Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

They need their own uptight plane so they can grouse at each other and leave our poor puppy dogs alone.

Some of us consider it selfish and bordering on animal abuse for selfish owners to insist upon dragging their dogs everywhere, including airplanes, instead of leaving the dogs in the comfort of their homes, a kennel or with friends/family members.

Many dog owners treat their dogs like some fashion accessory and not a living being.

Agreed.

FFS, Some people have to move! You people are idiots

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

They need their own uptight plane so they can grouse at each other and leave our poor puppy dogs alone.

Some of us consider it selfish and bordering on animal abuse for selfish owners to insist upon dragging their dogs everywhere, including airplanes, instead of leaving the dogs in the comfort of their homes, a kennel or with friends/family members.

Many dog owners treat their dogs like some fashion accessory and not a living being.

Agreed.

Completely agree. Dragging your dog everywhere is not to the animal's benefit.

http://people.com/crime/criminal-investigation-launched-dog-death-overhead-bin-united-flight/

Criminal investigation launched.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

They need their own uptight plane so they can grouse at each other and leave our poor puppy dogs alone.

Some of us consider it selfish and bordering on animal abuse for selfish owners to insist upon dragging their dogs everywhere, including airplanes, instead of leaving the dogs in the comfort of their homes, a kennel or with friends/family members.

Many dog owners treat their dogs like some fashion accessory and not a living being.

Agreed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't bring dogs on planes at all. Except for certified service animals.

The airline is at fault, but who in the heck flys with a baby, a small child AND a puppy? Stop doing this people. It's kinder to the animal and the rest of the passengers to leave it at home. If you can't afford to board the dog or have a dog sitter, you can't afford to fly and own a dog.

You're allowed to have a pet in a carrier that fits under the seat, which is what this family had. I can't believe all you assholes who are blaming the victims here.

If a flight attendant told me to put my dog in the overhead they would have to Taser me or escort me off the plane, because I would never do it.

That flight attendant should be fired and charged with animal cruelty.

It didn't fit under the seat, even the sympathetic passengers have acknowledged it was sticking out into the aisle. If it fit under the seat, the flight attendant isn't going to bother going out of her way to find bags to move into the overhead bin because those bins are always overfull the FAs end up having to move stuff around or gate check stuff to make it all fit.

O.k then United has to figure out how that dog carrier got onto the plane because somehow that got through routine screening.

It's possible that it was of a size that could be collapsed to fit under the seat, but then the dog wasn't cooperating so that it would actually fit. Would you prefer that the carrier be left hanging out into the aisle so that the dog got its skull crushed by another passenger stepping on it?

I don't understand why it couldn't have been turned so that it was part way under the seat and part way under the owner's feet rather than sticking out into the aisle. I am having a hard time visualizing this actually.

In addition to the puppy and her 11 year old, the woman also had an 8 month old lap baby. I'm guessing they were using part of the under seat storage area for the baby's diaper bag--since you often have to go a while into the flight before being able to access the overhead bin, it's smart to put anything you think you'll need for your baby/young child under the seat, instead of up above.

This lady made a lot of choices i wouldn't have made, but they were within the airline rules. I hope this tragedy makes the airline review and change some of their policies.

Having more items at your feet than can fit under the seat is not within airline rules. If that woman could have made the carrier fit but decided to put the dog up instead of one of her other carry-on items, that kills any sympathy I had for her. Yes, it would be inconvenient to put your diaper bag up, but between that and your dog?!? You keep your dog, not the diapers.

This is 100% right. There's no question the FA acted incorrectly, and should be disciplined (though the people calling for her execution need to up their medication). But, from what I've read either the carrier was too large to fit under the seat, or the dog's owner had other bags that she wanted to keep there, and there wasn't room for the dog. The right answer was for the FA to either insist that the dog go under the seat, or that the family get off the plane. I also think the FA was in a little bit of a tough spot - with all the recent bad PR, I'm sure she tried very hard to avoid forcing a family, with a baby, off the flight. That obviously would have been preferable, though, and she shouldn't have put the dog in the luggage compartment.

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

You seriously think it's kind to your animal to make it travel with you, for no good reason? Or is it about you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+1
The woman should have declined to fly.

It was mid flight, dummies. Good luck walking off.

The articles I read the dog spent the entire flight in the overhead compartment, which tends to suggest that it was put up there prior to take-off, not mid-flight.

But since the articles vary significantly in the details depending on which passengers the reporter spoke to, they're all a bit suspect.

Agree. Everything I have read suggests this happens when she boarded the plane and her approved dog carrier did not fit under the seat. That is United's fault assuming they knew which seat she was in and approved the dog carrier. Regardless, I still would have insisted on getting off the plane before putting my pet in the overhead bin, and fought my battle afterwards with the media and United, from the safety of the airport/my home, with a live puppy.

If she was assigned a bulkhead seat, why didn't the FA ask another passenger to switch seats with her? Heck, I love dogs and I would have been fine doing that. In fact, if they had even wanted to put the carrier under the seat in front of me I would have been fine with that.

At the same time, I doubt that I would have recognized the danger in putting the dog in the overhead. If the FA indicated that it was a safe thing to do, I would have trusted that it was a safe thing to do even if I wasn't too happy about it. I suppose she could have refused and gotten off the plane but then what? How would taking another flight help her? She would still have the same dog carrier and her children with her. I'm sure that all she wanted to do was get the flight over with so that they could spend a nice vacation with her husband.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+1
The woman should have declined to fly.

It was mid flight, dummies. Good luck walking off.

The articles I read the dog spent the entire flight in the overhead compartment, which tends to suggest that it was put up there prior to take-off, not mid-flight.

But since the articles vary significantly in the details depending on which passengers the reporter spoke to, they're all a bit suspect.

Agree. Everything I have read suggests this happens when she boarded the plane and her approved dog carrier did not fit under the seat. That is United's fault assuming they knew which seat she was in and approved the dog carrier. Regardless, I still would have insisted on getting off the plane before putting my pet in the overhead bin, and fought my battle afterwards with the media and United, from the safety of the airport/my home, with a live puppy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

They need their own uptight plane so they can grouse at each other and leave our poor puppy dogs alone.

Some of us consider it selfish and bordering on animal abuse for selfish owners to insist upon dragging their dogs everywhere, including airplanes, instead of leaving the dogs in the comfort of their homes, a kennel or with friends/family members.

Many dog owners treat their dogs like some fashion accessory and not a living being.

Anonymous wrote:I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

They need their own uptight plane so they can grouse at each other and leave our poor puppy dogs alone.

I never realized how many unhappy people there are in the world until I read this thread. Animal haters have very small, grinch like hearts.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why any dog owner would allow some snot-nosed stewardess to cram their dog into an overhead bin. I would have grabbed her by the neck and slammed her into the floor if she tried that with my dog.

me too.

Anonymous wrote:
It's possible that it was of a size that could be collapsed to fit under the seat, but then the dog wasn't cooperating so that it would actually fit. Would you prefer that the carrier be left hanging out into the aisle so that the dog got its skull crushed by another passenger stepping on it?

The solution to this problem is not to put a living animal in the overhead bin. It's just not. That should be so ridiculously obvious to anyone. A sealed luggage bin is nowhere to put a dog!

I also find the abuse of the "emotional support animal" designation to be problematic. And I generally don't understand dog people who bring their dogs on vacation (like my ILs). But that doesn't change the fact that I know that dogs are living beings with feelings...and it's literally inhuman to abuse them when you consider that canine domestication is an indicator of civilization. There's something really wrong with United's rules, training, or policies that the idea of putting a dog in an overhead bin was ever raised. Even if the family wanted to do it, the FA should have objected. It's crazy. Why not just put the lap baby up there too?
O.k then United has to figure out how that dog carrier got onto the plane because somehow that got through routine screening.