[Gustavus Adolphus]

Dulce, all the examples you provided are fine.

I don’t think anyone here has an issue with service animals, in general. In fact, as it has come to pass, I can tell you that the ADA needs to up its game with respect to enforcing stricter compliance with all levels of accommodation for physical impairment in many areas, including government building access. The ramps, sidewalks, etc are a nightmare, and parking is extreme, it’s either one space, or like PT pointed out, 30.

Anyway- Specially trained animals that perform a service are great. Ex: Dogs for the blind.

PTSD animals for our veterans are fine too. We have too many suicides as a result of serving in war, and until organizations like 22kill can do more for awareness, these animals may save lives.

However, now that the ADA has expanded its reach to the more general population in the US, there is little to safeguard against abuse.

The real problem is young women are smart when it comes to playing the victim and ESA’s are right up their alley.

So what happens when a girl gets a dog and complains to her friends that her apartment complex wants a $1000 pet deposit that she doesn’t have? Easy. All her friends tell her to go the same doctor that signed off on their ESA’s and you can take them wherever you want and nobody can say shit when you are all sitting there laughing and drinking brunch mimosas on Sunday morning in the restaurant. (I am not making up this example, by the way.)

Now, honestly I don’t even object to the whole situation at this point because I can see where a doctor does not want to have a patient come in, get denied and then go commit suicide. That would be terrible.

The thing that does bother me with the Emotional Support dogs is there is no real initial or ongoing training requirements. Half, at least, would be lucky to pass obedience school.

Second thing that bothers me is that there isn’t really a follow up or treatment for the emotional support being received. It costs nothing, no time, no inconvenience whatsoever to have an ongoing benefit of a single evaluation.

What if everyone who has ever had a temporary handicap parking tag was now allowed to eternally use those spaces forever? It would probably piss off the people who you could see that obviously needed to be closer to the entrance.

Last thing I’ll say is while I don’t have a problem with any of the animals and yeah some people are going to abuse it, the whole thing seemed to escalate really fast. One day, a lot of people just needed these animals by their side all the time or they wouldn’t be able to make it through the day?

I don’t get a lifetime prescription of Percocet just because my back got sore after a tough day at work, no they say to try some Advil first.

Just the same, a lot of us are saying that letting someone take a dog around wherever they want because they get nervous in public sometimes shouldn’t be the first solution.

I’d like to see the doctor maybe prescribe an emotional support Teddy Bear first.

[Elster]

Would be interesting if the médics or psychologists who prescribe stuff like opiates or this "ESAs" were to be more liable to malpraxis suits for their actions.

In the case of the OP psycho girl. Think about it, she is examined by a supposed professional who prescribes her an animal for her "condition". Now this is supposed to be a professional since they had to study a lot to earn their title, correct?
Isn't it a bit questionable that this person didn't at least consider the fact that the patient was mentally unstable enough to kill her prescribed pet? And if so then part of the blame does rest with said professional as even a layman could see this bird is bonkers (flushing a living creature down the toilet, and not exactly a goldfish)

[ivansirko]

It looks like her phone is her support animal.

(02-09-2018 03:17 AM)david.garrett84 Wrote:  

[Kurgan]

(02-11-2018 12:00 AM)puckerman Wrote:  

I have noticed more and more in America and in other democratic societies that vocal and passionate minorities prevail over the quite somewhat indifferent majorities. Let's take an example at the local level.

Old man or old woman goes to city council meeting. He complains that a two-way stop intersection in his neighborhood should be changed to a four-way stop. Now most other people in the neighborhood and town figure it's probably not needed at all, but it's not that big a deal to them. They don't say anything about it. The complainer keeps going to city council meetings until the council eventually votes yet just to shut him up.

Then suddenly everyone else notices the four-way stop. They wonder: "Why do we need this four-way stop?" But none of them are passionate enough to complain about it. The four-way stop stands.

At a larger level, I lobby the federal government for a $1 tax on every American citizen which will go straight to me. For Americans, it's "just a dollar." They don't care that much about it. For me, it's a big deal because I get over $300 million. I bribe Senators and everyone I can just to keep my little scheme going.

Unfortunately, this is how things work. I don't know how you fix the problem.

Scream and shouting win over calm talking and reasoning.

I see that happening at political events. The vocal and passionate ones are the ones who make the parties and politics not the majority that doesn't have the time and money to get to political causes. The passionate have the time and resources have the time to make things happen whereas most people work, have dinner and family and spend time with them.

If people actually cared about things and got involved, you'd see a lot of changes in politics especially in areas where it's extremely partisan and places have voted the same way for decades.

Your example reminds me of an article I read where at a state GOP event, the platform was being done. The social conservative crowd put in their beliefs and the libertarian part, disagreeing with them, had it changed and I think it worked on their favor.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-12-2018 11:34 AM)C-Note Wrote:  

Spirit Airlines forces Army veteran to flush service dog down the toilet

Quote:

Spirit Airlines is once again in hot water after an Army veteran alleged that flight attendants recently forced him to flush his service dog down the toilet in the airplane bathroom, sources confirmed today.

Travis Billingham, 29, of Little Rock, Ark., said that Spirit had no problem initially allowing his service dog, a golden retriever named Bubbles, onto the flight, but soon after takeoff flight attendants told him his companion would need to be flushed after the pup apparently bothered some other passengers.

“The flight attendants were telling me, ‘we’re so sorry, but your dog is barking at your fellow passengers and flushing him is required after this kind of disturbance, according to FAA guidelines,'” said Billingham. “I honestly thought it was a federal regulation so I went along with it.”

According to fellow passengers, Billingham was led to the rear of the plane with Bubbles, where he was told to put him into the toilet. “No, you idiot. Go head first. Cut off its oxygen source so it won’t struggle,” one flight attendant was overheard saying. “Push the damn thing. Harder goddamnit. I thought you people were strong in the military?”

The latest customer service fiasco for the company came just days after a college student said that Spirit representatives forced her to flush her emotional support hamster down the toilet rather than allow it on a flight. And last month, United Airlines banned a woman from flying with her emotional support peacock.

At least one of the Spirit flight attendants was aware of the previous incident with the hamster, which she referenced during Billingham’s ordeal:

“We had a girl flush her stupid hamster and she didn’t bitch nearly as much as you,” the flight attendant said, according to several passengers. “Thank you for your snowflake service is more like it.”

Sources say several passengers on Billingham’s flight expressed symptoms common with post-traumatic stress disorder afterward, citing the emotional ordeal of hearing a large dog being placed into an airplane commode at 35,000 feet.

That story must be fake.

[Elster]

It's a satire site, it should be obvious but since this Is the current year...

[C-Note]

(02-14-2018 03:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

That story must be fake.

I was thinking that I should explain the source for forum members who aren't from the US. It's a satire site aimed at the US military community.

[Suits]

(02-14-2018 03:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

That story must be fake.

How could this article be read as anything other than a clear parody?

It would be physically impossible to flush a dog sized being down a toilet, a toilet being the physical (typically porcelain) object upon which you sit.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-14-2018 11:34 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 03:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

That story must be fake.

How could this article be read as anything other than a clear parody?

It would be physically impossible to flush a dog sized being down a toilet, a toilet being the physical (typically porcelain) object upon which you sit.

Those airplane flushes are vicious:

[Thot Leader]

(02-13-2018 10:54 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  

(02-11-2018 12:00 AM)puckerman Wrote:  

I have noticed more and more in America and in other democratic societies that vocal and passionate minorities prevail over the quite somewhat indifferent majorities. Let's take an example at the local level.

Old man or old woman goes to city council meeting. He complains that a two-way stop intersection in his neighborhood should be changed to a four-way stop. Now most other people in the neighborhood and town figure it's probably not needed at all, but it's not that big a deal to them. They don't say anything about it. The complainer keeps going to city council meetings until the council eventually votes yet just to shut him up.

Then suddenly everyone else notices the four-way stop. They wonder: "Why do we need this four-way stop?" But none of them are passionate enough to complain about it. The four-way stop stands.

At a larger level, I lobby the federal government for a $1 tax on every American citizen which will go straight to me. For Americans, it's "just a dollar." They don't care that much about it. For me, it's a big deal because I get over $300 million. I bribe Senators and everyone I can just to keep my little scheme going.

Unfortunately, this is how things work. I don't know how you fix the problem.

Scream and shouting win over calm talking and reasoning.

I see that happening at political events. The vocal and passionate ones are the ones who make the parties and politics not the majority that doesn't have the time and money to get to political causes. The passionate have the time and resources have the time to make things happen whereas most people work, have dinner and family and spend time with them.

If people actually cared about things and got involved, you'd see a lot of changes in politics especially in areas where it's extremely partisan and places have voted the same way for decades.

Your example reminds me of an article I read where at a state GOP event, the platform was being done. The social conservative crowd put in their beliefs and the libertarian part, disagreeing with them, had it changed and I think it worked on their favor.

The root causes of the problem you describe are

1) the apathy and indifference bred by consumer culture; the average man can have a relatively comfortable life by simply going along with the crowd, never acting up or speaking out.

2) the male tendency to placate women combined with the female tendency to insist on reallocating resources to feed even the most seemingly useless members of the tribe.

3) Whatever leftist-globalist agenda is forcibly taking decision-making power away from average men and giving it to angry, crazy "oppressed people".