Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Passenger forcibly removed from plane due to dog allergy; dogs stay.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Not_Karl View Post
    Well, that certainly is Police brutality...


    On the contrary, that's sweet police.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	CHOSHOT35.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	15.7 KB
ID:	1017454

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
      On the contrary, that's sweet police.

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]9518[/ATTACH]
      They were trying to trigger an allergic reaction to peanuts and/or chocolate.
      "I know that at times I can be a little over the top." -ITS

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
        and this is stupid, why exactly? allergies? really? 55% of the US population test positive to one or more allergies. the number of allergens is likely close to a gazillion. so maybe we should just do away with aircraft altogether.
        Can we do away with the plane altogether. Probably not.

        Can we do away with pets in the cabin? Absolutely.

        That's my logic, counselor.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Evan View Post
          That's my logic, counselor.
          or lack thereof. you DO realize that on this particular flight one of the animals was a service animal, right? following your "logic" they too should be banned so a single passenger with an allergy (the VAST majority of which are not life threatening) can be happy.

          very logical....

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
            or lack thereof. you DO realize that on this particular flight one of the animals was a service animal, right? following your "logic" they too should be banned so a single passenger with an allergy (the VAST majority of which are not life threatening) can be happy.

            very logical....
            As I'm sure you know, counselor, the Americans with Disabilities Act states that title II (State and local government services) and title III (public accommodations and commercial facilities) must permit service animals to accompany people with disabilities in all areas where members of the public are allowed to go. As you might surmise, the cabin of a transport category aircraft is not clearly defined as either title II or title III, thus there is no clear legal guidelines to follow. This, of course leads to confusion and confrontational situations such as that which forms the topic of this thread. There are things to consider. An aircraft cabin is a closed environment where allergens can recirculate. It is a bad place for pets. Estimate range up to 15% of the population will experience pet allergies. Up to a third of those with asthma experience complications due to pet dander, and quite a few people suffer from asthma these days. Meanwhile we have a nice alloted space below the cabin where animals typically ride, in an enviable state of sedation.

            The industry neglects to address the issue. The same industry neglects to inform passengers at the time of booking when pets will be present in the cabin. If further neglects to provide a dignified cabin environment, instead creating a stressful and uncomfortable one for the sake of profits.

            Add it up. No clear ruling on the legality of pets in the cabin. No means to warn those with allergies at the time of booking. A declining cabin environment that inspires frustration and stress for both passengers and cabin crew. Now bring a couple dogs into the arena, along with a passenger having a serious dog allergy. And watch the fur fly.

            It's all very predictable and disgraceful and downright disturbing. We need to govern this industry before it devolves into chaos. It's practically there now. Respectable people are getting dragged off planes by uniformed barbarians as a result. It's time we give up this fantasy that deregulation works and restore some sort of order and dignity to the aviation industry. We need something akin to a passengers bill of rights. We need rules that everyone can understand and follow.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Evan View Post
              As I'm sure you know, counselor, the Americans with Disabilities Act states that title II (State and local government services) and title III (public accommodations and commercial facilities) must permit service animals to accompany people with disabilities in all areas where members of the public are allowed to go. As you might surmise, the cabin of a transport category aircraft is not clearly defined as either title II or title III, thus there is no clear legal guidelines to follow. This, of course leads to confusion and confrontational situations such as that which forms the topic of this thread. There are things to consider. An aircraft cabin is a closed environment where allergens can recirculate. It is a bad place for pets. Estimate range up to 15% of the population will experience pet allergies. Up to a third of those with asthma experience complications due to pet dander, and quite a few people suffer from asthma these days. Meanwhile we have a nice alloted space below the cabin where animals typically ride, in an enviable state of sedation.

              The industry neglects to address the issue. The same industry neglects to inform passengers at the time of booking when pets will be present in the cabin. If further neglects to provide a dignified cabin environment, instead creating a stressful and uncomfortable one for the sake of profits.

              Add it up. No clear ruling on the legality of pets in the cabin. No means to warn those with allergies at the time of booking. A declining cabin environment that inspires frustration and stress for both passengers and cabin crew. Now bring a couple dogs into the arena, along with a passenger having a serious dog allergy. And watch the fur fly.

              It's all very predictable and disgraceful and downright disturbing. We need to govern this industry before it devolves into chaos. It's practically there now. Respectable people are getting dragged off planes by uniformed barbarians as a result. It's time we give up this fantasy that deregulation works and restore some sort of order and dignity to the aviation industry. We need something akin to a passengers bill of rights. We need rules that everyone can understand and follow.
              We also need ALL aircraft to have a pressurised hold where the animals go for any legislation to work. I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am but I think I recall that some aircraft, especially smaller aircraft do not have a pressurised hold.
              If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                One page, about the stupidity of having dogs in the cabin.
                I think if you examine the statistics, if you want to enhance safety you'd be much better off banning humans.
                Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                Eric Law

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  Evan, I don't understand what's your proposal? I mean, I understand, but how do you think it would work?

                  Crew requests her to please deplane.
                  Crew insists that she has to deplane.
                  Crew commands that she deplanes.
                  Crew threatens that if she doesn't deplane they will be forced to call law enforcement.
                  Crew calls law enforcement.
                  Police tells her to get off the plane.
                  Police orders her to get off the plane.
                  Police shouts that she gets of the plane now.
                  Don't you think that some path similar these steps existed? What do you do next? Ok, here is what it came next, from the video.
                  Police starts to push her.
                  She shouts.
                  Other passengers tell her that she better obey and get off the plane by herself.
                  She says " don't touch me, I will get off by myself".
                  Police release her.
                  She doesn't move.
                  Police shouts her to get out.
                  She doesn't move.
                  Police grabs her and pushes her.
                  He cries she will get off by herself.
                  Police releases her.
                  She doesn't move.
                  Police shouts at her to get off.
                  She doesn't move.
                  Police grabs her, lifts her, and moves her off the plane.
                  Wrong!

                  That is the procedure for the 737-300. WN has largely replaced those with more advanced and automated models..
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                    We also need ALL aircraft to have a pressurised hold where the animals go for any legislation to work. I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am but I think I recall that some aircraft, especially smaller aircraft do not have a pressurised hold.
                    I sincerely hope not, for the sake of the floor structure. That circular (or ovalar) cross section IS the pressure hull. All pressurized transport category aircraft have cargo holds within the pressure hull and all major airline holds have heated areas as well. There may be some smaller pressurized t-props out there with non-pressurized holds, but nothing significant to this issue.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Evan View Post
                      I don't like dogs. (The little dot is a period.)
                      Fixed.
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        Fixed.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	402591_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	112.0 KB
ID:	1017485

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                          [ATTACH=CONFIG]9553[/ATTACH]
                          Here's why I like flying with dogs:

                          - They don't kick the seatback

                          - They don't hog the armrest.

                          - They don't scream the entire flight

                          - They don't board wearing flipflops and then take them off.

                          - They don't spill their fifth bourbon and coke on my lap.

                          - They don't reach for their overhead luggage in a mad panic when the flight ends (or when the plane is on fire).

                          - They don't want to tell me their life's story.

                          Put me on an all-dog flight anytime. But, as much as 3WE would like it to be, this thread isn't about me...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                            We also need ALL aircraft to have a pressurised hold where the animals go for any legislation to work. I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am but I think I recall that some aircraft, especially smaller aircraft do not have a pressurised hold.
                            Our cargo holds are pressurized but NOT heated, hence we don't have a live animals in cargo program.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              As you might surmise, the cabin of a transport category aircraft is not clearly defined as either title II or title III, thus there is no clear legal guidelines to follow.
                              Indeed the ADA does not apply to the aircraft at all (although it DOES apply to airports). Accommodation on the aircraft itself is governed by a different law, namely Air Carrier Access Act (49 USC 41705).

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                                As I'm sure you know, counselor, the Americans with Disabilities Act states that title II (State and local government services) and title III (public accommodations and commercial facilities) must permit service animals to accompany people with disabilities in all areas where members of the public are allowed to go. As you might surmise, the cabin of a transport category aircraft is not clearly defined as either title II or title III, thus there is no clear legal guidelines to follow. This, of course leads to confusion and confrontational situations such as that which forms the topic of this thread. There are things to consider. An aircraft cabin is a closed environment where allergens can recirculate.
                                Wrong and wrong. There is more air renewal in an airplane than in any smart building, and the portion that is recirculated passes through high-efficiency filters that stop almost 100% of bacteria, virus and, yes, allergenic.

                                It is a bad place for pets. Estimate range up to 15% of the population will experience pet allergies. Up to a third of those with asthma experience complications due to pet dander, and quite a few people suffer from asthma these days. Meanwhile we have a nice alloted space below the cabin where animals typically ride, in an enviable state of sedation.
                                And how would putting them in the hold help with the recirculation and the closed environment, if that was your concern?

                                It's time we give up this fantasy that deregulation works and restore some sort of order and dignity to the aviation industry. We need something akin to a passengers bill of rights. We need rules that everyone can understand and follow.
                                Yet, with that I agree.

                                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X