When dealing with the issue of guide dogs entering museums, it is advisable to adhere to the principle of prioritizing the weak and the greatest common divisor. Why can't guide dogs enter museums? ”According to reports, a blind young man in Wenzhou recently posted a video on his social media account saying that he wanted to take a guide dog to visit the Shaanxi History Museum, but was told by museum staff that "pets cannot be brought in". The young man explained that guide dogs are working dogs, not pets, and the staff's response was' animals cannot be brought in '. On June 17th, the reporter contacted Shaanxi History Museum, and the staff introduced that blind and other special groups can bring their disability and ID cards to the window for registration if they come to the museum alone. They can enter the museum through an accessible channel, and volunteers can also provide assistance after entering. However, it is recommended that special groups come to visit with someone accompanying them. According to the museum admission notice, guide dogs are indeed not allowed to enter. On the surface, the museum does not allow guide dogs to enter, which is somewhat inhumane. Without the eyes of a guide dog, blind people will find it difficult to move. But the Shaanxi History Museum also has alternative plans for blind visitors. The staff said they can send volunteers to assist with the visit, and if they bring a guide dog, they can also be responsible for guarding it. Objectively speaking, the museum's considerations are comprehensive, and the promised services are also humanized. Guide dogs cannot enter museums not because the staff are making things difficult, but because the exhibition space is relatively enclosed and the audience in the exhibition hall is relatively dense. If guide dogs enter, it may cause disorder and panic among other visitors. So, the regulation of Shaanxi History Museum is actually the result of balancing the interests of all parties. Moreover, it is difficult to say that such regulations violate higher-level laws. Article 58 of the Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities stipulates that blind persons carrying guide dogs in public places shall comply with relevant national regulations. The Regulations on the Construction of Accessible Environments stipulate that "visually impaired persons carrying guide dogs into and out of public places shall comply with relevant national regulations, and staff in public places shall provide accessible services in accordance with relevant national regulations. Upon closer examination of these two laws and regulations, although they clarify the right of guide dogs to enter public places, the relevant provisions are vague, such as whether they cover all scenarios and how to equip them with auxiliary supporting measures. Moreover, the intensity of the wording 'should' rather than 'must' and 'not' implies that these regulations are not mandatory obligations, but rather a principle advocacy, which provides space for public places to make autonomous decisions. As for domestic museums, the Palace Museum and the Museum of Chinese Archaeology allow guide dogs with work permits to enter, while museums such as the Potala Palace, Jingdezhen Imperial Kiln Museum, and the controversial Shaanxi History Museum explicitly prohibit guide dogs from entering. There are also a large number of museums that do not address this issue in their public management regulations. Whether from the prudence of legislation or the practices of museums around the world, this ambiguity is likely to stem from a cautious and deliberate approach. On the one hand, people with disabilities have equal rights to visit, and guide dogs as their auxiliary tools should receive sufficient support; On the other hand, museums are special public places, and "cultural relic protection" is the first principle. If guide dogs are released without any consideration, it may also cause losses to cultural relics and the rights of other groups. So, whether guide dogs should be allowed to enter museums is a typical multilateral interest topic. Any decision involving public interests must comprehensively weigh various factors, and often there is no optimal solution, even a "least bad" result can only be obtained. When dealing with the issue of guide dogs entering museums, museums can adhere to two principles: firstly, the principle of prioritizing the weak. Museums should develop detailed and actionable plans based on comprehensive considerations of cultural relic protection, passenger flow density, and management capabilities, in order to create conditions as much as possible for guide dogs to enter the museum; If not possible, volunteer services should also be arranged to accompany disabled people on visits, and guide dogs should be managed properly. Next is the principle of greatest common divisor. In areas with extremely high pedestrian flow or fragile cultural relics, practical factors should be taken into consideration, and whether guide dogs should be allowed to enter and the consequences after entering should be fully evaluated. In other words, even if guide dogs are allowed to enter museums, it is not appropriate to generalize. It is better to adjust flexibly and dynamically according to different time periods and regions, and provide good management services. Building a disability friendly society is a long-term issue that needs to be gradually implemented to prevent it from becoming emotional and moral. At the practical level, further legal adjustments and refinement may be needed, social networks providing more complete support, and museums exploring innovative and flexible management. Through multi-party efforts, the rights and interests of people with disabilities in public places can be maximized. (New Society)