Posted on 03/14/2018 6:58:21 PM PDT by MtnClimber
It’s characteristic of FR, sadly. As “conservatives” try to “out-anti-liberal” one another.
It’s amusing in small quantities. It gets really old droning on year after year.
Exactly. Too selfish to transport their animal correctly.
Were I the passenger, I would have been livid that I paid $125 dollars and was not allowed to stow the dog under the seat *where it belongs*. I would make them accommodate me or kick me off the plane while I raised holy hell with their airport offices.
I realize this situation involves a non-English-speaking new mother with an infant and an 11-year-old daughter and a puppy. Even if she did everything properly, she has bigger priorities than the welfare of the puppy. I fully grasp that. She clearly made the decision that, despite the inconvenience, she'd endure and continue on the flight.
It sounds like United is offering to pay for everything because they want the whole thing to disappear from the media as fast as possible whether they were the guilty party or not.
As for the flight attendants, I'd love to hear their side of the story but I don't expect the airline will ever allow that.
I hope they sue the tar out of United Airlines. Apparently, if you ever want your pet to die, just put it on a UA flight.
You can see from the picture of the dead dog that at least one side was or had netting. Flat nosed dogs don’t breathe well and overheat easily. Both could have killed the dog in that confined and unventilated baggage compartment.
Odd, isn’t it, to have a dead dog bark for 2 hours as reported by other passengers.
There is WAY more to this story.....did they actually PAY for the dog to be in the cabin.....did they just take the orders from ONE Flight Attendant.....why didn’t they go up the ladder if they did pay for the dog.....did they have the proper kind of pet carrier with air vents or was it a closed bag??
Please click on the link in post 55.
For some reason, many of the news articles seem to have been "scrubbed" although just may be since they have the owner's name/info they are just limiting the size of their reports.
Since the airline refunded their ticket prices including the $125 pet ticket price it seems as if the original reports are correct. They did have a proper carrier (most today for small pets are soft sided with mesh in several places). The dog was legally on the plane so it seems logical that it was in an approved carrier.
From the previous report:
Lara said that when the plane eventually landed three hours later and the owner, who was with her two young children, opened the overheard luggage, the dog was dead.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5496981/Puppy-dies-air-crew-say-overhead-compartment.html
The owner didn’t check on the dog for 3 hours?
More 11 year olds making public policy...
Compensate the family for the cost of the dog. Move on.
That she was heading for the gym?
When careless interacts with stupid, you get this.
At this extreme of stupid it could have just as easily been a newborn baby stuffed into an unventilated container. If you don’t grasp that a dog has to get air, you’re not to going to know any better for a baby, are you? Thank God it was just a dog.
Daughter is lucky to have made it to 11 with that mom.
“Thank God it was just a dog.”
That kind of thinking is why the pup is dead.
>> The owner zipped it up so that the dog couldn’t breathe.<<
And you know this how?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.