death at Dunn Loring metro

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

Think of it this way. People get dogs for protection, right? Especially pitbulls, for protection. Well, your protection is a threat to everyone else. For people with dog phobias or who have been attacked as children, it's visceral. So if you're going to have a dog in public with other people, especially in a confined train car, it better be trained and qualified. Because many people see an unleashed dog as an unpredictable threat.

You do know that many women have bad, traumatic experiences with men but we don't ban them from the metro. Everyone is afraid of everything now and is expecting some kind of perfectly curated life experience every time they leave the house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

Think of it this way. People get dogs for protection, right? Especially pitbulls, for protection. Well, your protection is a threat to everyone else. For people with dog phobias or who have been attacked as children, it's visceral. So if you're going to have a dog in public with other people, especially in a confined train car, it better be trained and qualified. Because many people see an unleashed dog as an unpredictable threat.

You do know that many women have bad, traumatic experiences with men but we don't ban them from the metro. Everyone is afraid of everything now and is expecting some kind of perfectly curated life experience every time they leave the house.

DP. People have to go to work and school, to earn a living, and do important and critical things.

Dogs do not. There is zero need for anyone to take their dogs with them, unless they are (1) a legit service animal trained to perform a specific medical task for its person, or (2) a person taking their pet to a vet appointment, moving, etc - in which case they need to be contained inside a carrier.

Please stop with the absurd analogies.They don't line up.

[Anonymous]

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was a pitbull.

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

Well, now we know why the daughter may not want to have kept the dog, especially since she has other pets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

It's why Jeff has to have a 48 hour rule. Although I see it doesn't apply to death by Metro.

This is not death by Metro. This is death by personal carelessness.

So, it's acceptable that failure to follow every single rule in Metro is potentially punishable by an immediate and horrific death?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

It's why Jeff has to have a 48 hour rule. Although I see it doesn't apply to death by Metro.

This is not death by Metro. This is death by personal carelessness.

So, it's acceptable that failure to follow every single rule in Metro is potentially punishable by an immediate and horrific death?

Nobody said that carelessness is a death punishment, but it was a preventable fatality due to something thinking rules don't apply to them. Think "play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

I feel for the train operator though, and other passengers. I hope they're not suffering from witnessing this incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

It's why Jeff has to have a 48 hour rule. Although I see it doesn't apply to death by Metro.

This is not death by Metro. This is death by personal carelessness.

So, it's acceptable that failure to follow every single rule in Metro is potentially punishable by an immediate and horrific death?

It was an accident! Acceptable/unacceptable does not come into picture here.

If this was due to Metro’s negligence, it would not be acceptable and everybody would be crying for a change in procedure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is horrifying and I hope it gets deleted before his family sees it.

I bet some of y'all fixated on the status of his dog's qualifications instead of his death and the trauma experienced by the witnesses claim to be pro-life.

God people in this area are freaking bizarre and soulless. Take up your dog rules agenda with your state and local governments. Advocate for real service animal policies.

It's why Jeff has to have a 48 hour rule. Although I see it doesn't apply to death by Metro.

This is not death by Metro. This is death by personal carelessness.

So, it's acceptable that failure to follow every single rule in Metro is potentially punishable by an immediate and horrific death?

Nobody said that carelessness is a death punishment, but it was a preventable fatality due to something thinking rules don't apply to them. Think "play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

I feel for the train operator though, and other passengers. I hope they're not suffering from witnessing this incident.

+1

Though I feel bad that the man died.

I hope the metro operator and witnesses are ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

No it’s not being debated it’s a series of stream of consciousness rants against pets and “they way things are these days” without any supporting facts. Nobody can definitively say that this dog was not a legit support dog or just a pet so any “debate” is just nonsense opinions. Have some respect for the dead and wait for actual facts before using this tragedy as a chance to talk sht about dog owners that you don’t like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pit bulls are not controllable by nature, are dangerous, vicious, and should be banned.

The very last place an animal like that should be is on the public metro.

[Anonymous]

The media is using the term "service dog" interchangeably with "emotional support dog" -- I presume they are doing this b/c it sounds more sympathetic to need a "service dog" rather than an "emotional support dog."

Most people have witnessed a true "service dog" in action. They are amazing! Incredible temperaments, calm, smart, TRAINED for months (or years) on how to handle every situation. They often have a harness that the disabled person holds onto so there is never any separation between the dog and the disabled person --- which makes sense b/c a true "service dog" needs to be right by his/her person in order to direct the person effectively.

This guy, apparently had an "emotional support dog" -- which was not officially trained to navigate public transportation, and the guy was not attentive enough or trained to manage the SUPPORT animal properly. He ultimately paid a terrible price for his inattentive to the dog.

An "emotional support animal" is not a "service animal" no matter how much the media keeps using that term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

No it’s not being debated it’s a series of stream of consciousness rants against pets and “they way things are these days” without any supporting facts. Nobody can definitively say that this dog was not a legit support dog or just a pet so any “debate” is just nonsense opinions. Have some respect for the dead and wait for actual facts before using this tragedy as a chance to talk sht about dog owners that you don’t like.

You are reinforcing what I said - folk don’t know the status of the dog therefore this discussion. Nonsense opinions is the whole point of DCUM. It’s not a news channel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

The law is clear on this issue:

“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/ “

Daisy is not a service animal.

She is a pet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

No it’s not being debated it’s a series of stream of consciousness rants against pets and “they way things are these days” without any supporting facts. Nobody can definitively say that this dog was not a legit support dog or just a pet so any “debate” is just nonsense opinions. Have some respect for the dead and wait for actual facts before using this tragedy as a chance to talk sht about dog owners that you don’t like.

Supporting facts:

- there is no indication the victim's pet dog was trained to help him with specific medical tasks (as service animals are required to perform)
- it was a pitbull, which, come on
- the owner was not handling his animal like people do with service animals. Service animals are kept right besides their owner for medical reasons. This dog was on a long leash, improperly connected to its owner. Real service animals are virtually never out of arms reach from their owner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

This is a hot-button issue because most folk want to know the difference between service dogs and emotional support animals because the rules for piblic transportation are very specific. It also involves the WMATA. Everybody agrees it is an accident. What is being debated here is the dog’s presence on the metro.

The law is clear on this issue:

“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/ “

Daisy is not a service animal.

She is a pet.

The one point that confuses me is why the metro police now say they didn’t notice the service animal vest under the sweater? So it was an emotional support dog wearing a service animal vest??