death at Dunn Loring metro

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it were an actual service animal, the family would have very likely disclosed the reasoning among other details. Ie, "grandfather of 4 with history of seizures."

This was almost certainly a pet that someone decided to call their "service animal." And regardless, the animal was transported improperly on the train--even if it was a legitimate service animal.

That is wildly untrue. The family shouldn't have to disclose the specific disability in order to be believed. They said it was a service animal. Why do you require disabled people to disclose medical information to you in order to believe them?

Because so many people abuse laws and regulations regarding service animals, and it negatively affects people who really need service animals for legitimate medical assistance. And there's zero indication that the man was disabled - where are you getting this information?

All the articles are reporting that his family is saying it's a service dog.

Just because the family says it's a service dog, doesn't mean that it is. It almost certainly was not.

+1

Service dogs cost thousands of dollars to train for specific tasks. I don’t think they would just get adopted out to a random family. The family is saying it’s a service dog but I don’t think it is. It’s still a tragedy and I still feel badly for this gentleman.

This is a cautionary tale as to why pets, a.k.a. emotional support animals should not be allowed just anywhere. It is literally an accident waiting to happen.

Seeing eye dogs, generally yes. Dogs trained for other things (seizure/low blood pressure detection, allergy detection, pressure training for anxiety attacks, etc) generally don't and are often owner-trained. There is no such thing as service dog certification on a national level and no training requirements beyond being task-trained for a certain condition. Since they are in public, they should be obedient and compliant, but theoretically you could have a wild-ass doodle who is not but who is ace at detecting tree nut presence in even trace amounts in food. That dog still counts.

"Service dogs" (with or without a vest on) include emotional support animals.

The appropriate level of training for an emotional support animal is left up to the individual patient, to train as they see fit.

You are wrong. Stop spreading lies and misinformation. From the ADA website:

Are emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals considered service animals under the ADA?

A. No. These terms are used to describe animals that provide comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.


https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it were an actual service animal, the family would have very likely disclosed the reasoning among other details. Ie, "grandfather of 4 with history of seizures."

This was almost certainly a pet that someone decided to call their "service animal." And regardless, the animal was transported improperly on the train--even if it was a legitimate service animal.

That is wildly untrue. The family shouldn't have to disclose the specific disability in order to be believed. They said it was a service animal. Why do you require disabled people to disclose medical information to you in order to believe them?

Because so many people abuse laws and regulations regarding service animals, and it negatively affects people who really need service animals for legitimate medical assistance. And there's zero indication that the man was disabled - where are you getting this information?

All the articles are reporting that his family is saying it's a service dog.

Just because the family says it's a service dog, doesn't mean that it is. It almost certainly was not.

+1

Service dogs cost thousands of dollars to train for specific tasks. I don’t think they would just get adopted out to a random family. The family is saying it’s a service dog but I don’t think it is. It’s still a tragedy and I still feel badly for this gentleman.

This is a cautionary tale as to why pets, a.k.a. emotional support animals should not be allowed just anywhere. It is literally an accident waiting to happen.

Seeing eye dogs, generally yes. Dogs trained for other things (seizure/low blood pressure detection, allergy detection, pressure training for anxiety attacks, etc) generally don't and are often owner-trained. There is no such thing as service dog certification on a national level and no training requirements beyond being task-trained for a certain condition. Since they are in public, they should be obedient and compliant, but theoretically you could have a wild-ass doodle who is not but who is ace at detecting tree nut presence in even trace amounts in food. That dog still counts.

"Service dogs" (with or without a vest on) include emotional support animals.

The appropriate level of training for an emotional support animal is left up to the individual patient, to train as they see fit.

You are wrong. Stop spreading lies and misinformation. From the ADA website:

Are emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals considered service animals under the ADA?

A. No. These terms are used to describe animals that provide comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.


https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/

You’re right, but most people don’t make the distinction.

[Anonymous]

Metro confirms to 7News that the man who was dragged to his death by a train was tied to a leash for his service dog, Daisy.

Daisy's service animal vest was covered up by a sweater, which is why they originally thought it wasn't a service dog.

- WJLA’s Facebook post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Metro confirms to 7News that the man who was dragged to his death by a train was tied to a leash for his service dog, Daisy.

Daisy's service animal vest was covered up by a sweater, which is why they originally thought it wasn't a service dog.

- WJLA’s Facebook post

lololololol

The proof of a service animal is not its vest, but in its behavior--and its behavior with its owner. This was not a service dog. Quite obviously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro confirms to 7News that the man who was dragged to his death by a train was tied to a leash for his service dog, Daisy.

Daisy's service animal vest was covered up by a sweater, which is why they originally thought it wasn't a service dog.

- WJLA’s Facebook post

lololololol

The proof of a service animal is not its vest, but in its behavior--and its behavior with its owner. This was not a service dog. Quite obviously.

ADA.

Was Daisy an ADA-approved service animal, or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it were an actual service animal, the family would have very likely disclosed the reasoning among other details. Ie, "grandfather of 4 with history of seizures."

This was almost certainly a pet that someone decided to call their "service animal." And regardless, the animal was transported improperly on the train--even if it was a legitimate service animal.

That is wildly untrue. The family shouldn't have to disclose the specific disability in order to be believed. They said it was a service animal. Why do you require disabled people to disclose medical information to you in order to believe them?

Because so many people abuse laws and regulations regarding service animals, and it negatively affects people who really need service animals for legitimate medical assistance. And there's zero indication that the man was disabled - where are you getting this information?

All the articles are reporting that his family is saying it's a service dog.

Just because the family says it's a service dog, doesn't mean that it is. It almost certainly was not.

+1

Service dogs cost thousands of dollars to train for specific tasks. I don’t think they would just get adopted out to a random family. The family is saying it’s a service dog but I don’t think it is. It’s still a tragedy and I still feel badly for this gentleman.

This is a cautionary tale as to why pets, a.k.a. emotional support animals should not be allowed just anywhere. It is literally an accident waiting to happen.

Seeing eye dogs, generally yes. Dogs trained for other things (seizure/low blood pressure detection, allergy detection, pressure training for anxiety attacks, etc) generally don't and are often owner-trained. There is no such thing as service dog certification on a national level and no training requirements beyond being task-trained for a certain condition. Since they are in public, they should be obedient and compliant, but theoretically you could have a wild-ass doodle who is not but who is ace at detecting tree nut presence in even trace amounts in food. That dog still counts.

"Service dogs" (with or without a vest on) include emotional support animals.

The appropriate level of training for an emotional support animal is left up to the individual patient, to train as they see fit.

You are wrong. Stop spreading lies and misinformation. From the ADA website:

Are emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals considered service animals under the ADA?

A. No. These terms are used to describe animals that provide comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.


https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/

Was Daisy an ADA-qualified service animal, or not?

Why can't you answer a simple question??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro confirms to 7News that the man who was dragged to his death by a train was tied to a leash for his service dog, Daisy.

Daisy's service animal vest was covered up by a sweater, which is why they originally thought it wasn't a service dog.

- WJLA’s Facebook post

lololololol

The proof of a service animal is not its vest, but in its behavior--and its behavior with its owner. This was not a service dog. Quite obviously.

ADA.

Was Daisy an ADA-approved service animal, or not?

That depends. What medically necessary task was Daisy trained to perform for its owner? Businesses are allowed to refuse entry to owners who refuse to answer this question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it were an actual service animal, the family would have very likely disclosed the reasoning among other details. Ie, "grandfather of 4 with history of seizures."

This was almost certainly a pet that someone decided to call their "service animal." And regardless, the animal was transported improperly on the train--even if it was a legitimate service animal.

That is wildly untrue. The family shouldn't have to disclose the specific disability in order to be believed. They said it was a service animal. Why do you require disabled people to disclose medical information to you in order to believe them?

Because so many people abuse laws and regulations regarding service animals, and it negatively affects people who really need service animals for legitimate medical assistance. And there's zero indication that the man was disabled - where are you getting this information?

All the articles are reporting that his family is saying it's a service dog.

Just because the family says it's a service dog, doesn't mean that it is. It almost certainly was not.

+1

Service dogs cost thousands of dollars to train for specific tasks. I don’t think they would just get adopted out to a random family. The family is saying it’s a service dog but I don’t think it is. It’s still a tragedy and I still feel badly for this gentleman.

This is a cautionary tale as to why pets, a.k.a. emotional support animals should not be allowed just anywhere. It is literally an accident waiting to happen.

Seeing eye dogs, generally yes. Dogs trained for other things (seizure/low blood pressure detection, allergy detection, pressure training for anxiety attacks, etc) generally don't and are often owner-trained. There is no such thing as service dog certification on a national level and no training requirements beyond being task-trained for a certain condition. Since they are in public, they should be obedient and compliant, but theoretically you could have a wild-ass doodle who is not but who is ace at detecting tree nut presence in even trace amounts in food. That dog still counts.

"Service dogs" (with or without a vest on) include emotional support animals.

The appropriate level of training for an emotional support animal is left up to the individual patient, to train as they see fit.

You are wrong. Stop spreading lies and misinformation. From the ADA website:

Are emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals considered service animals under the ADA?

A. No. These terms are used to describe animals that provide comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.


https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/

Was Daisy an ADA-qualified service animal, or not?

Why can't you answer a simple question??

What medically necessary task was Daisy trained to perform for its owner? Why can't you answer a simple, legally permitted question?

[Anonymous]

I'm so glad Daisy has a new home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question apropos of nothing…
This man was only 50. I know he had 4 grandkids, but why do they keep saying “grandfather dies after being dragged by train…”
Why not just say “man dies after being dragged by train…”

Because it's trying to inflate sympathy ("grandfather" invokes more than "man"), since any rational person knows he was just negligent and improperly taking his pet with him.

Plus, when most people hear “grandfather,” they think of an elderly man, not a 50 year old. Most 50 year olds I know are in pretty good shape, and are certainly not elderly and frail.

Exactly. I’m 48 and nowhere near elderly and frail.

Or close to being a grandparent !

[Anonymous]

It was a service dog

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was a service dog

Under the ADA, it was a pet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was a service dog

We don’t know that, and probably won’t ever know. Service dogs are not required to be registered anywhere. The daughter can say it was a service dog even if it wasn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm so glad Daisy has a new home.

Wow, assh0le. I bet Daisy would rather be with her owner.

Most of you posting on this thread are disgusting human beings.

Why don't you help instead of splitting hairs over details that don't matter https://www.gofundme.com/f/harold-riley

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WMATA also said the dog had no collar and by all accounts the dog was not being kept close to the owner. Grossly irresponsible to others (and the dog) in public whether or not the dog was a service animal.

I'm having a hard time understanding the logistics. Makes sense there was no collar or the dog would have been strangled, potentially when the train moved. But what was tied to the deceased? And what was the other end attached to? Seems unlikely to have been the dog or the dog would have had a lot of pressure on it as the train moved?