Imagine, if you will, finding the perfect pet, that dog or cat that just calls out to you. You’re ready to adopt, take the pet home, and give it a good life with all the love it has been missing. But wait, first you must answer this question: “Where do you stand on gun control?” Your answer will determine if you can have that pet.
Sound a bit far-fetched? Well, it’s not, at least not for one Southern California website that will not permit Second Amendment supporters adopt. The Shelter Hope Pet Shop in Thousand Oaks makes it clear that your political views will determine whether or not you can use its services. According to the company’s website:
“We do not support those who believe that the 2nd amendment gives them the right to buy assault weapons. If your beliefs are not in line with ours, we will not adopt a pet to you.”
And if you think that you can just say that you support gun control and still take home a furry friend, think again. Shelter Hope declared that it won’t tolerate those trying to cheat their way into a new family member:
“If you lie about being a NRA supporter, make no mistake, we will sue you for fraud. If you believe that it is our responsibility to protect ourselves in public places and arm ourselves with a gun—do not come to us to adopt a dog. We have a choice of who we work with. Shelter Hope Chooses to work with only like-minded humans.”
That isn’t the only restriction, either, although judging people based on their political beliefs is a doozy, to be sure. Potential pet parents must be 25 years old, and if they don’t own their own home, they have to submit to an inspection of their rental apartment or house.
Can Shelter Hope get away with this? Refuse service to someone based on political beliefs? Remember Jack Phillips, the baker who was sued because he wouldn’t make a cake for a gay wedding? You might think the same principles can be applied here, but, according to law experts, it’s not the same thing and the shelter can basically do what it wants. Liberty Nation Legal Affairs Editor Scott D. Cosenza, Esq. explained:
“Discrimination based on political views, such as position on gun control legislation, for instance, has never been ruled impermissible. If buyers or adopters sign a contract promising they are gun grabbers, and they are not, I would expect them to be found liable for their false affirmations.”
Emily Berman, a constitutional law professor at the University of Houston Law Center, agreed, saying federal law does not protect against discrimination “on the basis of gun ownership or support of gun rights.” But states can choose to alter the rules to prevent such restrictions:
“[T]here is also theoretically nothing stopping states and localities from imposing those kinds of rules. Just as a state can bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, presumably they could also do so on the basis of an individual’s view on guns.”
The shop owner, Kim Sill, referenced a time when she allowed a person to volunteer as a way to pay off a community debt but had to let him go because he didn’t get along with another employee. That volunteer, according to Sill, then went on a shooting spree at a bar in Thousand Oaks in 2018. Authorities told her that the pet shop had been one of his targets and suggested she acquire security. She didn’t hire armed security, hoping that having someone in uniform at the door would stop any attacks. She added that the Uvalde, TX, school shooting “was the tipping point,” and she decided it was time for her to do her part, which meant preventing people who didn’t agree with her position on guns from adopting a pet from her shop.
Sill has received a lot of negative feedback. She told NBC News that many of the shop’s donors are Republicans and that this decision might result in losing donations. “I say, fine, keep your money,” the shop owner exclaimed. “If I go out of business as a result, I go out of business. But I have to do something. And this is the only thing I can do to make the point that mass killings by people armed with guns have to stop.”
Amy Hunter, National Rifle Association’s spokeswoman, had something to say about the announcement as well: “Having this asinine political litmus test comes at the expense of needy and homeless dogs and cats.”
The comments on the shop’s Facebook page also showed contempt for Sill’s position. One poster wrote: “You’re not doing the animals any favors with this attitude. Nobody said you should have to carry a gun to protect yourself either! That’s a CHOICE.” Another posted: “Pets can not have a home because I, as a legal gun owner and an African American woman who lives with daughters, has taken steps to be able to defend myself and my family.”
And if that’s not enough, here’s a passage from Sill’s announcement that she demands former customers to return their pets if they endorse gun rights:
“We will continue to support our community, but if you are pro guns and believe that no background check is necessary, then do not come to us to adopt. We will grill you before you even get an appointment and visit our rescue. If we ask you ‘do you care about children being gunned down in our schools?’ If you hesitate, because your core belief is that you believe teachers need to carry firearms, then you will not get approved to adopt from us. If you foster for us and believe in guns, please bring our dogs and/or cats back, or we will arrange to have them picked up.”
