bpwallace49 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I don't see that it does. if the kid is restrained in a carrier and quiet, that should be good enough to satisfy any reasonable person. draw the line there. why? a one year-old, I agree. winery tour seems like a bad choice of activities. but an infant that mostly you just carry around while they sleep...I just honestly can't see what's so crazy about it. What happens when the child wakes up screaming? Is it still OK? Maybe an "only if they are unconscious" rule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 What happens when the child wakes up screaming? Is it still OK? Maybe an "only if they are unconscious" rule? :cracksknuckles: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 A few months ago, the wife and I toted our then 2-ish month old out for one of her first "outings". We went to a bar-ish type place that has a hugh outdoor area for a crawfish boil with a bunch of our friends. Mind you, this is a Sunday we're talking about, around noon. No problems bringing her there, in fact the cats at the door taking our $10 (which was a bargain, FWIW) were like "oh what a cute little one, blah blah blah". So after the boil, a few of the friends at the boil were planning on meeting some of our really good friends at this dive-bar place out on the trendy, hipster east side of Austin. They said we should go, and that the place has a huge patio so it'd be kid-friendly. Almost everywhere in Austin is like that. We decide to just stop by for no more than 20-30 minutes, as we hadn't seen our good friends in several weeks and it was on the way home. Well, we get there and see this hugh sign "NO KIDS ALLOWED" hung by the door. We're like "what-ev" and bring our sleeping tot who was in her carrier out on the deck with our friends. Again, it's Sunday, probably around 4-5pm. There were 2-3 other smaller groups out on the deck, none of which appeared to be bothered by our perfectly quiet and slumbering baby. About 15 minutes in, the douchebag bartender, engulfed in hipsterness and tats, comes out and tells us we have to leave. I see both sides of the argument: if he let us stay there for any length of time, I suppose that he'd have to let "anyone" do it. But come on, it was a Sunday late afternoon and it wasn't like it was a screaming toddler. Or screaming anything. Had she been up and screaming, we wouldn't have been there in the first place. Safe to say I wrote a scathing review on Yelp based on the bartender (who supposedly was the owner too) being a complete d00sh. He said "people come here to get AWAY from kids". Like there's some kind of kid infestation in Austin. Dude was just a moody hipster with a stick up his cornhole and likely unable to procreate. In the case of these restaurants, though, I can certainly see where the owners are coming from. People are generally oblivious to how annoying their little rugrats are. Control your progeny, folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 but to the original post, I think it's great. restaurants should be free to cater to families-with-kids clientele, and they should be free to cater to people specifically seeking to avoid that atmosphere. it should be totally up to the establishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 What happens when the child wakes up screaming? a 6 week old doesn't have much of a "scream". but probably what happens is the parent takes them to the restroom, changes them, then feeds them. if the kid is crying incessantly and that's bothering other people, that may be a good point to ask them to take her to the "family area" if the parents are too obtuse to do that on their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 As the parent of a 5 year-old, a 4 year-old and a 1 year-old... me too. The last thing I want around me when I go to a decent restaurant are young children. Yep, me too. I have plenty of restaurants I can take my four kids to (Applebees, Friday's, etc)....when I go out with my wife for some adult conversation, the LAST thing I want is some other kids spoiling the evening. While he may suffer some bad PR for being family-unfriendly...I too would be first in line to get in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffraff Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 2 thumbs up on this. Kind of like the opposite... can't go to Chuck-E-Cheese's and expect an iota of quiet time. I see no issue with a place that allows you to be in your own moment instead of sharing a moment with half the restaurant because of 1 unruly child. Cater to the clientelle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I would support the hell out of that restaurant. FINALLY. Me too. In fact I always said if I opened up a place this kind of rule would go into effect. I would put the age limit higher though. Say about oh 25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrip Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 (edited) The first thing I do in restaurants is scan for kids and try to sit far away from them. Even if they're quiet. Just the possibility of them deciding to throw a fit stresses me out. Edited July 13, 2011 by mrip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I don't like noisy kids sitting near me at a restaurant, but then again I'm old and crotchety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I have no issue with that whatsoever. I think more restaurants should consider this. Agreed. Contrary to popular opinion, I usually find that kids in the restaurants I go to are well behaved and well controlled but the odd one that isn't is a royal pain in the ass and the parents worse so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I don't see that it does. if the kid is restrained in a carrier and quiet, that should be good enough to satisfy any reasonable person. draw the line there. why? a one year-old, I agree. winery tour seems like a bad choice of activities. but an infant that mostly you just carry around while they sleep...I just honestly can't see what's so crazy about it. You argued in the front lawn veggie garden thread that subjectivity was a bad thing. Isn't allowing some babies but not others also subjectivity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Stick a tit in it. Anything that encourages breasts being whipped out in public I am in favor of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 You argued in the front lawn veggie garden thread that subjectivity was a bad thing. Isn't allowing some babies but not others also subjectivity? Agreed. The issue of some kids but not others is a massive can of worms. Mostly because you may as well not have any restriction on kids because you're right back to leaving it up to the parents to decide whether or not their kid is fine. The determination is ultimately never up to the proprietor whether or not a kid is too unruly, unless that proprietor wants to get into a fight. The only difference is that maybe they've been warned about your zero tolerance policy to noisy kids. And you know what that buys you? Zilch. Anyone cool enough to not fight you on it even after you made your policy clear would be reasonable enough to remove their kid anyway. Further, I got into it with someone about this topic and they argued that removing a screaming kid from a restaurant or store is just rewarding the behavior because now they know, if they're bored, just start screaming and mom will take you away. My stance was, teach your kids on your freaking time, not at the expense of the rest of my paying customers. (Fortunately this argument was not actually happening at my restaurant). So, now it's not even about "my child is an angel" but, "you're retarding my child's learning process by 'giving in' to him". That was a new one for me. So, either you allow kids or you don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 but to the original post, I think it's great. restaurants should be free to cater to families-with-kids clientele, and they should be free to cater to people specifically seeking to avoid that atmosphere. it should be totally up to the establishment. +1 Now would I ever patronize such an establishment, even when I have a babysitter? Never. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 You argued in the front lawn veggie garden thread that subjectivity was a bad thing. Isn't allowing some babies but not others also subjectivity? one situation is the cops having power of law to arrest and fine you, the other is a business establishment trying to provide the best experience for all its patrons without unnecessarily pissing anyone off. but yeah, other than that tiny little distinction, exact same thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Make it objective and hand a sound meter on the carrier. If the kid gets over 30db, you're outta there! 30db is a quiet whisper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 30db is a quiet whisper. ok, let's revise the number to 15db Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 I got into it with someone about this topic and they argued that removing a screaming kid from a restaurant or store is just rewarding the behavior because now they know, if they're bored, just start screaming and mom will take you away. Only if the parent is a moron. ie if they just remove the child/leave (giving the child what it wants). OTOH if you remove them to give them a good spanking (gasp - the horror) or other discipline, and/or get them home and discipline them in whatever way is effective, AND make it clear that is why they're getting the punishment, and enforce similar discipline in similar situations (you can't just threaten it as not backing it up means they know it's an empty threat) they will not consider it a "reward." If I'm anywhere near these places I'd go out of my way to dine there and ask to shake the owner's hand and buy him a drink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 I'm with club. A business has the right to set their rules as they see fit. I have the option of giving them my business or not. A place that bans kids won't get my business even when it's just me and the wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 A business has the right to set their rules as they see fit. Bars that want their patrons to be able to smoke would disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) Bars that want their patrons to be able to smoke would disagree. If you live in California, I'm sure you could get enough signatures to get a prop on the ballot to ban kids in restaurants. after that, who knows....might just pass Edited July 14, 2011 by REZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Bars that want their patrons to be able to smoke would disagree. or if they want "Whites Only" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 A place that bans kids won't get my business even when it's just me and the wife. Heck, I'd be more likely to go there for a meal. When we have a sitter, the last thing I want to hear is kids screaming and carrying on. Hell, there are times when we're out without the kids my wife and I hardly speak because we enjoy the silence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) There is already a surplus of people who think they are the boss of me in my life. I'm not adding some Showtime Rotisseriebag dick who owns a restaurant to the list. Edited July 14, 2011 by Clubfoothead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.