Passenger Attacked by Emotional Support Dog on Delta Flight
Jun 6, 2017, 12:54 pm
#61
Join Date: Jan 2017
Programs: UA
Posts: 324
I think it does just not to this degree. I was on a Delta RJ in which a VET with a large dog had bulk head and hit dog growl and bit the flight attendant. The FA wasn't harmed and joked it off but the remainder of the flight folks were fearful to wlak to bathroom and they eventually moved him to first class so the dog was not blocking the aisle.
This is saddening as causes anxiety to other passengers yet we are more concern with Michael Vick transporting his prize fighter vs. passenger comfort/calm.
This is saddening as causes anxiety to other passengers yet we are more concern with Michael Vick transporting his prize fighter vs. passenger comfort/calm.
1) The Marine - BTW, if he's so traumatized by flying that he needs a ESA, then shouldn't he be in treatment and not on active duty? I call BS on the ESA...Something doesn't add up.
2) Whomever issued that Certificate - They should be put out of business
3) Delta Airlines - Yea, they should be held liable too. The person who probably will end up with permanent scarring to his/her face...didn't buy a ticket to be placed next to a clearly undocile animal too big for the seat.
Here's how it should go
1) ESA's must fit in their container and remain there for the entire flight. If they cannot do so, they can't fly. That container must fit underneath the seat in front of the pax. If the container does NOT fit in the seat in front of the pax, then the pax may pay for another seat for the animal in order for the animal to fit in its kennel in a seat. If the animal in its kennel cannot fit in an extra seat, then it cannot go in the cabin.
2) Under no circumstances should any pax be placed in an inferior seat, simply because someone is flying with a dog without payment.
3) ESA's must be muzzled and be certified to be docile to the same extent as a Blind person's service pet. Clearly the certification going on right now is NOT sufficient for the ESAs.
4) The fact that the person who is responsible for the kind of serious attack is an active duty Marine.....is irrelevant in this instance.
Jun 6, 2017, 1:13 pm
#62
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 61
If someone has a medically diagnosed condition that can be aided by a service dog, they should get an dog specifically trained to perform the necessary tasks for this person to live a more independent life AND should have passed the Assistance Dogs International Public Access Test. These are the owners and the animals laws were written to protect and they should continue to be.
Jun 6, 2017, 1:24 pm
#63
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Orleans (for now)
Programs: DL PM, WN, SC, various other programs of lowly status
Posts: 1,673
I agree. ESA are not Service Animals. People claim every type of pet from parakeets to snakes to be ESA. I am very anxious when I fly and my (RIP) Siberian Husky would have been of great comfort for me on flights. Never in a million years would I have even considered trying to pass her off as an ESA. Take Meds, meditation, therapy, a train, car, bus whatever, but don't claim an emotional need equates to a physical need.
A child with a dog trained to spot a potential seizure or diabetic incident? Yes, bring it on. A true PTSD veteran with a trained and officially certified support animal? Bring that too. Seeing eye dogs, welcome too. Otherwise, they should go in a carrier that fits under the seat or in a purchased adjacent seat.
A child with a dog trained to spot a potential seizure or diabetic incident? Yes, bring it on. A true PTSD veteran with a trained and officially certified support animal? Bring that too. Seeing eye dogs, welcome too. Otherwise, they should go in a carrier that fits under the seat or in a purchased adjacent seat.
Jun 6, 2017, 1:34 pm
#65
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,404
Has anyone seen reports of the victim's injuries? If the dog bit/mauled his face, the damage could be severe: permanent disfigurement, damage to the eyes, nose and facial bones, need for reconstructive and plastic surgery, etc. I wonder how severe it was. Maybe the lawyers are waiting until the medical status is clarified before going public or filing a lawsuit, hopefully against both DL and the dog's owner, although I'd like to also see the federal agency responsible for the ACA and enforcement to be sue also (but it's not going to happen).
Jun 6, 2017, 1:36 pm
#66
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,404
......which is locked and remains so during the entire flight and time in the airport (except for TSA airport security screening). (No, the ESA doesn't need to roam freely around the SC either, or growl and threaten others during check in and boarding.
Jun 6, 2017, 1:38 pm
#67
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 825
Honestly, it's probably a good idea for even properly-trained service dogs taken into the tight confines of an airliner to wear a comfortable basket muzzle. Why take the risk (small though it may be) of the expensive, highly-trained animal making a dangerous mistake under stress that might disqualify it from further work?
Jun 6, 2017, 1:39 pm
#68
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,404
Honestly, it's probably a good idea for even properly-trained service dogs taken into the tight confines of an airliner to wear a comfortable basket muzzle. Why take the risk (small though it may be) of the expensive, highly-trained animal making a dangerous mistake under stress that might disqualify it from further work?
Jun 6, 2017, 2:31 pm
#69
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 279
I think that in this case, the victim should sue
1) The Marine - BTW, if he's so traumatized by flying that he needs a ESA, then shouldn't he be in treatment and not on active duty? I call BS on the ESA...Something doesn't add up.
2) Whomever issued that Certificate - They should be put out of business
3) Delta Airlines - Yea, they should be held liable too. The person who probably will end up with permanent scarring to his/her face...didn't buy a ticket to be placed next to a clearly undocile animal too big for the seat.
Here's how it should go
1) ESA's must fit in their container and remain there for the entire flight. If they cannot do so, they can't fly. That container must fit underneath the seat in front of the pax. If the container does NOT fit in the seat in front of the pax, then the pax may pay for another seat for the animal in order for the animal to fit in its kennel in a seat. If the animal in its kennel cannot fit in an extra seat, then it cannot go in the cabin.
2) Under no circumstances should any pax be placed in an inferior seat, simply because someone is flying with a dog without payment.
3) ESA's must be muzzled and be certified to be docile to the same extent as a Blind person's service pet. Clearly the certification going on right now is NOT sufficient for the ESAs.
4) The fact that the person who is responsible for the kind of serious attack is an active duty Marine.....is irrelevant in this instance.
1) The Marine - BTW, if he's so traumatized by flying that he needs a ESA, then shouldn't he be in treatment and not on active duty? I call BS on the ESA...Something doesn't add up.
2) Whomever issued that Certificate - They should be put out of business
3) Delta Airlines - Yea, they should be held liable too. The person who probably will end up with permanent scarring to his/her face...didn't buy a ticket to be placed next to a clearly undocile animal too big for the seat.
Here's how it should go
1) ESA's must fit in their container and remain there for the entire flight. If they cannot do so, they can't fly. That container must fit underneath the seat in front of the pax. If the container does NOT fit in the seat in front of the pax, then the pax may pay for another seat for the animal in order for the animal to fit in its kennel in a seat. If the animal in its kennel cannot fit in an extra seat, then it cannot go in the cabin.
2) Under no circumstances should any pax be placed in an inferior seat, simply because someone is flying with a dog without payment.
3) ESA's must be muzzled and be certified to be docile to the same extent as a Blind person's service pet. Clearly the certification going on right now is NOT sufficient for the ESAs.
4) The fact that the person who is responsible for the kind of serious attack is an active duty Marine.....is irrelevant in this instance.
Welcome to America people.
Jun 6, 2017, 2:38 pm
#70
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 129
This is SPOT on.
1) ESA's must fit in their container and remain there for the entire flight. If they cannot do so, they can't fly. That container must fit underneath the seat in front of the pax. If the container does NOT fit in the seat in front of the pax, then the pax may pay for another seat for the animal in order for the animal to fit in its kennel in a seat. If the animal in its kennel cannot fit in an extra seat, then it cannot go in the cabin.
2) Under no circumstances should any pax be placed in an inferior seat, simply because someone is flying with a dog without payment.
3) ESA's must be muzzled and be certified to be docile to the same extent as a Blind person's service pet. Clearly the certification going on right now is NOT sufficient for the ESAs.
4) The fact that the person who is responsible for the kind of serious attack is an active duty Marine.....is irrelevant in this instance.[/QUOTE]
1) ESA's must fit in their container and remain there for the entire flight. If they cannot do so, they can't fly. That container must fit underneath the seat in front of the pax. If the container does NOT fit in the seat in front of the pax, then the pax may pay for another seat for the animal in order for the animal to fit in its kennel in a seat. If the animal in its kennel cannot fit in an extra seat, then it cannot go in the cabin.
2) Under no circumstances should any pax be placed in an inferior seat, simply because someone is flying with a dog without payment.
3) ESA's must be muzzled and be certified to be docile to the same extent as a Blind person's service pet. Clearly the certification going on right now is NOT sufficient for the ESAs.
4) The fact that the person who is responsible for the kind of serious attack is an active duty Marine.....is irrelevant in this instance.[/QUOTE]
Last edited by Oxnardjan; Jun 6, 2017 at 2:47 pm
Jun 6, 2017, 2:57 pm
#71
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Somewhere between here and there...
Programs: WWF, Appalachian Mountain Club
Posts: 11,595
I'm not saying the owner shouldn't be punished, or that the the dog should have been allowed on in the first place, but comments like these are what make these situations even worse.
I have a pitbull and have fostered dogs of all breeds for years. My pit is no more likely to bite than a lab. She's the most gingerly, loving dog I've ever had.
I love how easy it is for people to say "Well the dog attacked someone. He's a psychopath. Time to put him down." These are the same people that say the death penalty is unconstitutional and would rather spend tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of tax payers money keeping rapists, kid touchers, and murders alive in prison.
I have a pitbull and have fostered dogs of all breeds for years. My pit is no more likely to bite than a lab. She's the most gingerly, loving dog I've ever had.
I love how easy it is for people to say "Well the dog attacked someone. He's a psychopath. Time to put him down." These are the same people that say the death penalty is unconstitutional and would rather spend tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of tax payers money keeping rapists, kid touchers, and murders alive in prison.
Your pit is totally the coolest dog ever and would never bite anyone.
Until it bites someone. Not saying it will (and honestly, it's pretty unlikely), but you can't say it won't.
Destroying a dog is not an easy thing to say or do, but there's times when it must be done.
No one is commenting on YOUR pitbull.
Pitbulls account for over 70% of dog attacks and fatalities in the US.
That is a fact. It is completely irrelevant that your pitbull is docile.
Also if a dog inflicted an injury as described in the article he should absolutely be put down on the spot and the owner should be held responsible as well.
Pitbulls account for over 70% of dog attacks and fatalities in the US.
That is a fact. It is completely irrelevant that your pitbull is docile.
Also if a dog inflicted an injury as described in the article he should absolutely be put down on the spot and the owner should be held responsible as well.
Without all the facts, it's tough to know why the cop for 'cleared' the dog, but on it's face, it seems the cop was irresponsibly lenient.
Jun 6, 2017, 3:02 pm
#72
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
This thread is now closed pending review by the moderators. If and when it will be reopened is up to our discretion so please do not question our actions.
RSSrsvp - Moderator
RSSrsvp - Moderator