Sounds to me as if he went postal.

This guy is a double amputee and already had a tough life and must have just snapped when told to leash his dog. I hope the guy he shot lives man.

It'sAboutTime,

Your first moral. Are you saying that "ALL" responsible gun owners are "NOT" responsible Americans?!

How can you turn a bad situation into something funny? He said the family is upset that Wal-Mart continued to do business after the shooting. "They just kept running like nothing even happened," he said. Now that's funny!

Thanks AnIndividual, I'm glad you see it my way. When I want a cup of joe or a beer the first thing I do is start waving my 1911 around and you ought to see the service I get, pronto.

What is up with all of the walmart jokes? You guys trying out your material before your show? It seems to me like the internet is full of bandwagon jumpers that love to hate what everybody else hates. If your big and successful the internet hates you. The fact of the matter is, is that most of you calling Wal-Mart evil shop there. This store manager was shot by some loon who didn't believe his dog should have been kept on a leash. Not that it couldn't be in the store, mind you, just that it had to be on a leash. Plus, the man had two guns on him. Why did he need two guns?

The first thing that came in my mind was where in Florida did this take place.

On a serious side I really hope the Wal-Mart employee recovers. He was just trying to make it safe for other customers and gets shot by a nut case.

Why should the store close? The victim is alive, I assume the blood has been cleaned up, and there's no doubt as to who did it and they have the weapon used. So, there is no crime scene to preserve. So, what's the big deal about staying open?

ItsAboutTime-3704531

I understand you but the way you put it into words would include yourself as a not so responsible American considering you uphold the 2nd Amendment and also own a gun.

It was a little confusing and seemingly a slight bit contradicting.

SpcTorres

Don't know why he would have two guns but as a double amputee, I guess he feels as though he can be taken advantage of very easily.

Plus, considering the fact that he shot someone over simply leashing his dog, would help explain his mentality of carrying two guns. Basically a nut case as Larry puts it.

Mornin' stonepipe...

Top of the mornin' to you Creek Dog Bro, and Spc Torres. Wish I could stay and play but got to run! Have a great day!

ItsAboutTime, I agree with CreekDog, your original comment implied that a person can't own a gun and be responsible. I disagree, you can be responsible and own a gun. Just like you can be irresponsible and own a gun. And then you say you are a "responsible" gun owner. But yet you already said there's no such thing. So which is it?

Nobody is denying there's people that don't take the responsibility of owning a gun seriously. It's not about drinking the NRA kool-aid. And that's a double-edged sword. Don't drink the kool-aid of the Brady Campaign and assume "guns are bad, mmkay".

This disabled guy sounds like some crackpot who had 2 too many guns on him. The article never said why the manager asked him to unleash his dog (?) I'd think being a service dog one would want them leashed, especially in a place of business.

This guy is a double amputee and already had a tough life and must have just snapped when told to leash his dog.

Was it unreasonable to ask the man to leash his dog? Was making that request grounds for getting shot? Tough life, indeed.

It'sAboutTime,

You say;

I am not concerned about the 'govt' 'shooting me, and more concerned about 'you responsible gun owners' who apparently, are NOT responsible and shouldn't have a gun even though the 'law' says you can.

So, you're a gun owner yet, you point the finger at everyone else who owns a gun and say we are "not" responsible gun owners. Looks like you're the only one in America that is a responsible gun owner.

Very "Hippocratic" to me dude...

Gumps,

No, it wasn't unreasonable. What I said does not justify him shooting this guy at all. Just mentioning the fact that he "probably" just snapped since he already doesn't have it easy. Prosecute the piss outta this guy man.

the best part of this story is yet to be told... when and if this fellow recovers, Walmart will undoubtedly fire him for questioning a disabled person service dog. Thats the walmart we all know and love. most disgusting company ever.

Should of had a turbo-charged wheelchair..faster getaway.

He's no blade runner that's for sure.

I think this Second Amendment rights just violated this mans First amendment rights to free speech? The dog needed to be leached in the store no matter how well trained it should be restrained. The employee had the right to speak up. The gun person denied him that right, by use of violent force of a gun, carry if you must but remember Don't infringe on my right to speak. Ha! Ha! Ha!

When does the Second Amendment violate the First Amendment? Who has the right to make that decision?

Yeah Bubba, I always leach my dog when I go out.

bubba:

You've illustrated what I consider a very valuable point. The store manager was apparently shot because of what he said to the shooter. In my view, a textbook clash of Amendments. Who will make the argument that both the shooter's rights, and the victim's rights were simply being exercised? The outcome is simply the cost of freedom? "Don't take a knife to a conversation"?

Creek Dog

Sounds to me as if he went postal.

I don't think so. Sounds to me like this guy was looking for love. One pistol self-defense; without a carry permit illegal. Two pistols...listening to the voices in his head.

"Pirtle had two pistols with him at the store and later admitted to detectives that he had shot Mahi, according to an information report filed by the local district attorney."

The second never violates the first.

This guy wasn't responsible (obviously) and his criminal actions are landing him in jail.

The cost of freedom is that you have to deal with the guy with the nazi flag and the guy with the rainbow flag. Knowing that some guy with a gun can shoot you or a guy with a car can run you over. The only alternative is that you and the rest of the USA are thrown in jail 24/7. No matter what hair brained schemes you want to come up with to control bad human behavior, they will fail and only punish innocent people. This is the reality that intelligent people understood back in the day. When faced with reality we decided to punish people who did harm and not attempt to preemptively arrest people just because we don't agree with how they live their lives, what they said, what they believe, etc..

Unfortunately the idiots make up the majority of our population and think freedom isn't worth it and that their megalomanic driven ideas are the solution.

Yes, another "responsible" gun freak posing as a normal human being.

The "service dog" was 5 months old and wasn't wearing anything that identified it as a service dog. The news in Alaska has since stopped calling it a service dog. Due to the amount of training a service dog must receive it is impossible that a 5 month old puppy was a fully fledged service dog. If the dog was in training, it should have been wearing something expressing that.

It is also within the ADA for a business owner/manager to ask that a service dog be restrained or even to leave if its behavior is disruptive. The entire encounter is on video, with multiple witnesses. I think it will become clear that the manager was not being a bully.

Also, the man lost his legs to poorly controlled diabetes, he didn't lose them in a war.

american against idiots

i'm not a gun person....

First of all I want to say that I'm a gun person. Now where's that Fk'n bullet you want to put in my head? Pffffft! You're not a gun person but you'll threaten to put a bullet in someones head for mentioning that they are. You're very strange man....

first of all, for those of you that thinks the double amputee did something wrong by unleashing his dog, he did not....no one has a right to tell him to leash his dog...a blind person may keep a service dog leashed, but the whole purpose of a service dog for someone with mobility issues is for the dog to do what they cannot, which requires being unleashed, for example to clear a buggy out of the way, to retrieve an item from a shelf, help open a door etc....so his rights were violated first of all...

I don't care who you are. If the rules to a public establishment are for you to "leash" your dog while you're on their property, you do it or do not step foot in "their" establishment...

I don't think a dog will know the difference between decaf versus regular coffee on a shelf to retrieve anything.

It's for insurance reasons. Like, if the dog bites a little child or something.

unfortunately it is against the law to shoot someone for being ignorant, a bully, or a power tripping walmart manager....is a person crazy when they shoot someone out of anger, maybe, maybe not....is it

"Really" if you ask me, you're whacked dude. It's "unfortunate" that you cannot shoot somebody for being ignorant?! WTF man... And you're not a gun person... Hmmmmmmm...

You need professional help man. You've got issues. Plus you need to post with paragraphs and punctuation. I had a very hard time reading your post. I usually skip over poor penmanship posts but since yours was so full of BS, I couldn't help but to read it and remind myself of the crazy reality of certain people in this Country.

can anyone out there even see how ridiculous this country is becoming...

Not until "after" reading your post they didn't. Whew! You have your avatar name in reverse. It's Idiot against Americans.

American:

First, I disagree that this man was being bullied. Businesses have the right to policy.

Calm down, you aren't stupid. Consider your intelligence a gift, a tool, and very much a responsibility. The best of luck.

MarieBaar, thank you for pointing our the facts the story seems to leave out. NBCNews is great at reporting only the junk they want to sway peoples minds, while ignoring other things like objective opinions and truth!

You get the comment of the day award!

He said the family is upset that Wal-Mart continued to do business after the shooting. "They just kept running like nothing even happened," he said

Here is more nonsense! What did they expect, close the store or open it up for looting?

Idiots.

America is becoming The Unfortunate World Wretch....And ANOTHER NutJob with Two Guns this time. It is Totally Undertood by All That America Is In DESPERATE NEED of A Universal HealthCare System WITH Fully Staffed and Equipped Psychiatric OutReach Teams Having "Examine and Retain" Authority Coordinating With ReOpened Federal and State Mental Hospitals. And people like dianne feinstein who tried and failed to confiscate ALL of American's FireArms!! Are You Readers aware of the fact that this Despicable Politician Has a California State Unrestricted Carry/Conceal gun permit and carries a deadly PPK 380 pistol to shoot people with IN ADDITION to the SHAMEFUL Fact she has dual israeli/American Citizenship AND AND AND!!!! Mind You!! Has Voted EVERYTIME Blocking An American Universal HealthCare System forcing Americans to pay huge policy premiums While, WHILE, WHILE !!! This amoral person has pushed through israeli Universal HealthCare System Free to ALL ISRAELIS AND PAID FOR BY AMERICAN TAXPAYERS While she has made sure Americans pay throught the Nose and Wallet for healthcare insurance..... We might as well confiscate baseball and crickett bat, ALL Knives, Frozen Leg Of Lamb, Table lamps, Cars, Heavy AshTrays and ANY Blunt Instruments.

An Alaska mini Dog Day Afternoon. Agree with those who say he probably has PTSD. He may have had a flashback and lost control. At least the dog didn't get hurt. I hope the manager recovers completely. Too many people are primed to use violence to resolve their interpersonal disputes.

ted:

"The second never violates the first."

Would this incident be excluded from 'never'? The shooter was exercising his Second Amendment rights, the victim was exercising his First Amendment rights, and the rights of the company he represents.

The shooter, equipped with his rights, critically (at the very least) wounded the victim due to an instantaneous, utterly inexplicable decision.

I take exception to the current reality that the vast majority of citizens - including gun owners and WalMart managers - are constantly at risk from gun carriers that are 'responsibly' exercising their rights up until the instant of firing their weapon.

After the weapon is fired, the victims rights are utterly irrelevant - luck and medical care are their only hope of survival. The rights of the (now) criminal, however, continue to be meticulously defended.

The victim loses his/her life, or survives in some fashion with whatever residual effects - the criminal receives housing, meals, clothing, legal representation etc. Fascinating stuff, this.

This wheelchair guy was a responsible gun owner right up till the time he whipped it out and committed his assault.

In America, you are born a responsible gun owner. We just assume it. But it is not always true. And, disaster follows.

Irresponsible gun owners cause death and tragedy in America because they do not handle their guns correctly, or they do not keep them secure.

Be nice if we could find a way to not let irresponsible people have guns.

This article left me with One Big Question: What happened to the dog?

I like dogs. Not smelly dirty ugly disgusting creek dogs.

Alaska is an interesting case. It is a very rural state, which usually means low gun violence. But gun violence in Alaska is very high. They have just about the most liberal gun laws in America. The words "gun control" are not spoken in Alaska.

...a faceless evil Walmart policy...

compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act is not some Walmart policy - it is federal law. While there are liberal guidelines for allowing service dogs into public establishments, there are also limitations.

As expected, the proliferation of incidents like these are occuring as the proliferation of guns increases in the general population. True, there is only one legal reason for using lethal force, but human beings don't restrict their weapons use to just that one reason. Weapons come out when people are scared, angry, or seeking a personal sense of justice, to name a few. Doesn't detract from the saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people." That is still a true assessment.

"As a supporter of the second amendment and owner of a gun, it's clear there are 'some' that simply should NOT own a gun even though it's their "right"--itsabouttime

Can't help but agree with this statement. 100%! It's the talk from the "gun control" freaks that people CAN'T own guns that worry me.

"Hey, if Walmart closed a store every time a piece of white trash committed a crime in their store, they'd never be open!"--d.man

D.man, what a racist statement. Look around a Walmart at the customer base and tell me what you see. Mainly, poor people of all races. All you "enlightened" "inclusive" "liberals" who didn't call him on this are hypocrites.

What would your reactions have been if someone had said the same words about "black hood rats?" Yeah, that's what I thought. Effin' hypocrites.

NBC, by what criteria do you pick and choose the racist statements you decide to censure?

The gun control "freaks" aren't saying you can't own a gun. Everyone agrees that certain people should definitely NOT have access to firearms. How does a society enforce this? Universal background checks is a good start but the NRA is against this. Why?

Drug use and mental illness are two reasons you cannot own a gun, 40 states do not add these people's names to the NICS system NOW.

What is the point of requiring "universal background checks" when socialists will not add these people to the lists of people who cannot own firearms?

Passing another law, while utterly failing to enforce the laws on the books is simply stupid.

Or typically democrat.

bubba:

You've illustrated what I consider a very valuable point. The store manager was apparently shot because of what he said to the shooter. In my view, a textbook clash of Amendments. Who will make the argument that both the shooter's rights, and the victim's rights were simply being exercised? The outcome is simply the cost of freedom? "Don't take a knife to a conversation"?

====================

False choice. The man's life was not threatened. The Manager had as much right as a guardian of the establishment to tell the man to leash the dog as he would have telling him to put a shirt on if he had come in there w/o one on. That is the policy of the store.

There is no part of this story where the man in the wheelchair is in the right either directly, or indirectly. He shot an unarmed man, who was not in the act of assaulting him...his animal was unleashed and then he tried to flee the scene of the crime (albeit at 1/2 a mile an hour, but nonetheless, tried to flee the crime).

This has nothing to do with guns and has nothing to do with rights being violated except those of the man who was shot.

This is the worse scenario. When people are idiots, they do idiotic things and unfortunately the devastation of those idiotic things is only enhanced when the idiot has a gun.

False choice. The man's life was not threatened.

From what I understand, he only has to feel threatened to defend himself....

An off-duty police officer shopping at the store detained Pirtle,

Am I the only one who thinks that the "detaining" part of this equation may have had something to do with this shooting? It seems similar to False Imprisonment. Did the off-duty have a weapon on him? Did the Handicapped man feel threatened? Too many questions here, not enough info.....

• Service Dog
• Handicapped man
• No crime comitted
• Handicapped man detained

Seems like the off duty police officer may have "exceeded his authority" here? Maybe??

(Personally, I think that the "Authority Training" officers receive in the academy, and is monster-ized during training evaluations, creates more problems than solves them...)

"Daniel Pirtle, 45, was caught while attempting to flee the Anchorage store on his motorized wheelchair, according to police reports about the Saturday incident."

=========

Perhaps @Unbelievable-895817 you should read a little bit closer. The shooter attempted to flee the scene in his motorized wheelchair....THEN the off-duty officer detained him.

"false imprisonment", no. "feel threatened", no.

The off-duty police officer did his job. 2nd amendment or no, we don't get to just casually shoot unarmed people in a grocery store and then get to just leave at our leisure w/o dealing with the police.

The dispute was over a service dog used by Pirtle, according to police reports. Mahi was shot in the abdomen after he asked Pirtle to leash the dog. An off-duty police officer shopping at the store detained Pirtle, according to police reports.

Maybe YOU should read closer....

As I said Too many unknowns here. As written it looks like the order is....

• off duty request to leash
• detained
• off duty shot
• attempt to flee

"false imprisonment", no. "feel threatened", no.

Guess you read his mind at that moment, huh G-man....

and then get to just leave at our leisure w/o dealing with the police.

And to further expound, Who said THAT was ok? He should have waited for the police. The article never says who stopped him after the shooting.

**** Edit *****

@Allen - Omaha After rereading the 3rd time, I see it. Still a poorly written article and standby the other assertions

"Daniel Pirtle, 45, was caught while attempting to flee the Anchorage store on his motorized wheelchair..."

=============

Perhaps I should have said reading and critical thinking instead. "Daniel Pirtle, 45, was CAUGHT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO FLEE..."

It did not say he was detained by an off-duty police officer and then tried to flee and then caught until authorities got there. It is clear the off-duty police officer acted AFTER the shooting had already occurred. The suspect was trying to flee and the officer acted.

It's not rocket science playa.

CC GWRider

"Hey, if Walmart closed a store every time a piece of white trash committed a crime in their store, they'd never be open!"--d.man

D.man, what a racist statement. Look around a Walmart at the customer base and tell me what you see. Mainly, poor people of all races. All you "enlightened" "inclusive" "liberals" who didn't call him on this are hypocrites.

==============

So you follow-up bemoaning the person making a race-based comment with you making a class-based comment...nice.

Service dogs cannot be denied access to a place of business, but it has to have some kind of collar or "vest" if you will that identifies it as such, and must be under the control of it's owner/handler. The manager of the store is just what the title says, the manager. It is his responsibility to maintain the everyday function of the store. If the dog had bitten a child, the store could be held liable, so he was protecting his customers, and his employer.

"They just kept running like nothing even happened,"

"Attention Associates cleanup on aisle 3". /S

Working service dogs are usually wearing a vest or other distinct identifier (guide dogs for example have the handle type leash for their person to use), other service dogs have vests. If this was a 5 month old it is not a service dog, if it is a puppy in training it would very definitely have a vest and the trainers are required to keep them leashed.

Everyone assumes the shooter lost his legs in a war, not all amputees are wounded warriors, many folks have lost legs in traffic accidents or to cancer etc, so lets not assume this guy is some sort of wounded hero with ptsd. What we do know about this guyt is he has serious anger management issues.

And to WM folks out there - you can and should challenge folks bringing dogs into your store - if they are not trainined service dogs they can pose a dnager to your customers. (Oh and service dogs are allowed where food is sold and consumed they are the only dogs allowed in restraunts).

I am wondering if there are more responsible gun owners or more irresponsible gun owners in America?

I think people that have a firearm should be more responsible if they have a Concealed Carry permit as they mostly likely went through some type of training to get it.

If they are criminals with a firearms, they are by default irresponsible and if they are concealed carrying without a permit, they are irresponsible as they are not abiding by the law.

Did you hear there was a responsible 11 year old kid that shot and killed (in his home) an intruder that was trying to rape his mother? No? Didn't think so. That is not news worthy for MSNBC that wants to continue the gun debate in a negative fashion.

@ ItsAboutTime-3704531

Creek Dog

There are many Americans who are 'responsible gun owners'. Is this man? How about a police officer that let his toddler get a hold of a gun and then shot himself? Florida, a woman threatens to shoot 3 Walmart workers because they wouldn't redeem her coupon. Another man stored his 'guns' in the oven. A woman turned the oven and it shot her, again in Florida. Shall I go on?

Yes, all 'responsible' gun owners here. As a supporter of the second amendment and owner of a gun, it's clear there are 'some' that simply should NOT own a gun even though it's their "right"

#1.5

And it is just as clear that some people shouldn't be allowed to drive a car, operate heavy equipment, be doctors or have children. And I agree some people shouldn't be allowed to have guns.

But the question is which ones? who are you or anyone else to tell someone they can not have children, or be a doctor until they prove they aren't equal to the task?

So who is anyone to tell someone they can not own a firearm until they prove they are incapable of being responsible? Even mentally ill people can appeal, and with a note from the doctor can get certified to pass NICS.

@ DelFairchild-1968594

I am wondering if there are more responsible gun owners or more irresponsible gun owners in America?

I think people that have a firearm should be more responsible if they have a Concealed Carry permit as they mostly likely went through some type of training to get it.

If they are criminals with a firearms, they are by default irresponsible and if they are concealed carrying without a permit, they are irresponsible as they are not abiding by the law.

Did you hear there was a responsible 11 year old kid that shot and killed (in his home) an intruder that was trying to rape his mother? No? Didn't think so. That is not news worthy for MSNBC that wants to continue the gun debate in a negative fashion.

#1.62

300 million plus guns, 60 million plus gun owners, fewer than 800 accidental shootings in a year. 700K Doctors, 120K accidental deaths each year, hmmmm. 150 times more likely to die from 1/100 the number of people. And most people would consider doctors RESPONSIBLE.

I have read numerous studies showing that CCW have a lower incidence of crime, than the general population, and even some police forces. (Google; lower incidence of crime among concealed carry permit holders)

What do you expect from the Ministry of Socialist Neophytes Broadcasting Communism? What?! you expect the whole story here? now that's just funny. whew, I am having trouble breathing, stop making me laugh.

AnIndividual, #1.8- EXCELLENT!!! Why don't you just NAIL IT! for the multitudes who have just Soooooo missed the point? THANK YOU!

@ gargirl-318900

The gun control "freaks" aren't saying you can't own a gun. Everyone agrees that certain people should definitely NOT have access to firearms. How does a society enforce this? Universal background checks is a good start but the NRA is against this. Why?

#1.50

What is so truly sad about the "gun control freaks" and you may seem to be one of them, is that they know absolutely nothing about firearms. A gun is a gun. Well a book is a Book, and piece of art is a piece of Art, what's the difference if we ban or burn a few of them, you can still have a book to read, or a piece of art to look at or at least the ones I don't find offensive. Or maybe we need to ban MSNBC, NPR and the Huffington Post, you can still get your news from Fox, Talk Radio, or Newsmax. Does that help put it in a perspective you can understand?

And how do you propose to enforce a universal back ground check? What constitutes a background check? Am I to be forced to pay an FFL dealer to do a background check on a guy who wants to by my gun? What gives the Government the authority to "tax" such a transaction? What information am to give a person I buy a gun from, and what assurances do I have that information will be safe guarded? And what are my remedies if it is not? I have owned and sold numerous guns over the years, as have many other people, what is to keep someone from saying they sold that gun before the UBC was in place, even though they didn't?

I understand why so many people are in favor of a Universal Background Check, it sounds good on the surface, but I don't think any of them have thought it through. The NRA has, undoubtedly, and they can see the pitfalls in it, and have probably come up with a whole lot longer list than I have, which is no doubt, why they are against it. I am not against UBC, but I see no way of enforcing it, and I see it as being in no meaningful way effectual against reducing crime.

If you wish to reduce crime, then start treating criminals like criminals. Let's start executing them upon their 3rd felony conviction. Let's start treating gang members as accomplices, one gang member kills a person, all other known gang members get sentenced the same. Let's do away with the Government Programs that seem to foster and subsidize this culture of violence. For Starters.

OMG....you just can't make this stuff up....lol...only in the USA. Let me get this straight disabled man goes to walmart with his service dog and guns.......never mind.

But the question is which ones? who are you or anyone else to tell someone they can not have children, or be a doctor until they prove they aren't equal to the task?

Well, why start off with the assumption that everyone will be a responsible gun owner?

Which ones? How about the ones that do not know which end the bullet comes out? How about the ones who live in a house with kids and who plan to leave their loaded gun in a drawer?

SpcTorres, Walmart IS evil! They treat their employees like cr@p.

I've heard of people dying because Walmart used to lock their doors at night and the paramedics couldn't get in in time (they actually got fined by OSHA for that incident); having their insurance company sue an employee who got rundown by a truck at another store, when she got a settlement (which was nil) - even though her youngest son had just died in Iraq; making elderly people stand for HOURS.

Why do you think their stores are so smelly & dirty, and their employees so grumpy & unhappy?

Plus their quality sucks, they get most of their merchandise overseas - and it's poorly made, everything's a mess in the stores, and their choices are nil in the groceries (at least by me).

I refuse to shop there, not only for the poor quality, but mostly for the way they treat their employees!

davey-526272

But the question is which ones? who are you or anyone else to tell someone they can not have children, or be a doctor until they prove they aren't equal to the task?

Well, why start off with the assumption that everyone will be a responsible gun owner?

Which ones? How about the ones that do not know which end the bullet comes out? How about the ones who live in a house with kids and who plan to leave their loaded gun in a drawer?

#1.69

I can start off with the assumption that 99.99% of gun owners are responsible, based on this:

About 45% of Americans report having a gun in their home, that's about 140 million Americans. Let's say half of them at the gun owners, (I have seen reports any where from 60 to 100 million) so that is 70 million. I have seen reports that show there are between 600 to 800 accidental guns deaths each year. So if we divide the average number of deaths (700) by the number of gun owners we get .001% of gun owners are responsible for accidental gun deaths.

So what you are telling me then is that the women who can not afford her children and must resort to welfare should have her children taken away forever? Or a Doctor who misses a diagnosis and prolongs the suffering or causes a death, should have his medical license taken away permanently? Both of these cases are based on a single incident, with no mitigating circumstances, yet this seems to be your solution.

And just for your edification, I grew up with guns. I was nine years old when I BOUGHT, (yes with my own money) my first gun (my parents filled out the paper work). But I also grew on a farm, and I learned the dangers of guns, machinery and basically life at an early age. So, the mere fact that a gun owner leaves a loaded gun in a drawer is no indication of irresponsibility, provided they teach their children the dangers of guns and how to safely handle them.

But judging by your comments, I would say you are an unfitted citizen, you should not have children, and you should be deported.

A great American tale here, man with two limbs and two guns gets the draw on the manager of a gun store...well, every Walmart is a Gun Store,ain't it ? THIS IS America !!!

only 600 to 800 accidental deaths annually ? Hey,Bozo, there are 40,000 deaths by gunshot annually in the USA...40,000 ! In all of Great Britain last year, there were only 24 deaths by gunshot. Great Britain allows hunting rifles and shotguns....and the government has not taken away anyones freedom unless they are criminals....The USA has jails which hold a staggering 25% of ALL the imprisoned people on Earth..25%....most of them used guns on crimes, ban guns,= lower crime rates, safer nation..it's easy getting illegal guns in the USA....I was offered one as a High School freshman by the kid at the locker next to mine...

Wait.. what??? Should that be this:

Service Dog
Handicapped man
ATTEMPTED MURDER
Handicapped man detained

Once, just once, it would be refreshing to see the "right to guns" guys use a little good judgement and discretion and refrain from trying to defend the indefensible. You guys don't really help your cause when you come here with excuses (even if caused by poor reading comprehension) for every jackass who gets arrested for misusing a weapon.

But judging by your comments, I would say you are an unfitted citizen, you should not have children, and you should be deported.

I have had enough discussions with gun people to now know one thing, gun lovers will take a discussion into the wild blue yonder when you have made some good points about the gun problem in America.

American Idiot, so I guess shoot first instead of talking? Is that your view, did you consider the store manager did not know and just thought the dog was a pet, that's the problem with people that have a gun, they think they are KING KONG because if he did not have those guns he would have been forced to talk instead of SHOOT, maybe you should change you handle.

wait a minute... what happened to all the indignant "lets drag him out into the streets and shoot him" claptrap for daring to question our lords the disabled? well he just did what you scream for everytime a protected group is thought wronged- you should be happy

Pro Freedom 5130956,

I think the dog WAS unleashed, the manager asked him to leash it. Sad for everyone. The poor manager, doing his job. This poor guy, who knows what demons he has, how he ended up a double amputee, what trauma was possibly involved.

I'll probably catch it for this remeark, but the poor dog too, trained to serve the disabled man, seeing him so angry (one wonders if his anger is always so close to the surface, difficult for any animal). Then hearing gunshots so close to him, having a bunch of people coming after his owner.

Not that they shouldn't have apprehended him, not at all. I'm just saying it's all terribly confusing for a dog; seeing his owner panicked and angry; the loud gunshots in such close proximity; people screaming; people behaving in a threatening manner toward his owner; all overwhelming for a dog. I hope he's relocated to a calm, loving home.

The trauma to kids in the store, other customers; and the fear and grief the manager's family is going through, I hope it ends with his recovery.

Unbelievable 895817:

I'm sorry to disagree with you. but your interpretation of the wording of the article seems to me to be a deliberate effort to somehow find this guy was wronged. I'm not minimizing the unfortunate events of his life, I feel for the guy, I really do. Severe, probably lifelong diabetes, double amputation at maybe 40 years of age; horrible circumstances.

But he obviously needed some type of psychiatric intervention. I'm sure he felt misunderstood, felt his dog was being persecuted, etc. But this manager was doing his job. I did not feel the off-duty cop did anything to provoke this man. I thought it indicated he was asked to leave by the manager BECAUSE the dog wasn't leashed. I didn't think he was detained until he shot the manager.

Anyway, horrible story, no need to jump Alan from Omaha though.

Not that I don't like to read but I wish some of you would stop writing novels when you make a post. When I see those long ass posts I often think that -there is someone with a chip on their shoulder

Service dogs are allowed, but they must be on leash and they must be identified as service dogs (either with a vest or by producing correct documentation when requested).

Legally - this Motorized wheelchair operator doesn't have a leg to stand on. Escalating the confrontation did not need to be carried to this extreme - the shooting level. He missed out on great chance to instruct the Greeter about "Service Dogs"... I've noticed that most Wal*Marts already have signs on the door explaining to all customers that they adhere to Service dog regulations, asking all patrons to honor those regulations by not harassing the dogs.

Wal*Mart seems blameless in this way out of control incident.

I don't feel sorry for the double amputee once he decided he was above regulations and requirements. All that poor man did was ask him to leash his dog, it was NOT an event to be shot for. I hope the victim lives and the moron that shot him gets put in prison for a long while. He's a reason why people are looking to tighter gun control.

reno - The definition of service dog has changed in the last several years. In some states (not sure about Alaska) people with emotional/mental health issues can have a pet (doesn't have to be a dog) as an official service animal.

Service dogs are limited to the blind.

There are mobility assistance dogs which are service dogs that pick up things/move things that their handlers can't, there are stability assistance service dogs who are there in case their handler falls down and can't get up or gets wobbly for a moment who stabilize them, there are service dogs that alert to impending low or high blood sugar for diabetics, there are service dogs for hearing impaired people. There are MANY jobs a service dog may do - they are NOT limited to the blind.

One of my friends has a daughter with difficult to control Type I diabetes and they are waiting for their service dog to be trained so the 5 year old can GO TO SCHOOL since the school seems not to be able to follow directions about how to manage her diabetes. Once they get the dog, she will take the dog with her TO SCHOOL every day. The dog will also alert if something happens to her blood sugar during the night. The poor child has already been hospitalized three or four times due to dangerously high or low blood sugar that came on with no warning despite testing 5 times a day.

cat:

Good info, thanks.

For those people who think that only the blind get service dogs, you're out of touch. All of the types of service dogs I described are protected under the ADA - they MUST be allowed into anywhere that the PUBLIC goes. That includes restaurants, shopping places, grocery stores and public schools. If you are a store or a restaurant and accept the public coming into your place of business you MUST allow ALL service dogs (including therapy dogs for mental health issues) to enter your place of business. They are EXEMPT from public health codes/laws.

Thinker, Actually they are not limited to the blind, and not limited to dogs. I went to my niece's wedding, and her groom's aunt was blind and she had a seeing eye pony. I didn't believe it myself, but it was what it was. Cat, I agree that they are to be allowed in. Nobody said the man couldn't have the dog there, just that it had to be restrained.

Shooting this guy may be his retirement plan.

The prison imates will not have any sympathy for him and they shouldn't.

Hey, he felt threatened. Just standing his ground, you know.

It was a pet and he was a man with a broken mind.

And yet he was a legal gun owner. How wonderful that we have such freedom in this country!

Not enough ammo! Dude was just defending his freedom and liberty. Why all the handwringing over a little powpow action?

You libs are all a bunch of pussies is all I can say. If you don't like guns then move to Canada or some other pussy country.

Are you saying that at any time when you feel your rights are being violated, it is acceptable for you to murder someone?

You must be on the wrong page. I don't think anyone was "murdered" in this article.

Bluelake--so--I guess not only should W-mart have closed their doors, but they should also have STILL have had to pay anyone scheduled to WORK during those closed hours? Or are you saying those workers should just be "out" that money they were scheduled to earn during those hours?

Or gee, those who had put in a prescription should just have to wait a few days to get their meds?

What is it with people and thinking the world has to stop when something bad happens?

A guy was shot by a nutcase. Its a terrible event, and I really hope the guy lives, but theres no reason to shut the store down so long as it can operate around the crime scene. In reality, only two people are directly effected... and I'm sure any employee that was disturbed by the attack was allowed to go home. So what is there to gain by shutting down the store? There are dozens of other employees who need the paycheck, and thousands of customers who need a place to shop that are not effected by this at all. Why punish them for no practicle reason?

fruit made in China?

Shut down because somebody was "murdered"? Did they sut down Washington DC when the snipers were actually killing people? The gas stations remained open, the highways were kept open, etc. But maybe we missed an opportunity to close down the reckless use of money in that location.

Stopping the operation would have been a matter of honor and respect for a colleague. It's a statement as to what you value more.

Bluelake, As large as a Walmart is, and the number of customers,and considering that the victim didn't die, the perp and the weapon were in police custody, and witnesses were readily available, it would have been easier to do just what they did. As long as the actual scene was kept isolated.

Bluelake

It's always easy to spend other people's money. Paying for about fifty employees with a whole day pay is no big deal to you because it'd not your money.

I'm curious...do you have any employee working for you....?

The true comparison between automobile deaths and gun deaths is to compare how many people deliberately killed other people or themselves with a car vs how many were deliberately killed with a gun.

ExYahoo, you're right. Although so long as they don't endanger others, I don't care if they use their automobile to commit suicide.

Yeah - cars are made for killing. The logic is stellar!

There have been numerous news stories over the years of nut jobs taking cars and driving them into crowds be they adults or children and seriously injuring them deliberately.

Execution within 30 days when there is no question regarding the facts. No nonsense, no judge deciding what the jury can and cannot hear, no appeals. And children who are taught that there are painful—yes, PAINFUL—consequences when they are two years old and throw a temper tantrum.

You're talking about North Korea, right? Execution within 30 days, you must be living in between the covers of a comic book. This guy will be in prison for a long time. If Wally should die, then he'll probably die in prison. Your comment about pain and children is disturbing.

Patter--it is ENTIRELY possible that this guy actually was subconsciously hoping to 'commit' suicide by cop.And botched it.

Twodogs—

Your comment about pain and children is disturbing.

No it isn't disturbing. Parents who won't discipline effectively are disturbing.

Children throw fits and scream, kick, even bite their parents and they're given " time out." They get a little older, ignore parental rules, talk to their mother especially as if she were a POS, and they are sent to their rooms to play on their computers, watch television, and text. (Ever wonder why kids don't mouth off so much to daddy?)

Eventually they rape or murder someone because they have no impulse control. What happens to them next is their FIRST lesson in painful consequences.

Don't you really think it would have been kinder to bust their butt when they were little and threw their first temper tantrum? Not to mention better for the victims?

And children who are taught that there are painful—yes, PAINFUL—consequences when they are two years old and throw a temper tantrum.

You can beat a 2-year old if you want to. I'll pass.

I think all that talk about "irresponsible so called adults" applies to those who beat 2-year olds.

Harold, I'm old enough that, when I acted up, I felt the pain. There is a difference between spanking a child and beating one. What kind of a deterrent do you think it is to send an unruly child to his room when he has an electronic fantasyland in there? It'd be more like punishment to lock them out of their room.

Once my son was old enough to walk, having him stand in the corner for ten minutes became a very severe punishment for him. Each child is unique. While not every parent can figure it out, most parents know how to properly punish their child. The few who don't are the ones who make the headlines.

xd:

May I quote you? "And you know this how"?

If the Second Amendment is a joke, what is the first and why did the founding fathers put it there?

And the guns owners protect your sorry ass.

That "well-regulated militia" has been replaced by the armed forces. The threat of dictatorship is protected by our constitution and the rule of law, not by the racists, homophobes and misogamists of the right-wing.

How was the Wal-Mart manager protected by the gun owners? Gun owners don't care about protecting anyone, or else the NRA would enlist volunteers to guard the schools, malls and big box stores.

@van helsing

Not according to numerous SCOTUS decisions. The "militia" is the whole of the people, and yes, that even includes YOU!

And it is the armed populace that does in fact aide in ensuring a despotic tyrannical government does NOT come to power in this country.

And why must you characterize any and all pro 2nd Amendment individuals as racists, homophobes and/or misogamists? You're not trying to stereotype people are you?

it is the armed populace that does in fact aide in ensuring a despotic tyrannical government does NOT come to power in this country.

What fantasy world do you live in? It must be the one that says "if you repeat a lie long enough, zombies like you will believe it."

@van helsing

What fantasy world do you live in? It must be the one that says "if you repeat a lie long enough, zombies like you will believe it."

Military tactics are based for the most part on numbers.

Consider this for a moment. Of the 2.5 million members of our current armed forces, approximately 250,000 are the actual combatants. The remaining members are basically support, human resources, logistics, maintenance, recruiting, medical services, etc.

For the past 11 years, approximately 10,000 to 20,000 Taliban and AlQuaida have had our active and para-military forces, as well as the combatants of other nations, bogged down in Afghanistan with NO END IN SIGHT.

Currently, there are 80,000,000 legal firearms owners in this country. If ten percent of them took up arms against a despotic government trying to usurp the Constitution, that is a force of 8 million people. If only ONE percent of them took up arms, that is still a force of 800,000 people. And remember that many of those people have the same training as our own forces as they were previously members of the armed forces.

Further, consider one more point. You don't believe the people could in fact take on the government if the government turned on the people. If you think this way, please explain to me why, when the people of another country rise up against their government in revolt and for freedom, one of the first things OUR government does is supply them with small arms to fight?

Don't say it can't be done. It HAS been done. Tell the founding fathers that their fight and ultimate defeat of the preeminent military power of the world at the time was an impossibility. You HAVE been proved wrong.

And it is the armed populace that does in fact aide in ensuring a despotic tyrannical government does NOT come to power in this country.

While you're into mythical paranoia what-if's, why not include the idea of protecting ourselves from space alien invaders? I'm sure that's why we haven't been visited yet...

@Gumps

I'm sure that's why we haven't been visited yet...

And you know this how?

While you're into mythical paranoia what-if's

Would you have said the same thing to George Washington or Thomas Jefferson when they contemplated rising up against the most powerful military force known on the planet at the time?

They DID win did they not? We fly the American flag over our shores, not the flag of the British empire.

arizona:

How many times do you suppose the victim in this incident has been 'protected' by a 'gun owners'? Speculation as proof? These threads have become a clinical exercise in desperation, if not hysteria.

Some of us consider 'patriotism' to be helping our neighbors and our nation. Some of us consider 'patriotism' to be working ourselves into a hysterical lather over imaginary, tyrannical enemies.

When the tyrants ban elections, get back to me. In the meantime, I'll concentrate on dealing with the realities of life - rather than the demons of my imagination. If you let them, those demons can get the best of you.

sdn: Do you have some illusion that police come from outer space? Cops in this country are Americans with guns protecting your ass. And THAT is reality. Get some help about your imaginary demons.

Hey Reno - some service animals are lap dogs - they are called emotional support animals to be exact. It's what happens when a lawyer says the rights of his client outweigh the rights of all other individuals. We get a case a month for our no-pet clients - all of sudden everyone and their mother need an emotional support animal.

@AnIndividual

Who is blaming the news media? Is that a reference to my previous post?

xd:

"But of course, who needs facts about an incident like this. And the "news media" wonder why people are losing faith in them."?

@SDN

Man in wheelchair enters store with unleashed dog.

Man from store tells man in wheelchair to leash dog.

Man in wheelchair shoots man from store.

Off duty cop detains man in wheelchair.

Yes sir. That is really a solid story with all the facts presented.

Oh.. such an abundance of facts. I compressed the posted "article" into four sentences and followed with my comment. My four sentences provided all of the salient "facts" presented. Not much to go on if you want the truth.

xd:

I'm always interested in the truth.

@SallyAnn-4595694

While I'm not disagreeing with you, I do ask one question.

If you're not a stockholder, why should corporate management be concerned with YOUR concerns. They report to the stockholders, not you.

If you want to change the corporate culture, buy stock and go to shareholder meetings.

I ALWAYS SAY, if Sam Walton knew what has happened to his name sake store after his death, he would be turning over in his grave. Right after his death is when the "Proudly Made in the USA" banners all came down and WalMArt changed into the retail arm of the Peoples Liberation Army of The Peoples Republic of China.

Sally Ann you need to get back on the meds. Your rant has nothing to do with the senseless shooting of the manager. The problem I see is that your hatred of Walmart overrides your common sense.

xd:

Are you familiar with the term "good of the order"? Do you consider that concept worthwhile? Would you be willing to help a sick or injured fellow human, even if firearms weren't involved? Do you consider the exploitation of tens of thousands of your fellow Americans - not to mention our tax supported federal social services programs, simply a matter to be discussed at a stockholders meeting? Do you think a group of major stockholders will vote against gaming a federal subsidy?

"The good of the order" is the basic issue here. While extremely specific 'individual freedoms' are defended to the death, the 'good of the order' is utterly ignored. "I'm keeping my guns at any cost" is entirely self-explanatory.

Witnessing and discussing the costs of these 'freedoms' is lost in the din of defense of the utterly outdated concept of "a regulated militia" (the definition of 'regulated' always being self-serving). Our history since the American Revolution exposes these 'militias' as agents of ethnic, racial and philosophical 'cleansing' virtually exclusively.

SDN

Are you familiar with the term "good of the order"? Do you consider that concept worthwhile? Would you be willing to help a sick or injured fellow human, even if firearms weren't involved?

Oh, I most assuredly DO help my fellow man. Likely more than you do. I won't go into details, suffice it to say I am very generous in both time and money.

However, I believe in that simple concept of "self reliance" also. Is that "self reliance" something you know about? Or do you believe that those not self sufficient or self reliant should enjoy all the benefits and life enjoyments of those that HAVE worked enjoy?

And you speak of "militias" in the modern sense of the word. I will most assuredly agree that there are many of, dubious is the term that comes to mind, pedigrees. However, I believe in the militia in the historical Constitutional understanding of the word. The people with a strong belief in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, are the militia I speak of. The government is not necessarily concerned with the Constitution. The government is concerned primarily with the continuation of the government at the expense of any rights enjoyed by the people.

The Oath of Office people take is to defend the CONSTITUTION from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. The Oath is NOT to defend the government, it is to defend the documents that enable the government. And it is that document that limits the power of government over the people.

xd:

You didn't answer any of my questions. I will answer yours.

"Oh, I most assuredly DO help my fellow man. Likely more than you do." Really?

"..do you believe that those not self sufficient or self reliant should enjoy all the benefits and life enjoyments of those that HAVE worked enjoy? No.

"The Oath of Office people take is to defend the CONSTITUTION from all enemies..." It also includes the oath to obey the orders of superiors, up to, and including, the Commander in Chief. Exclusivity can be useful in some circles.

"The government is not necessarily concerned with the Constitution." Really?

"The government is concerned primarily with the continuation of the government at the expense of any rights enjoyed by the people." Really?

"Is that "self reliance" something you know about?" Yes - 65 years worth.

"And you speak of "militias" in the modern sense of the word." That would define "modern" as being post "American Revolution"?

I am aware of the purpose and the text of the Constitution.

Good One Otto :)

Best comment yet!

And then we can have the Internet Intelligence Test amendment and the Positive Voter ID amendment and while we're at it why not a Nothing to Hide amendment to make enforcing the rest easier.

explaining it to "simple people" that all people should not be
allowed to have guns,

Yes, specifically let's start with blacks, Latinos, anybody who makes less that $50k/year and don't forget gays and all Democrats. (See this is the issue with deciding who does and doesn't get to exercise rights, that its not always going to be you doing the deciding.)

assault weapons removed from sale,

Any object that is used to assault someone is by definition an 'Assault Weapon', are you proposing a system where nothing is allowed to be sold? (after all baseball bats kill more people a year than rifles)

In a state that lets you carry currently
the training is pretty much down to “Can ya hold a gun in your had?, Okay you
can carry a counseled weapon to church.”

Which state? (there are 50 in case you forgot) As I am sure you are aware the individual laws of each state are varied based on the wishes of the people in that state (federal system of government, you remember it from high school right?) As far as carry permits it can range from your have at it (Idaho and maybe Nevada IIRC) to are you a connected and rich politician (California and several East coast states) Also unlike drivers licenses, carry permits are not valid outside of state of issue absent an legislative agreement between the state governments.

I would hope that this might make you at least think a little bit, but unfortunately my experiences with individuals such as yourself is that you are incapable of critical thinking and so you allow yourself to be swept up in the current morass of emotional pandering.

Yep,
that’s what I thought I would get ... all I can say is this is not a new
subject. If Congress wasn't corrupt (ha) and they NRA would be observed as not
a legislative branch of our government .. then a long long time ago this would
have been solved. This is easy to solve, but with so called leaders on the take
and simple minded country music fans it will take longer. Notice I said
"It will take longer." Meaning logic in America lacks speed of any
kind. Here's a fact (and so you can’t be silly "assault weapon" means
any war type looking semi-automatic rifle that can have a magazine carrying
lets say 30 rounds) Fact: If a legal ban on assault rifles (make you happy?)
was put into place as federal law and active on a Tuesday and all little simple
guns shops observed the law you would have not a single person killed by a legally
purchased assault rifle the next day. Oh, or the next day after that. Sure all the ones sold before that day, but
not after. Yah that’s right, you can’t
have someone shoot dead with a gun they couldn't buy. But hey to hillbillies
watching Dukes of Hazard with their sister on their lap .. what’s one life
right. That’s a fact you cannot fight or twist or anything else. Also, you might change your mind if you were
ever shot at.

and they NRA would be observed as not
a legislative branch of our government ..

The NRA is no more a branch of government than the AARP, NAACP, PhRMA, or any other large well funded lobby organization is. Yes there is way to much money in politics, but that applies to everything not just firearms.

Here's a fact (and so you can’t be silly "assault weapon" means
any war type looking semi-automatic rifle that can have a magazine carrying
lets say 30 rounds)

Any war type looking gun, which war? If you go all out the M1 Garand (standard issue battle rifle for WWII, google for pix) had only an 8 round capacity and was fed from stripper clips in a fixed magazine. If you go by just capacity then anything that has a magazine capacity of less than 30 rounds is no longer an 'assault weapon' which means that an AR-15 with a 20 round magazine is NOT an assault weapon despite the 'war looking' part. And then you get to the technicalities of your ban, is the ban on retail sales, all sales, what about gifting, would buying a storage unit at auction with an 'assault rifle' in it make you a felon? Post your actual ban language (The whole law as you want it) and then I'll critique it. Anything else is a useless exercise.

And for future reference you should probably leave out the hillbilly slurs. I don't care that your father didn't share the moonshine with you and that your sister could run faster than you.

That’s a fact you cannot fight or twist or anything else. Also, you might change your mind if you were
ever shot at.

10 year military veteran, the point is to avoid situations where people are shooting at you but to be prepared for when they happen by being able to SHOOT BACK.

rnd:

Civilian life in the US is specifically intended to not be a military exercise. As it not-so-slowly becomes such, whom deserves the credit will become even more obvious.

The shooter was probably Sarah Palin's cousin or Insane Wayne LaPierre's brother. Never can tell when some mamma's little angel might throw a temper tantrum in a store, so how about arming all Walmart employees, just in case the little brat goes berserk and can be put down?

That will probably be the next carry permit rule...all wallyworld staff carry sidearms openly and all management are armed with fully auto to help supress any uprising in housewares. In a state with a huge alcoholism problem and loose firearms laws these tragedies are on the rise. And no one seems motivated to deal with it.

I own guns. They've never been used to kill, wound or maim -- unless you count paper targets, cans and the occasional bottle.

The purpose is target shooting, which I enjoy. Perhaps I'm not doing it right?

terelyn:

Sounds to me you are one of the very few that are 'doing it right'.

An "accident" is an injury or damage caused by something completely out of human control. Most automobile "accidents" are caused by irresponsibility or stupidity.

Terelyn, we just have your word for it. Also you forgot to include the words "so far" in your claim. For all we know you're on the virge of shooting someone because you don't like their politics, music, sexuality, religion, or how he or she is looking at your property.

All responsible gun owners are only responsible until they're not. All law-abiding gun owners obey the law until they decide not to.

bc black people don't shoot strangers at all smh

No surprise that the scumbags at Walmart kept the store open and kept the cash rolling in even though their manager was bleeding out on the floor of the goddamn store. That's right in the Walmart employees' manual: Money first. Screw everything else. There is no everything else.

Now Walmart will turn this into a positive story about how, since the manager looks like he might not ever come back, they're creating jobs! For the $18 bucks an hour they paid him, they can now hire FOUR part-timers at $9 an hour. JOB CREATION!

The only thing I ever do at Walmart is use their bathroom. Piss on Walmart. Literally.

How about people at the pharmacy (if there was one) that needed medicines? People that need plumbing supplies, light bulbs, food, extra blankets, replacement heaters, and all the other stuff people buy at Walmart?

Of course WalMart is in it for the bucks. and they get them by meeting their customers needs. So do these needs equal or exceed your concept of what was di=ue the manager in question?

You are so wrong. They certainly can demand that the dog be on lead in the store. They didnt refuse service or admission or limit his use of the store. There are just as many people who are concerned about loose animals. People like your mom are whats wrong with the service dog system. Silly people believing that their disability should allow them to do whatever they want.

B murphy--sorry, but the law says that while you cannot ban the animal from your facility except under extreme conditions (obviously, it cannot visit a patient in a hospital room that requires sterile conditions) they CAN require the dog to be on a leash.

The manager ONLY asked the guy to put a leash on his dog, not to not enter.

I'd toss the card on the floor, say 'yes I have good lawyers', and escort her out the door. Businesses are private property. If you don't like their policies, go elsewhere. You've inherited quite an attitude.

@SDN: lol, I don't have a service dog. I said my mom does. Having trouble reading? And I've got the attitude? When you'd throw a tantrum like a child and toss the card on the floor? Classy.