would put her almost 5′ from my dog (even with his snout poking through the fence, which he only does if someone addresses him/calls him over for a pet), that has not been sufficient for her and she has done all the crazy stuff I mentioned above as well as actually walks out in the street if I’m out when she passes the yard (I have tried mightily to avoid her…for example, if I see her coming when I arrive home from work, I wait a while before going out…she ALWAYS appears, no matter how long I wait…she’s watching, I know it, yes, it’s spiteful, I agree). I kind of think she’s hoping she gets hit and thinks she’d be able to sue me if she did. If she had it her way, I’d (at least) have to leash my dog even in my own yard. That’s what fully accommodating fearful people might look like.
            And, I should clarify…it’s not just me with that crazy neighbor. I talked to a couple of neighbors and she also, a while back, went after some guys across the street from her who frequently let their dogs out in their front yard (also supervised, I’ve never seen the dogs out without them at least sitting on the porch…their back yard isn’t fully fenced, so they use the front) and nearly pepper-sprayed another neighbor’s dog when she ran up to about 3′ from their fence and fetched a ball they had thrown (that neighbor said she yelled “you back that dog off or I will be forced to defend myself” while pointing the pepper spray). From talking to them, it sounds like she’s taken it further with me than them (the guys said she called the police on them once, but she’s done it at least 5 times to me, and I appear to be the only one she’s called animal control on…at least both the police and AC have expressed shock at the discrepancy between what she stated in her calls and the actual situation – apparently she reported to the police that my dog was at large and threatening people and to AC that I leave my dog out in the yard unsupervised for several hours a day).

          • JoDa, I’m sorry to hear your neighbor is giving you such a hard (and unjustified) time.
            I don’t think that kind of extreme paranoia is representative of most of the folks who are expressing concerns about dogs in stores, though. (Not that that makes it any less aggravating for you to have to deal with this neighbor on a routine basis.)

        • There’s a difference between passing a dog on the street and being in a confined space such as the aisle at Walgreens.

  • I never had a problem with it until I stepped in poop IN Sephora.

  • Wow, 30% of the comments compare dogs with children. (With only 10 comments so far, the math is easy.) It’s numbers like this that make me seriously think we should bring back poll testing before permitting people to vote.

    • justinbc

      I think the fact that anyone advocating in the affirmative has to resort to extreme examples to more correlations says everything you need to know about the sensibility of each side of the debate.

    • No one is saying dogs are the same as children. Folks are pointing out that there are many many things in life that are annoying and germ covered (e.g., kids), so the hysterical freak out about how we are all going to die if a dog walks into a hardware store just seems silly. (Also, you may want to reconsider advocating for poll testing – that reading comprehension section can be tricky, hon.)

      • No one is hysterically freaking out. But people are saying that it’s not more important for you to take your dog to Walgreens than it is for those with allergies to be in a confined space with them when there’s no need for them to be there.

        • Uh. You may want to read the comments. E.g., commenting that you should not have to “risk your life” shopping bc there is a dog in a store = hysterical freaking out.

        • I’m really allergic to certain perfumes can we ban those too?

          While were at it CO2 emission causes asthma attacks for millions of people. Lets ban cars while we’re protecting people with allergies.

      • justinbc

        You mention reading comprehension, yet you keep mentioning this “hysterical freaking out” that opponents are making…and yet not a single person has made that argument here other than you.

        • I stand by my comments. But thanks!

          • justinbc

            Then please point out to me the post where someone stated they would die if they came into contact with a dog. I don’t see it here, maybe you read it somewhere else, or just imagined it in order to argue against a position that nobody is taking?

          • My pleasure! Check out Anon, October 29, 2015 at 10:38 am: “I should not have to risk my life or take medication (which can cause all kinds of other problems including liver damage) just because you can’t stand to keep your chattel at home where it belongs.”
            You may find “Ctrl F” helpful.

          • justinbc

            That was posted after your comment. You may find clocks helpful.

          • So? I was actually initially looking at the numerous references to biting, “emotional/physical safety,” “traumatic incidents,” “deathly fears,” etc. – and summed up that hysteria with a statement that wasn’t a quote and didn’t purport to be a quote. Is your point that somehow my statement wasn’t valid because someone came along a few minutes later basically proved that I hit the nail on the head?

      • Well, as long as we’re on reading comprehension: “30% of the comments compare dogs with children.”
        Notice that does not say “dogs are the same as children.” It says people are comparing dogs with children. For instance, someone posted,
        “Overall, I have had better interactions w stranger’s dogs than stranger’s children. I like both dogs and children. But I have never understood the “No Dogs” thing. Some dogs are bad. Some children are bad. That’s life. ”
        That poster unquestionably compared dogs with children. And by the way . . . that poster was you.

        • Oh! You got me! Yes, I talked about dogs and children in the same comment, and pointed out that my dog is way more tolerable than your children by comparing the two. But I did use children as a comparison for what “rights” my dog should have, which is what you were implying.

        • While we are at it, post above at 12:11pm (and by the way….that poster was you) – “‘Well, we can’t do X with kids, so we shouldn’t do it to dogs.’ If that makes sense to you, you should seek an assessment.”
          So, do you now understand the response – “No one is saying dogs are the same as children.” If not, is there a friend around who can explain it to you?

  • As an owner of a “really nice dog” 🙂 I would NEVER bring him into a store unless it expressly said dogs are welcome outside. I just think this is one of those things that yes it’s annoying but is also considerate. as for all the stores on 14th street being pet friendly, unless its logan hardware or planet pet, keep your dog out.

  • I can’t, for the life of me, think of a single situation where it’s absolutely necessary to take your dog into a store. Leave it at home.

    • justinbc

      Anthropomorphization is a problem that many pet owners suffer from, dog owners in particular.

      • +1
        Please folks – just have a kid. I love pets too but some people just take this stuff way too far, beyond the realms of common sense, courtesy, and reason.

        • “just have a kid”

          Not always an option.

        • Funny, when I see a kid have a meltdown in a store, I think “just use birth control.”

        • “some people just take this stuff way too far, beyond the realms of common sense, courtesy, and reason.”

          You say this as though the argument does not apply as much, if not more, to parents as it does to “crazy dog people.”

          • It doesn’t apply as much because children are fellow human beings. Dogs are animals. Doting upon them (as anon describes) as if they’re your children is creepy and more likely than not, a sign of lonliness

          • Having a child sounds like a pretty terrible method of coping with loneliness, P Streeter.

          • @ P Streeter: The point was not whether one target of affection is worthier than another. The point was that parents can be just as unreasonable, self-involved and demanding as the dog owners in question can be. #notallparents of course, but the point is that neither side has a monopoly on bad behavior.

        • “just have a kid”
          Wow. Just…wow.

    • No, there is no situation where it is absolutely necessary. But there are plenty of situations where it is the preferred thing for a dog owner to do. So, if a store has decided that they don’t mind having dogs enter, then bring in the pooches. If some customers don’t like it, they can shop elsewhere.

    • This doesn’t really apply to DC life, but what if you’re doing a multi-hour driving trip with your dogs and you have to stop and pee somewhere and it’s a hot day? One time I was harassed by VA police for leaving my dogs in the car in that situation (although I don’t think 5 minutes in the car with the windows down when it’s 73 degrees was going to kill them).

  • I am really outraged by no dog policy. And I find the comments a further outrage. Allergies, biting, strange children — this is crazy. Just let folks do what the want and if I wish to bring my dog into a store, hell yes I will and do. Dogs and children make us smile and maybe just smiling at each other can solve some issues in this WAY TOO UPTIGHT town!

    • No, it’s not crazy, it’s sh!t that happens every day. It’s not an issue of people being too uptight, it is a very real health and safety issue. You don’t get to just do whatever you want because you think dogs and children should make everyone smile.

      • There is no health issue and safety is a matter of circumstances. Crossing the street carries more risk than sharing store space with a leashed dog.

    • In other words, “Your rules do not apply to me. I like to take advantage of the social norms that civilization provides, but when they interfere with MY desires, then I am outraged and will openly flout my disregard for others by blaming others”

      Thank you so much. I’m sure you think you’re making the world a better place, but really you just want what you want. period

      • +1. The attitude of “I’m going to do whatever the hell I want and f*** everyone else if they don’t like it or if it’s against the law” does not make for a smoothly functioning society.

        • The entitlement is pretty crazy. In a city with limited resources and lots of people who need to use them, it’s really not a reasonable request that everyone with dog allergies, dog anxiety, or an aversion to being licked, humped, drooled on, barked at or peed on just stay home or find another store to shop at so that the dog owners have free rein to not leave their dogs at home ever.

          • “The entitlement is pretty crazy.”
            It’s sort of the theme of our city. School residency cheaters, scofflaws illegally renting out basements, Congress sucking at the teat of lobbyists, lobbyists and their represented industries sucking the taxpayer dry, DCRA in bed with every major and fly-by-night developer trying to hustle real estate, churches fighting bike lanes, drivers not following any rules, etc etc etc.
            Doing whatever you want – consequences and fellow citizens be damned – is The American Way. The political leadership has proven this time and again. Why shouldn’t that trickle down to an arrogant dog owner?

    • I just returned from a work trip to San Diego where almost every single store implicitly accepted dogs, and most had water dishes outside.

      While this “I do what I want” attitude is not necessarily constructive, it should be noted that there are places that can and do live their everyday lives sharing stores with animals.

      And it’s great!

  • Can I bring my full-grown male howler monkey into stores with me?

  • Dogs are allowed in some stores, and not in others. It’s up to the proprietors. Does anybody think it should be any different?

    • Apparently DCRA does. There are rules on the books about limiting animals in places where consumables are sold. However, DCRA has been inconsistent in their application of those rules. Some establishments have randomly been fined, while others continue to welcome dogs without issue.
      In a place like a pharmacy – where people go when they are already sick and to buy consumables – I think it’s reasonable to keep animals out.

    • My argument would be that if a store owner tells some uppity person with their dog that they have to leave, that uppity person might go on Yelp and trash his business. If the owner has the law on his side (“sorry, dogs aren’t allowed in stores unless otherwise posted!”) then the burden is off of him to enforce it.

      • So, you are saying that the law should be that dogs are not allowed unless the store posts a sign saying that dogs are allowed? Then the uppity dog owner can still trash a business on yelp for not posting a sign saying that dogs are allowed. Or are you saying that the law should ban dogs from stores in order to protect store owners from the possibility of bad yelp reviews?

        • justinbc

          If someone wants to find a reason to write a bad Yelp review there’s little that the business owner can do to prevent it. Some people are predispositioned to finding ridiculous faults.

  • I hate dogs, especially the ones that are supposed to be “just being friendly” and get their nose up in your crotch. I never really disliked dogs until after 17+ years of living in DC and having to be around people and their pets – stray cats, barking dogs, dog poop, dog bites, dog parks (God I hate dog parks), that fool that would walk around Dupont Circle with a ball python around his neck, my kids class ferret…you name it. And yes, I am disgruntled and lousy…so there.

    • Yes, that’s right, dogs are a DC thing the rest of the country doesn’t have. Smaller towns and NYC don’t have any people with pets. And those awful dog parks, creating dedicated spaces for dogs to exercise and play in a sequestered location. Just awful, totally awful, for people who hate dogs. Most of all stray cats. Yes, those people and their horrid stray cats….

    • I was ambivalent toward dogs until I lived in DC and had to deal with the nonstop furbaby introductions and subsequent barking/biting/pawing/slobbering/jumping/all around unwanted and unpleasant interactions whether wanted or not. Keep them out of my face, and for god’s sake keep them out of our stores.

    • Why on earth are you going to dog parks if you hate dogs?

      • Yeah, they’re pretty easy to avoid. I wish I was burdened with a dog park or two!

      • Just a guess, but based on the Dupont reference he is probably more complaining about the people who congregate with their dogs on the sidewalk outside a certain dog park.

  • I think it’s OK to bring dogs to an outside patio of a restaurant and let them hang out. I’m always surprised by places with huge patios that don’t allow this. That being said, I wouldn’t take my dog inside anywhere, especially a walgreens.

    • I talked to the folks at Le Diplomate about this once. They said that dogs had to stay outside the fence of the “patio/summer garden” because it includes a prep station and is under DCRA jurisdiction. The sidewalk cafe (tables on 14th) does not include any food prep areas so you can have your dog at your table.

    • Technically, restaurants are not supposed to allow pets on patios according to DOH and DCRA regulations. However, enforcement is lax. If I owned such a place, I’d be concerned about liability – if it’s illegal, the business’s master insurance plan will probably not defend you in a case if someone was bitten or mauled on your premises.

      • justinbc

        Yeah, I definitely blame the lax, and inconsistent, DCRA enforcement as part of the reason there’s a misconception by people in DC that dogs are allowed at more places than they technically are.

  • This is totally up to the individual store and rightly so (assuming they aren’t selling/preparing food, in which case it becomes a health hazard).
    I love my dog and sometimes have to make a second trip while out with him to return to stores, but those are the choices you make when you have a pet. If you think your dog has “a right” to be in a store, you are the one who is entitled and out of touch.
    Also, stop putting your poop bags in my trash!

    • +1 Best response yet.

    • +100! Thank you for being a responsible dog owner! I love dogs, I and love to interact with well-behaved ones in stores, but I don’t feel so warm and fuzzy about the ones that are shoving their snouts into my bag or barking at me or flying down the hallway of my apartment building to jump up and grab on to my clothes while their “parent’ tries to figure out where that little goofball went. Control your animal in public spaces and we won’t have a problem.

    • justinbc

      Don’t get me started on the poop bags. As a dog owner myself, I would never, ever throw my dog’s feces into someone else’s receptacle. The irony is the people most likely to do this are the ones who also complain about quality of life issues, with zero comprehension for what they’re doing to others.

    • Totally agree with letting the owners of retail establishments set their own policy. If a dog destroys something, make the owner pay up (or something like that). I’d also be ok with giving some discretion to bar and restaurant owners as well. Dacha is very dog-friendly and they do a very good job of fostering a comfortable atmosphere for all. I don’t think they should stop letting dogs in because of a health regulation that’s too broad.

      • “they do a very good job of fostering a comfortable atmosphere for all.”
        You’re not a neighbor, I guess.

        • Oh lord, not going down this rabbit hole, but I’m about two blocks away. I support them in this latest fracas with the ANC but was just using them as an example of a bar that has managed to be dog-friendly without making non-pet owners feel uncomfortable.

  • I have a dog and I understand why most stores don’t allow dogs inside. I think it’s a perfectly reasonable policy. I wish the city was the type of place where I could leave my dog tied up outside for 5 minutes and not have to worry about someone messing with her.

  • I am a massive dog lover and cross the street to pet cute dogs. BUT…my dog does not enjoy going shopping, she gets nervous and overwhelmed. Dogs do not belong in Walgreens or supermarkets. But outdoor cafes and the like, I would think are great places to enjoy time outside with your pooch.

    • It’s important for dog owners to know the preferences of their particular dog, though. Mine gets nervous and overwhelmed sitting in outdoor cafes (gets antsy sitting still for a long period of time while I chat/eat/etc), so I avoid putting her in those situations. She has no problem going into stores, though.

  • Dogs are allowed in the Apple Store in Georgetown. And honestly, most are better behaved than some of the clientele.

  • I love my two dogs, but good god – no. Not in stores.

    Maybe Home Depot, where the aisle are wide and floors are concrete, but otherwise, no.

  • I love my dog. Hes the sweetest. But… hes also 70lbs and gets anxious in new situations (not to mention hyper). I don’t want to bring him into a store or restaurant. Do I mind personally if someone brings a dog in to a store our restaurant? No – As long as the dog is well behaved. However, I understand there are a myriad of reasons why introducing dogs into public situations like that can make people uncomfortable or just be impractical. Alas dog lovers, its probably for the best to leave your furry friend at home or just take them to the park.

  • this is silly — it’s an established fact that 98.7% of the Chihuahuas in DC are registered emotional support dogs

  • Walgreens is a pharmacy. It is NOT just a retail store. Pharmacies are required to follow certain rules or they lose their license. I am honestly not as familiar with the regulations in DC vs Maryland, but I am almost certain that you are not allowed to have animals in a pharmacy due to contamination issues, or just because the Board of Pharmacy doesn’t like animals, idk. At any rate, this is up to the store owner. If a business owner allows dogs, great! Those who don’t like them don’t have to shop there. If a store doesn’t allow dogs, great! People are offended don’t have to shop there. They are giving plenty of notice. What is the big deal?

  • Great response. I think we should assume retail establishments don’t allow dogs and if they advertise that they do, say “Oh wow…this place allows dogs. That’s really great of them. I will support them with my business” as opposed to vilifying places that choose not to cater to dogs.

    • I agree 100%. I see very little vilification of stores that don’t allow dogs on this thread, but if someone should start doing this, they are definitely in the wrong.

    • +100 I am a dog owner and I would never assume that my dog is welcome in a store (unless its a pet store) unless the policy is communicated openly to the public. That means that I set aside 30 an additional 30 minutes to walk my dog before I run any errands. That is a burden of responsibility that I accepted when becoming a dog owner.

      • +1. This is part of being a dog owner. Sometimes it’s annoying but that’s how it goes.

      • justinbc

        I think you nailed part of the problem right there, whether purposely or not. I’m sure most of the responders here are great, perfect dog owners, but many dog owners in DC are terrible, and lazy when it comes to their responsibilities for their pet. I’ve had roommates who fit this bill perfectly with their dog, rarely ever walking them, leaving them at home unattended for very long stretches of time, etc. The person who takes their dog into Walgreens because it’s already convenient for them and considers it the dog’s exercise for the day is the one likely to cause the most problems and be the most “surprised” when their pet acts out in public.

  • I had a good dog, such a sweetheart. I never took him into stores except into the pet store (he LOVED it) and sometimes into the bank (well, not the bank proper, but the little ATM room). I agree, no dogs in stores unless the owner welcomes them.

  • Also keep your dogs on short leash on the sidewalks people!

    • Same for your kids too, please.

      • Apparently Duponter is one of those people who feels the need to push his or her agenda regardless of the topic. In case you have trouble with reading comprehension, the topic is dogs in certain places, not children. Feel free to start one of your own on that topic if you’d like. But since you decided to go down that road, if you really think that there’s an equivalency between a small human being and a non-human animal your reasoning skills are suspect and just about everything else you argue can be safely ignored.

        • Uh. No one said that dogs and children are the same. In response to folks griping about how other people’s dogs annoy them, Duponter (and several others) have pointed out that the rest of us have to deal with your annoying crap too like your kids so boo hoo for you that you don’t like my dog or my kids. I love your reasoning that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is “pushing an agenda.” Isnt that what you’re doing? Isn’t that sorta the point of blog commenting? Are we all supposed to just say: “I have nothing to add to this conversation.” You must be fun at parties.

          • It’s been pointed out several times, but you fail to see it. By bringing up kids you’re stating that there’s some way to compare the two, rights-wise. If you really think so, you have no business arguing with the grownups. Humans and non-humans don’t have the same rights, period.

          • Oh honey. You are so missing it. No one is saying that dogs should have the same “rights” as children. This doesn’t even have anything to do with “dog rights.” I doesn’t have anything to do with “children’s rights” either. Are you seriously this dense?
            Does Human A being annoyed about X trump Human B’s right to have X with him/her?
            Does Human A being annoyed about X trump Business Owner’s right to allow Human A to have X with him/her on Business Owner’s property?
            See how no one is talking about X’s rights?

          • That should say – Does Human A being annoyed about X trump Business Owner’s right to allow Human B to have X with him/her on Business Owner’s property?
            (Oof. Nothing more embarrassing than trying to lay down the sass and then screwing it up with a type-o.)

          • That’s not all that’s embarrassing. It’s also embarrassing to be wrong (your attempt at being clever by using “Honey” notwithstanding). When the topic is about dogs not being allowed somewhere as soon as you or anyone else brings up the idea of equivalent treatment of children; like one of the first posts from last night saying that they should banned from stores, or like Duponter’s completely asinine and irrelevant point above about leashing children, or — come to think about it — your completely asinine and irrelevant post about your last cold; you’re putting them on the same plane. Particularly since children weren’t the issue to begin with. But, whatever, keep treating your animals like your children and we’ll just keep laughing at you.

          • I was being condescending, not trying to be clever. Honey.
            I’m sorry that mention of snotty nosed children who are not as cute as dogs apparently cut a little close to home. You really may want to consider taking blog comments a little less seriously.

          • “(Oof. Nothing more embarrassing than trying to lay down the sass and then screwing it up with a type-o.)”
            Given the frequency it happens to you, I’d imagine you’ve gotten used to it by now. Though I suppose I should make a distinction between errors in reasoning and typos, but you’ve got the whole waterfront covered. Congrats.

          • @dcd – oh snap! i made one type-o, which i corrected a second later. sue me! as far as you thinking i have “errors in reasoning” – consider you have been walking around in fear that one day a bullet is going to fall from the heavens and kill you (which you so artfully explained below)….I take it as a complement that you have been unable to follow my reasoning.

  • I have no issue with dogs in a store, in fact as a dog owner I have found several stores that allow dogs and as a result I frequent those businesses over others that don’t. Some of the stores actually have dog treats that they give my dog thankfully with a smile and a pat on the head. As a result my dog pulls over to those storefronts when we walk on by. I can understand not allowing them in restaurants, but a drug store to me is no big deal.

  • I like dogs. I like cats. I like birds and rabbits. But when I am shopping, I don’t particular like any animal sniffing and/or drooling on me/my clothes. Additionally, what if someone accidentally brushes up or steps on said nice, well behaved dog and the dog freaks out? What then?

    People need to remember – not every dog does through the rigorous training a service dog goes through. Loud noises, grabby kids, crowded situations, and sudden movements can be problematic of even the NICEST dog. Example witnessed last month: at a restaurant, aged Labrador lying on patio by owner. little kid walks by and kicks dog in the rear. Dog turns and snaps & barks at child. [note, child is ok but did get a talking to]

  • We have a super reactive dog and would never even think about bringing her to a store, but I am shocked by some of the dogs that people do bring to public places that are absolutely freaking out. These people are oblivious and then only way to keep them from causing a dog bite is by telling them dogs aren’t allowed, period. Sadly, there are a handful of stupid people that ruin things for the rest of us.\.
    As someone who really wishes our dog was better socialized as a puppy, I do appreciate business that advertise that they allow dogs so you can bring your pup and get them used to sights and sounds. But it’s the same as yelling fire in a crowded theater – your right to bring your dog around stops as soon as it infringes on someone else’s rights to safety.

    • My dogs are super reactive too. Even if I didn’t care about anyone else, I wouldn’t bring them to a store simply because it would be such an awful experience for ME! Walking them is torture enough. I can’t imagine that someone would want, or even be able, to buy groceries while their dog is barking and pulling on the leash. Maybe they’d try it once and then realize it’s not possible and never do it again.

  • I’m a dog owner and I don’t think dogs or any pets that aren’t service animals should be allowed in stores because like many have commented you might think your dog is a good dog when in fact they aren’t. I’ve had plenty of incidents where I’m walking my dog and people’s “nice dogs” start snarling and trying to nip at my dog. Also there are those individuals that don’t care about anyone but themselves and leave their dog shit all over the sidewalk for people to step in and I wouldn’t be surprised if they would do the same in a store

    • Seriously, WHAT is with the people who don’t pick up the dog sh!t on the sidewalk?! It’s mind-boggling how entitled some people are.

  • I am a dog owner and lover but it should be absolutely at the owner’s discretion. I hate when people bring dogs in without even asking.

    • It should be assumed and accepted if they don’t unless they otherwise advertise as being “dog friendly”

  • If a store is dog friendly you can bet I am bringing my dog in. If its not that’s fine as well. Personally, I don’t think dogs in stores is a big deal. In NYC you see dogs everywhere.


    • What if a dog is established as a corporation? Since corporations are people, my friend, then that dog BOOM becomes a person.
      Vote Romney 2016!

  • As someone who has been hospitalized for allergic reactions to dogs and cats, I applaud this ban. I should not have to risk my life or take medication (which can cause all kinds of other problems including liver damage) just because you can’t stand to keep your chattel at home where it belongs. Animals, other than humans, are considered property in the eyes of the law.

    I think dogs and other pets are cute. But keep them at home. Because you may never now when your cute little animal may cause someone to spend a week in a hospital.

    • Congrats. You used a fancy word – chattel. You are clearly smart.

      Not sure what that has to do with anything, but okay.

    • I hear your reasoning, and I actually don’t think that people should bring their pets inside a store unless the store is openly permitting them as a policy (and I’m a dog owner.) But, I don’t see how its realistic not to take medication for that severe of an allergy with service animals everywhere? I never thought animals on airplanes were a good idea, but you have to allow for service animals. How do you handle that?

    • Also, chattel, really?

    • Tsar of Truxton

      ~40% of Americans have dogs. ~10% of the population is allergic to animals. I haven’t seen a specific number, but it is largely accepted that a much smaller percent of those who are allergic to animals are actually allergic to dogs (most people are allergic to cats). Of these people who are allergic to dogs, an even smaller percentage are allergic to the point where contact would lead to hospitalization. It sucks that you have allergies like this, but you are a small minority, and society doesn’t alter behaviors because something might cause harm to someone, somewhere. If a private business wants to allow it, then that is its prerogative.

      • “Society doesn’t alter behaviors because something might cause harm to someone, somewhere.” Really? Why can’t I get peanuts on a plane?

        • Tsar of Truxton

          Well, actually you can get peanuts on some airlines, and you can bring peanuts on any plane. In the cases where you can’t, it is because a private business made a decision not to serve them, which is that businesses right. Just like it is a businesses right to allow dogs.

        • In the last week I have had peanuts on 4 different airplanes on two airlines.

          Care to try that again?

      • “Society doesn’t alter behaviors because something might cause harm to someone, somewhere.”
        That’s . . . ridiculous. I can’t fire a gun up in the air because the bullet, when it lands, might cause harm to someone, somewhere. I can’t drive drunk because I might cause harm to someone, somewhere. A significant portion of our laws exist to prevent harm to someone, somewhere.

        • you missed the point. your examples are not comparable because those situations present the same (albeit small) risk to everyone. a better example would be – no one can drive a car ever because a small percentage of the population is allergic to emissions. (also, while we are at it, that is NOT the reason you can’t fire a gun in the air.)

          • “(also, while we are at it, that is NOT the reason you can’t fire a gun in the air.)”
            Really? The reason I can’t fire a gun in the air isn’t because I might hurt or kill someone? What is it, then? A noise violation?

          • “I can’t fire a gun up in the air because the bullet, when it lands, might cause harm to someone, somewhere”
            Really? You are doubling down on this laughably false statement? JFC. The danger is not the falling bullet. Actually, bullets don’t really fall back to earth with enough force to hurt someone – and of course, given that the majority of the earth’s surface is not covered by a person, odds are that falling bullets just hit the dirt, the pavement, a roof, a tree, whatever. Seriously, when was the last time you heard about someone killed by a bullet falling out of the sky and killing them?
            The reasons you can’t fire a gun in the air (which I trust I have to walk you through, because I don’t think you will get there on your own) – e.g., the bullet could hit someone on the way UP (like someone on a balcony), gun fire incite violence (if people think you are firing at them) or confusion/terror (if people don’t know what is going on). Plus, its just generally not a good idea thing to have people standing around firing guns.

          • @dcd – you may find this article helpful – http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/03/watch_out_for_falling_bullets.html
            Other things you may find helpful – High school physics. Common sense. Thinking before you type. Googling before you type. Reading something other than blog comments.

        • Tsar of Truxton

          Way to take the statement out of context. I never said we don’t have laws to protect people as a whole. We don’t, however, create laws to protect a individuals who make up a miniscule percentage of the population. Someone brought up peanuts before. You can still buy peanuts. You can still eat peanuts. I’ve heard of a lot more people dying due to peanut allergies than I have heard stories about someone dying while walking by a dog in a store, yet still no protection for these people with peanut allergies. That’s because they are still an incredibly small group who happen to have been born with a bad allergy. Laws are intended to protect the masses.

          • justinbc

            Peanuts are predictable. They aren’t going to jump out of the bag on the airplanes and start biting and drooling on people. Dogs however are significantly less predictable, and once again, you can’t just assume that everyone’s dog is well behaved just because yours happens to be.

          • “We don’t, however, create laws to protect a individuals who make up a miniscule percentage of the population.”
            Once again, that’s simply not true. To extend the previous comparisons, since it’s not a nuclear weapon, only a miniscule percentage of the population is at rick when I fire a pistol in the air. Same for when I drive home drink – only a tiny percentage of people are in danger.

          • @dcd – wow. even after this is pointing out to you, you don’t stop and think; just put your head down and keep typing.
            please tell me you can understand the difference between:
            (a) something that is potentially dangerous to everyone, although the risk that a specific individual will be affected is small – e.g., you drive drunk, which could kill anyone, but the odds that you will hit and kill a specific person out of all the people in the city is pretty small; and
            (b) something that presents absolutely zero risk to the vast majority of people, but could present a danger to a minority of people – e.g., dogs present no medical issue to most people, but a small percentage of people have allergies.
            Please tell me you can follow that. Just read it. Think about it. I really think you can follow it if you just read it and think. Just try. Please?

      • I feel your pain. I’m nowhere near as bad as you, but I have had reactions trying on clothes that I assume had been tried on by pet owners and I do react whenever an animal touches me. There is no way to function in society and avoid reactions entirely, but it amazes me how quickly people discount the fact that pets cause a lot of problems for some people that are entirely avoidable.

  • All I’ll say is if a store wants to allow dogs, it should. If it doesn’t, it shouldn’t. If you don’t like dogs, or are allergic, avoid stores that allow dogs. If you don’t care, congrats, you can go to the store that allows dogs.

    I don’t think should is really relevant. Should a store give me $100 every time I walk by? Yes. Will they? Probably not.

    • justinbc

      This is one of the more well stated affirmative arguments, and I actually agree with it. As long as a store is abiding by the laws of the District, if those laws allow them to have dogs on premises then the store should certainly be able to determine if they want them (and in fact, legally, they can and do). Hopefully they would also post a notice that it’s allowed, to eliminate confusion on either the dog owners part, or those who want to avoid dogs. The question posed is pretty vague, and to answer it generally I would say “no” because there are many instances where it’s just a terrible idea.

  • I Dont Get It

    I love my senior citizen dogs but I don’t take them with me when I go shopping.

  • I can understand the service dog exception if your complaint about dogs is behavior, since most service dogs are incredibly well trained and rarely interact with other people in any way.

    I do not understand if your complaint is about health issues (allergies or just having a live animal near food preparation) why there is a service animal exception. Are you not allergic to service dogs? Just regular one?

    Also, humans are live animals. And I’d rather have a dog sniff my foot as I walk by than a dirty smelly homeless guy telling me I’m a mother f***er.

    • There is an exception because the need for the service animal (and the owner’s rights under the ADA) trump the potential health issues.

      • So the potential health issues really aren’t as bad as everyone’s making them out to be.

        • No, it’s that only a very tiny portion of people actually require a service animal under the ADA – i.e., a properly and expensively trained service dog, none of this “emotional support dog” BS. It’s not a big issue when it’s 1 out of 700 people who are disabled and require the animal to cross the street. When it’s that low, people will allergies or phobias can avoid and make other arrangements and avoid. However, it starts to become an issue when tons of people – who are otherwise fully able-bodied – claim to have a service animal. Or when everyone decides to take their dog shopping and dining with them over the busy weekend just because. It’s at that point that people are forced to interact with lots of animals and can’t escape them.

        • The potential health issue is a dog might get scares because it’s not used to being in a damn drugstore and bite someone.

    • Service dogs are trained not to interact with anyone other than their owners. They’re working, they aren’t going to jump all over you, lick you, or otherwise misbehave. Additionally, the use of a service animal is unavoidable by those who need them, unless you’re disabled, you really don’t need to bring your dog into Giant.

  • ledroittiger

    Dogs are allowed in Guilford Liquors on Rhode Island Ave, NW.

  • Dogs and children should be allowed everywhere. Then we could all get along.

  • I love when stores allow dogs, and I am probably more likely to frequent a store if they allow my dog to join me. If I am walking to Georgetown or 14th Street with my dog, it is so nice to be able to hop in and shop or look around. Should these stores be required to let us in? Of course not. And if they tell me we can’t come in, I would never hold it against the store. But I really appreciate when they do. And no, I am not bringing my dog with me every where because I need him by my side or because I think he is a person (a debate for another day). It’s just nice to be able to walk the dog, get fresh air and a little exercise, explore neighborhoods, get errands done, etc. all at once. As for Walgreens, it is totally up to the store. If they can’t allow dogs for legal reasons, I understand. If they just have found that it doesn’t work for them to allow dogs, that’s OK too.

    • I think you’d see fewer dogs tied up in front of stores (which really isn’t safe for the dog or for people passing by) if they were allowed inside.

  • Americans get so bent out of shape about dogs.

    I’m fine keeping dogs out of pharmacies and any retail store where it would be problematic, but casual neighborhood restaurants (pubs, bars, etc), Amtrak, Metro, large public buildings (post office) should be allowed. Dogs arent some huge public health threat.

    People who are allergic to things are so hysterical about their allergies. I have an anaphylactic allergic reaction, but lets be reasonable. If you were as allergic to dogs as some people seem to be to peanuts or shellfish, you would have dropped dead long ago.

    Countries around the world, including some of our closest approximations in Europe (including UK, Germany, France) and Canada are far less freaked out about dogs being places. People arent dropping dead or getting strange diseases from four legged furry vectors.

    Proprietors should be free to prohibit dogs or allow them. But public amenities should have some sort of allowance for dogs. We have a quiet car on Amtrak, but no dog car? It makes no sense.

    As for Walgreens, I dont think there’s any science behind prohibiting dogs from pharmacies, but I’m fine with prohibitions of animals from healthcare related venues, since there are allergic reactions to them.

  • I’m okay with dogs on patios or more open spaces, but not in stores with tight aisles, and it’s because I hate hate hate when they stick their wet snotty noses on my black work pants. It happens to me a lot actually. Even if I try to smile and edge by, a lot of times the dog still gets close enough to press its wet fact on my pants. DISGUSTING. And I have not had a child do this to me, except for my own.

    • Wow, that has never happened to me, and I live in Dog Central (aka Eastern Market). That sounds pretty gross though.

      • justinbc

        My dog was obsessed with sticking her nose straight up into women’s crotches. She almost never did it to guys for some reason. When leashed and walking this was obviously easier to control, but if I were giving my attention to what I’m looking at on a shelf rather than her I wouldn’t put it past her one bit.

  • what about my neighbor who insists on bringing his dog over to my house when he comes over even though i have made it clear numerous times i don’t want the dog in my house.

    • Arrange to meet at his place instead?
      Also see “The Gift of Fear” on dealing with people who don’t want to take “no” for an answer.

  • My job allows dogs inside, and I strongly wish it did not. I’m less concerned about allergies than I am about someone tripping (very frightening here; it’s an accident waiting to happen), getting bitten (saw it happen to my assistant manager), and so on. Personally, I really don’t want to get slobbered upon. When I was a kid, I would always pull away from dogs, and the owners would reassure me that the dogs wouldn’t bite. That’s not what concerned me! I can’t fathom pet ownership- I like wild animals. They should stay that way.

    Dogs aren’t people. They aren’t children. Did you know that some languages don’t even have a word for “pet”?

    • Oooo, dogs at work! That should be a follow up post! After watching a dog begin pissing at one end of the office hallway and walk to the other end while pissing, I say no (smelled forever). Same office, different dog owner had two dogs that just barked constantly when she wasn’t there. But because she was upper level management, no one could say anything. So glad I work at a place now that doesn’t allow dogs.

      As for stores, leave it up to the owner, so long as its within the law. Unless expressed openly (sign on door, etc), people should assume dogs are not allowed.

    • They’re not people, but they’re not wild animals either.
      I think a designated “office dog” who is very well trained could be good for morale in a small office, but only if everyone is ok with dogs. My sister’s office is like that. I love my dogs but I know if I had them at work they’d be distracting and would inevitably end up peeing on something. Plus I’d have to start driving in.

  • After reading this thread I think the best solution would be to allow dogs in stores but require their owners to remain outside on the sidewalk.

  • I don’t understand why people so easily discount the impact of an allergic reaction. My daughter is allergic to dogs, and it is not life threatening for her, but it sure causes her discomfort when she has a reaction, that requires her to take multiple kinds of allergy medicine to recover from it (and she is just this year old enough for allergy shots). We go out of our way to avoid interacting with dogs and we can accomplish that when in an outdoor setting because of WIDE open spaces. This is not the case in the aisles of Walgreens. We avoid situations with dogs whenever possible so we don’t have to give her allergy medicine regularly because who wants to dose their child with medicine unnecessarily. We do it proactively when we know she can’t avoid exposure to a dog, but I don’t think my daughter should have to take allergy medicine regularly so she can walk down the aisles of Walgreens. (and yes, a dog rubbing up against her may cause a reaction if she can’t change her clothes. this can largely be avoided in an outdoor setting) And we do not frequent restaurants that allow dogs on their patios. I don’t think they should be allowed, but its not worth my energy to fight it, so we just avoid them. The world is full of dogs, we do what we can to avoid them, but please be respectful that they cause health discomfort to some people and are not appropriate in every setting.

Comments are closed.