It is believed that it would be very difficult to carry a dog when you go outside for dinner, because there are now a lot of rules for dogs. The first thing you have to do when you walk a dog out of the house is to hold a dog, and if you don't, dogs can easily hurt others. Second, if found by the supervisory authority, a certain penalty is imposed. The second is that you have to have a dog certificate. You've got a dog certificate now. If you don't have a dog, you can be punished. Finally, dogs have to be vaccinated, and if they are not vaccinated, the dogs themselves are easily ill and alive, and if they are not vaccinated, and if they are carrying rabies, the consequences will be disastrous.
So now it's basically a dog that pays a lot, not only for the economy, but also for energy. But now dogs can't be kept largely at home and must walk every day. Even when people go out for dinner, they bring dogs. But eating with dogs is also difficult because many restaurants refuse pets. Even if a pet is allowed in, there are a lot of rules, such as having to be placed in a designated position, not having the dog at the table together, or feeding the dog with the dining equipment.
Once upon a time, a customer at the restaurant fed her dog with a bowl of food from the restaurant because she thought that the dog was close to herself and she considered the dog her son. So what's the problem with eating with your son? But this move was seen by the people next to it, who were very angry. They saw people feeding dogs with a bowl from a restaurant, so if the bowls they eat now used by dogs. In response, they complained about the shop, and the last one was helpless and only to remind the customers that this was not possible. This makes the customer angry, thinks he's here to consume and that his dog is his own son and why can't he eat together. In the end, the mess broke out and the restaurant, in an effort to eliminate the impact, threw away all the dishes that the customer used to eat.
Does the restaurant have the right to refuse to allow dogs to enter or to eat at the table? In response, some netizens felt that the restaurant could not be discriminatory, that dogs were so good and did not affect others. Besides, you've got to clean your chopsticks every day. They don't matter who eats them, they're in a hurry. And when you wash the chopsticks, it's not the same, it's not the same, it's the same, it's the same, it's the same, it's the same, it's the same. Besides, we go to the restaurant to eat as a consumer, and with our dog we should become God, and as a restaurant we should not treat ourselves that way, we should do the service well.
In fact, it is the right of the restaurant to refuse a dog entry or a dog to eat at a table, but sometimes the restaurant does not make it clear that it does not affect the customer. However, the restaurant must have the right to ban dogs from entering, even if allowed to do so, by requiring dogs to wear bite-proof cages and leash. Even when a customer wants a dog to eat together at a table, the restaurant can expressly refuse. Because some of the dishes are not really for dogs, the restaurant does this because it's worried about the subsequent dogs eating their stomachs, and the customers come here to make trouble claims, so they usually refuse. I don't know what your opinion is. Do you think dogs should come to the table with their masters when they eat outside?