United forces woman to put puppy in overhead bid, where it dies during flight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh – it’s a dog, whatever. Maybe stop bringing your effing “emotional support” animals everywhere.

Ikr...The US is the only culture which has fetishize dogs to this extent. I cant imagine if someone in any other country brings a dog with them wherever they go and tells someone, "I need my dog for emotional support." People would just laugh in their face. It's ok if the dog is a guide dog or a real service animal (like for epileptics) but this whole emotional support business is getting out of hand.

+1. I believe that they have emotional problems but a dog isn't going to solve it.

+10000

Seriously, this. An animal is not a child's security blanket, and you can't just bring it with you wherever you go. You're not a champion for animal's rights that you think you are, if you think it's ok to just bring your pets on planes.

Leave your animal at home. It'll be fine without the stress of travel. Your emotional problems aren't going to be solved by bringing your pet with you everywhere.

Hey genius, some people have to move, and they can't necessarily drive to their destination.

I can say the same thing about your annoying toddler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh – it’s a dog, whatever. Maybe stop bringing your effing “emotional support” animals everywhere.

Ikr...The US is the only culture which has fetishize dogs to this extent. I cant imagine if someone in any other country brings a dog with them wherever they go and tells someone, "I need my dog for emotional support." People would just laugh in their face. It's ok if the dog is a guide dog or a real service animal (like for epileptics) but this whole emotional support business is getting out of hand.

+1. I believe that they have emotional problems but a dog isn't going to solve it.

+10000

Seriously, this. An animal is not a child's security blanket, and you can't just bring it with you wherever you go. You're not a champion for animal's rights that you think you are, if you think it's ok to just bring your pets on planes.

Leave your animal at home. It'll be fine without the stress of travel. Your emotional problems aren't going to be solved by bringing your pet with you everywhere.

Hey genius, some people have to move, and they can't necessarily drive to their destination.

I can say the same thing about your annoying toddler.

You could, but then you'd be equating a human being with an animal, and you'd out yourself as not so bright. But, go ahead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh – it’s a dog, whatever. Maybe stop bringing your effing “emotional support” animals everywhere.

Ikr...The US is the only culture which has fetishize dogs to this extent. I cant imagine if someone in any other country brings a dog with them wherever they go and tells someone, "I need my dog for emotional support." People would just laugh in their face. It's ok if the dog is a guide dog or a real service animal (like for epileptics) but this whole emotional support business is getting out of hand.

+1. I believe that they have emotional problems but a dog isn't going to solve it.

+10000

Seriously, this. An animal is not a child's security blanket, and you can't just bring it with you wherever you go. You're not a champion for animal's rights that you think you are, if you think it's ok to just bring your pets on planes.

Leave your animal at home. It'll be fine without the stress of travel. Your emotional problems aren't going to be solved by bringing your pet with you everywhere.

Hey genius, some people have to move, and they can't necessarily drive to their destination.

I can say the same thing about your annoying toddler.

You could, but then you'd be equating a human being with an animal, and you'd out yourself as not so bright. But, go ahead.

+1

Also, isn't this site called DC Urban Moms and Dads? I'm sure you can find a site for dog enthusiasts somewhere if you want people to agree with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh – it’s a dog, whatever. Maybe stop bringing your effing “emotional support” animals everywhere.

Ikr...The US is the only culture which has fetishize dogs to this extent. I cant imagine if someone in any other country brings a dog with them wherever they go and tells someone, "I need my dog for emotional support." People would just laugh in their face. It's ok if the dog is a guide dog or a real service animal (like for epileptics) but this whole emotional support business is getting out of hand.

+1. I believe that they have emotional problems but a dog isn't going to solve it.

+10000

Seriously, this. An animal is not a child's security blanket, and you can't just bring it with you wherever you go. You're not a champion for animal's rights that you think you are, if you think it's ok to just bring your pets on planes.

Leave your animal at home. It'll be fine without the stress of travel. Your emotional problems aren't going to be solved by bringing your pet with you everywhere.

Hey genius, some people have to move, and they can't necessarily drive to their destination.

I can say the same thing about your annoying toddler.

You could, but then you'd be equating a human being with an animal, and you'd out yourself as not so bright. But, go ahead.

Obviously a pet being transported within CONUS would be able to travel by ground. How did pets travel overseas before all this craziness??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I don't understand how you can get a dog and not know what you're getting into. Your breed, its limitations, issues faced when traveling, and going above and beyond to make sure you go in fully informed. It's your animal, and you can't expect the world to accommodate you or know your animal and its tolerances.

That seems to be a problem with a lot of pet ownership these days - people want a dog as a status symbol, for companionship, because they think they're "fun" or cute or whatever. They jump into it with such negligent ignorance on the responsibility. You can't expect others to care/know more about your dog than you do.

Huh? If the FA had placed the baby up in that carry on compartment instead and the baby suffocated, instead, I guess that would "prove" that the mother should have known her child's limitations and never brought her baby on the plane?

Obviously, the mother would never have allowed her child to be placed up there. But if the FA indicated that placing the pet carrier up there was a safe thing to do, I can see how an owner might reluctantly agree to that rather than disembark. I'm sure the owner had no idea that the compartment lacked air.

[Anonymous]

There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

Have you seen the pictures of the carrier? It's not obviously a pet carrier, it looks like any other bag.

[Anonymous]

If you don’t like flying with dogs on board then DONT FLY. You dog haters can take the bus or walk. It is our right to fly with dogs, thanks to the airlines policies. And it is our right to persecute and ostracize vicious flight attendants line the one that killed the dog

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I don't understand how you can get a dog and not know what you're getting into. Your breed, its limitations, issues faced when traveling, and going above and beyond to make sure you go in fully informed. It's your animal, and you can't expect the world to accommodate you or know your animal and its tolerances.

That seems to be a problem with a lot of pet ownership these days - people want a dog as a status symbol, for companionship, because they think they're "fun" or cute or whatever. They jump into it with such negligent ignorance on the responsibility. You can't expect others to care/know more about your dog than you do.

Huh? If the FA had placed the baby up in that carry on compartment instead and the baby suffocated, instead, I guess that would "prove" that the mother should have known her child's limitations and never brought her baby on the plane?

Obviously, the mother would never have allowed her child to be placed up there. But if the FA indicated that placing the pet carrier up there was a safe thing to do, I can see how an owner might reluctantly agree to that rather than disembark. I'm sure the owner had no idea that the compartment lacked air.

This makes no sense. A dog is not a human. I get that you think your dog is human because you profess to love that dog like it was a human. But, a dog is not a human. This is going too far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like flying with dogs on board then DONT FLY. You dog haters can take the bus or walk. It is our right to fly with dogs, thanks to the airlines policies. And it is our right to persecute and ostracize vicious flight attendants line the one that killed the dog

It's also the airlines' right to decide to that pet owners are too much of a PITA on flights and to change their policies to restrict pet carriage as a result. You want to continue to be allowed to bring your pet, you need to do your part to manage your pet responsibly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like flying with children on board, then DON'T FLY. You child haters can take the bus or walk. It is our right to fly with children, thanks to the airline's policies.

FTFY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like flying with dogs on board then DONT FLY. You dog haters can take the bus or walk. It is our right to fly with dogs, thanks to the airlines policies. And it is our right to persecute and ostracize vicious flight attendants line the one that killed the dog

It's also the airlines' right to decide to that pet owners are too much of a PITA on flights and to change their policies to restrict pet carriage as a result. You want to continue to be allowed to bring your pet, you need to do your part to manage your pet responsibly.

Ok we’ll right now the rules are on the dog owners’ side. So if you don’t like it TOUGH LUCK. HA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

Have you seen the pictures of the carrier? It's not obviously a pet carrier, it looks like any other bag.

Even so, the dog would have moved in response to being lifted and placed. Instinct is to move to brace yourself. I could maybe buy her story if it were a cat, but even small dogs are sturdy. You couldn't NOT feel one moving around in a soft bag you were lifting.

[Anonymous]

I would have walked off the plane before allowing my dog to go into an overhead bin. Common sense says there is not enough air for a puppy to breathe there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Boycott this horrendous airline.

https://nypost.com/2018/03/13/dog-dies-after-united-flight-attendant-forces-it-into-overhead-bin/

What is wrong with this pet owner? I would have refused. Crazy.