death at Dunn Loring metro

[Anonymous]

Was the ‘driver’ held accountable for failing to first look before shutting the doors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was the ‘driver’ held accountable for failing to first look before shutting the doors?

The train operator looked twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on the news reports, it is believed the leash was clipped to the man's waist/pants. The dog was apparently an emotional support dog due to the man's childhood trauma. (based on ABC local news report).

I suspect that the dog was not "trained" in the official sense that a real "service dog" is trained to manage all kinds of situations. Probably, this was just a dog that the guy liked and the dog probably went on one side of those metal posts/vertical bars in the metro, and the guy with his leash were on the other side... and the dog didn't get untangled from the post before the door closed.

I don't know if we can expect the train conductor to see and notice a leash from several hundred feet away. Seems like the deceased man had the responsibility to keep his dog close enough to disembark safely.

Tragic all the way around. Oddly, Channel 7 news reported that the deceased man's daughter didn't take the dog... and that an adoptive home was found. That seems kind of strange.

+1

I believe this is an accurate summation of what transpired.

Hope the poor Metro driver is not charged with anything.

[Anonymous]

Wasn’t yesterday too warm for a service dog vest and a sweater?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the ‘driver’ held accountable for failing to first look before shutting the doors?

The train operator looked twice.

This death was clearly NOT her fault in any way whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

But details do matter.

Pets should not be allowed on metro.

Daisy is a pet. There no proof Daisy was an ADA-approved service animal.

But for the victim’s act of bringing his pet into metro, the victim would still be alive today.

Arguing the facts does not make one an “a-hole” as you claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t yesterday too warm for a service dog vest and a sweater?

Correct. This entire story is faked. Metro doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

I hope this story is a lesson to ahole “emotional support” dog owners who abuse restrictions and bring their pets with them everywhere. They’re probably the same ahols parking in handicapped spaces without a disability or legit, current placard.

[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.

Uh, no. "Emotional support animals" are NOT service animals. Every pet is an emotional support animal, and pets need to remain at home. Service animals are ones that have been trained to accomplish a specific medical task for a person.

This. Some posters are being willfully obtuse about the distinction.

[Anonymous]

It was a pitbull.

https://twitter.com/adamtuss/status/1626224469936340996?s=46&t=6wJqFUd4gJdaUhQQR0tr1Q

[Anonymous]

The guy is dead for chrissakes. You people are petty and cold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The guy is dead for chrissakes. You people are petty and cold.

He is dead, but he is dead directly due to his own negligence and selfishness. If he didn't bring his pet pitbull with him everywhere just because he wanted to, he would be alive. This should be a lesson to others who abuse service animal permissions.

[Anonymous]

I am sorry for this man and his family. A sad story and awful for him and for anyone that witnessed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The guy is dead for chrissakes. You people are petty and cold.

+1

This thread is depressing insight to our culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was a pitbull.

https://twitter.com/adamtuss/status/1626224469936340996?s=46&t=6wJqFUd4gJdaUhQQR0tr1Q

Wow so his irresponsibility went even deeper than first suspected, and he didn't even have control of the animal.