steve32

The issue is NOT the OP's attitude towards pets on the plane.

The dog (and owner) was obviously untrained, which should negate any claim of being a support animal--emotional or otherwise. IF they aren't trained, no special privileges. If the alleged "special needs" of the person (patient) are not sufficient to spring for some training so the animal can behave properly in public, then the "need" isn't enough. If there is a claim that they can't afford the training, what about a simple carrying container/cage? They should be able to draw comfort from the animal through the thin wall of the travel container, or does the patient need to have the animal injected as an IV during the flight?

The OP has a genuine concern about the safety, health and well being of not only that planeload of passengers but also following planeloads of pax who will have to put up with dog hair, dander, urine and feces (smell as well as associated potential germs) on the upholstry, carpeting, etc.

Also, the most likely time that a catastrophic incident will occur is during take-off or landing, at which time unsecured items become airborne missiles. Unsecured pets are potential missiles with sharp teeth, claws, and an instinct to bite/claw to defend themselves in situations that they don't understand and feel danger. Don't claim you can hold onto the pet in such a situation as studies (and the experience of friends of mine) of pets in vehicles in crashes show that's an impossibility. You try to make that claim about an infant/toddler in your car and have it ride in your lap and you are liable to have the child forcibly removed from you by police and yourself facing fines, possibly jail, and a very real chance of losing custody of the child.

Steve