Disabled Vet With Service Dog Kicked Off Of Airline.

[No Joy]

Disabled vet kicked off US Airways plane in service dog dispute
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/0...ff-us-airways-plane-over-service-dog-dispute/

I think this is a tough one to judge. I'd like to know the events and conditions that led up to this.

The veteran seems to have gone off the deep end, but was it airline's procedures, policies and discrimination that pushed the veteran of the deep end?

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Why did the dog have to stay on the seat? Sounds like the guy was totally unreasonable about it. Would you take off with an irate, unreasonable man in the back?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4

 

[Badger]

I don't think requiring the service dog to be on the floor at his side is asking too much.

Like always, there is probably more to the story.

 

[poadeleted20]

As the airline said, it's all about human passenger safety for ground evacuation.

I know of no FAA rule requiring airlines to allow service dogs to sit in a seat. I do know of rules saying that anyone other than an infant in the lap of an adult must be strapped in. I doubt the seat restraints are built for dogs, and I know of no rule requiring airlines to have dog-compatible seat restraints. In terms of safety regulations, the dog is treated like baggage, and that means on the floor.

In any event, I think the airline (especially the flight crew) handled it as well as they could, and did the right thing later by paying the vet's overnight expenses. I would also guess that the dog was on the floor on the later flight.

I would be interested to see what would have happened if the traveler had one of those dog restraints which hook to automotive seat belts allowing the dog to be safely restrained in the seat, but that wasn't the situation.

 

[No Joy]

Why did the dog have to stay on the seat?

Good question. Why did the airline not want the dog in the seat?

Perhaps the veteran didn't want his dog to be in the way in the aisle? Perhaps the veteran didn't want the dog in the aisle, where the dog would be more distracted and more likely to be harassed/abused?

Would you take off with an irate, unreasonable man in the back?

Absolutely not. But was it the airline that made the veteran irate?

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Good question. Why did the airline not want the dog in the seat?

Perhaps the veteran didn't want his dog to be in the way in the aisle? Perhaps the veteran didn't want the dog in the aisle, where the dog would be more distracted and more likely to be harassed/abused?

Absolutely not. But was it the airline that made the veteran irate?

Likely did not want him in the seat to reduce the chance of the dog becoming a projectile in a sudden stop or crash. Nobody said anything about blocking the aisle with the dog. According to the article there was an empty seat beside the man. The dog could have sat on the floor in front of that seat. I'm not seeing any good excuse here.

As for who made him irate, if he is so out of control of himself that he is yelling at the crew, it doesn't really matter what the root cause is. Get the heck off my plane until you calm down.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4

 

[poadeleted20]

Good question. Why did the airline not want the dog in the seat?

FAA safety rules. The dog is effectively baggage, and baggage must be stowed on the floor or in the overhead bin -- and I can't see the dog going in the bin. The dog could be up on the seat in flight, but not for taxi/takeoff/landing.

 

[No Joy]

I know of no FAA rule requiring airlines to allow service dogs to sit in a seat.

Are there any FAA rules forbidding airlines from allowing service dogs from sitting in a seat?

In terms of safety regulations, the dog is treated like baggage, and that means on the floor.

What safety regulations require a service dog to be treated like baggage?

I would be interested to see what would have happened if the traveler had one of those dog restraints which hook to automotive seat belts allowing the dog to be safely restrained in the seat, but that wasn't the situation.

A restraint, in most cases would probably improve the safety of the dog and the passengers. Though I'm not sure it would be a good idea to require service dogs to be restrained. Sometimes service dogs have to be unrestrained to do their job. In some cases a restrained dog is more dangerous. Many disabled people are very poor, and have a lot of expenses because of their disabilities; requiring a restraint might be another unfair burden and cost to them. Try living on $12,000 a year, with a lots of healthcare expenses. It costs about $5000-$20,000 for a service dog.

To the best of my knowledge commercial seatbelt restraints for dogs is a new innovation of the last few years. To the best of my knowledge service dogs have been riding on airlines decades before commercial restraints were available.

 

[No Joy]

FAA safety rules. The dog is effectively baggage, and baggage must be stowed on the floor or in the overhead bin -- and I can't see the dog going in the bin. The dog could be up on the seat in flight, but not for taxi/takeoff/landing.

Do you have a link or a copy of the specific FAA regulations that require service dogs to be treated like baggage? The ADA requires fair and reasonable accommodation. I suspect in most cases that stuffing a service dog in an overhead bin would be cruel to the service dog and would likely prevent the service dog from doing its job.

Did the disabled vet a for the seat for the dog?

Many service dogs have flown on flights before. Are you trying to tell me that they all have been restrained? None of them have flown in seats or aisles before?

I seem to recollect an unrestrained "service pig(s)" causing problems on one or more flights before.

Service pig Airline
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95217&page=1

Feds: Airlines Must Let Passengers Fly With Pigs for 'Emotional
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/feds-airlines-must-let-passengers-fly-pigs-emotional-support

Likely did not want him in the seat to reduce the chance of the dog becoming a projectile in a sudden stop or crash. Nobody said anything about blocking the aisle with the dog.

Are you sure? I didn't hear saying that the reason they airlines wanted the dog out of the seat, was because they considered the dog a potential projectile.

The dog could have sat on the floor in front of that seat. I'm not seeing any good excuse here.

Are you sure? Perhaps there wasn't enough room in front of the seat for the dog?

As for who made him irate, if he is so out of control of himself that he is yelling at the crew, it doesn't really matter what the root cause is. Get the heck off my plane until you calm down.

IF the airlines caused the problem, then they should be held responsible.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Are you sure? Perhaps there wasn't enough room in front of the seat for the dog?


IF they airlines caused the problem, then they should be held responsible.

Per the article that does not seem to be the case. Short of his dog being some kind of giant mastiff or similar, it could obviously fit in front of the seat.

BTW, it's federal law that you obey the instructions of the cabin crew. Period. If they tell you to do something, you need to do it. And if you can't handle a disagreement without screaming at the crew, well, you're part of what's wrong with the world.

I'm curious if you would be so defensive of this man if he wasn't a veteran.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4

 

[Henning]

I would be interested to see what would have happened if the traveler had one of those dog restraints which hook to automotive seat belts allowing the dog to be safely restrained in the seat, but that wasn't the situation.

That's what I was wondering. Perhaps the airlines will look into those like fat people extenders and have a couple around.

 

[No Joy]

Per the article that does not seem to be the case.

Hypocrisy. My point is the article doesn't support the ASSUMPTIONS that you were making.

Short of his dog being some kind of giant mastiff or similar, it could obviously fit in front of the seat.

Untrue. You have an inferior knowledge of service dogs and medical conditions.

BTW, it's federal law that you obey the instructions of the cabin crew. Period. If they tell you to do something, you need to do it.

False. Passengers do not have to abide with an order that is illegal, or unreasonably/unnecessarily endangers. Airline crews also have to abide by the law. There should be balance and sense applied to the law.

Unfortunately airlines sometimes abuse the law that you mention to break the law and endanger passengers.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Hypocrisy. My point is the article doesn't support the ASSUMPTIONS that you were making.


Untrue. You have an inferior knowledge of service dogs and medical conditions.

Feel free to quote the part of the article that defies what I say.

I've seen plenty of service dogs. Most are all around the same size, a size that could reasonably be expected to sit or lay in front of the seat.

Again I ask, are your thinking faculties blinded by the fact that this guy is a veteran? No matter how ridiculous the request may seem to be, screaming until the police are called to take you away is not appropriate.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4

 

[poadeleted20]

Are there any FAA rules forbidding airlines from allowing service dogs from sitting in a seat?

Yes. Other than the infant-in-lap exception, you can't have anything in a seat during taxi/takeoff/landing but a person properly strapped in.

What safety regulations require a service dog to be treated like baggage?

If it's not a person, it must be on the floor or in the big. That's the rule. Dogs are not people under FAA rules. Hence, dogs (like baggage), must be on the floor or in the bin.

 

[denverpilot]

Likely did not want him in the seat to reduce the chance of the dog becoming a projectile in a sudden stop or crash. Nobody said anything about blocking the aisle with the dog. According to the article there was an empty seat beside the man. The dog could have sat on the floor in front of that seat. I'm not seeing any good excuse here.

I didn't check the article for what kind of dog he had, but I've been on Domestic in Cattle Car Class where my legs would not fit between my ass and the seat in front of me and anyone with oversized genetalia might have needed surgery post-flight to restore function.

Putting a dog bigger than a chihuahua down there would be cruel and unusual punishment. Even the chihuahua would feel trapped.

 

[jonnyjetprop]

Every airline must comply with both FAA regulations and ACAA (Air Carrier Access Act). It does require reasonable accommodation, but that does not allow an airline to violate its own safety policy's set forth in its FAA approved manuals.

In reviewing my airlines manuals, service animals may only be accommodated sitting on the floor or in the lap of the disabled passenger and only if the animal is smaller than an infant. It is specially prohibited from occupying a passenger seat. I would assume that USAirways has similar verbiage in their manuals.

 

[poadeleted20]

In reviewing my airlines manuals, service animals may only be accommodated sitting on the floor or in the lap of the disabled passenger and only if the animal is smaller than an infant. It is specially prohibited from occupying a passenger seat. I would assume that USAirways has similar verbiage in their manuals.

I sat in a USAirways (well, really Piedmont, but they're a wholly owned subsidiary) Dash 8 behind a disabled vet with PTSD who had a service dog (German Shepherd -- ain't going in that guy's lap) to help identify when an episode was coming on. The dog sat on the floor in front of the empty seat next to him for taxi, takeoff, and landing, and in the empty seat next to him in flight. Seemed to work just fine once they got the person in the seat next to him to move to another seat in the airplane to make more room for the dog on the floor. Just a bit strange during the flight with that dog doing a Kilroy over the back of the seat in front of me.

However, had that flight been full, there would have been a problem, because there would have been no way to fit that dog under the seat without blocking egress.

 

[jonnyjetprop]

Ron,

It's for this vary reason why there's a FAA regulation that you have to do what's in your manuals and not a generic regulation in many cases. My MD-11 is somewhat more spacious than a Dash 8. FWIW, we would put the passenger with a service animal at a bulkhead, window seat per our manual. How Piedmont would handle a full flight, I don't know. Their manual may even go so far as to require the carrier to pull a passenger off.

It's good training for me. I'm going back to the MD-11 next month.


No Joy,

I'm going to side with USAirways on this one, unless something comes out that changes the story. There's just too much at stake for the airline to screw up something like this.

I sat in a USAirways (well, really Piedmont, but they're a wholly owned subsidiary) Dash 8 behind a disabled vet with PTSD who had a service dog (German Shepherd) to help identify when an episode was coming on. The dog sat on the floor in front of the empty seat next to him for taxi, takeoff, and landing, and in the empty seat next to him in flight. Seemed to work just fine once they got the person in the seat next to him to move to another seat in the airplane to make more room for the dog on the floor. Had that flight been full, there would have been a problem.

 

[frfly172]

I would need the full story to make a decision,rather than the headline.The airline did step up and pay for the hotel. I can understand why they would not want him on the flight with the crew he had a problem with.would also be nice if the news reported all the facts .

 

[No Joy]

Feel free to quote the part of the article that defies what I say.

Hypocrisy. Feel free to quote the part of the article that defies what I say. You have been asked to support your claims, you haven't. You've made false claims.

You're behaving like a troll. Even your user ID "cheap weenie" seems to brag that you are an uncivilized troll.

I've seen plenty of service dogs. Most are all around the same size, a size that could reasonably be expected to sit or lay in front of the seat.

I reiterate. Not all service dogs should be placed on the floor in front of the seats. Not all dogs could humanely fit their. Not all dogs have the same physical attributes or medical conditions. Not all dogs perform the same job.

Your knowledge of dogs and medical conditions is inferior.

No matter how ridiculous the request may seem to be, screaming until the police are called to take you away is not appropriate.

If the airlines and the law enforcement refuse to comply with the law, in some cases I feel that making a scene can be an appropriate response.

Every airline must comply with both FAA regulations and ACAA (Air Carrier Access Act). It does require reasonable accommodation, but that does not allow an airline to violate its own safety policy's set forth in its FAA approved manuals.

I think you're not being honest. You seem to be talking double talk. The alleged FAA regulations, ADA and airline safety policies seem to be in conflict, therefore it seems it is not possible to be compliant with all. I thought the disabilities act was conceived to supersede most other existing laws.

In reviewing my airlines manuals, service animals may only be accommodated sitting on the floor or in the lap of the disabled passenger and only if the animal is smaller than an infant. It is specially prohibited from occupying a passenger seat. I would assume that USAirways has similar verbiage in their manuals.

What law says that the airlines don't have to abide by the disabilities act? If what you claim is true, I think the FAA is wrong for violating the disabilities act, for allegedly approving such a manual. In my opinion your alleged airline manuals are ignorant, discriminatory and violates the law.

Specifically what the manual is that?

Yes. Other than the infant-in-lap exception, you can't have anything in a seat during taxi/takeoff/landing but a person properly strapped in.

Some have chosen not to discriminate. Some have chosen to allow reasonable and fair accommodation.
http://youtu.be/tz92Ir6w8_o

If it's not a person, it must be on the floor or in the big. That's the rule. Dogs are not people under FAA rules. Hence, dogs (like baggage), must be on the floor or in the bin.

Under the disabilities act, there must be reasonable accommodation. Show me where in the law specifically that FAA rules, supersede the disabilities act?

You're avoiding the question I asked before.

Do you have a link or a copy of the specific FAA regulations that require service dogs (or service animals) to be treated like baggage?

I would need the full story to make a decision,rather than the headline.The airline did step up and pay for the hotel. I can understand why they would not want him on the flight with the crew he had a problem with.would also be nice if the news reported all the facts .

I would like to know the full story to not some powder puff story about how they allegedly paid for a hotel. I would like USAirways to go on the record and try to truthfully explain why it was discriminating against the war veteran. Why wouldn't US Airways allow the dog in the seat, like other airlines have? I would like to know what happened, before the camera started rolling. I doubt I'll ever fly US Airways again. I don't want to support discrimination.

Paying off the war veteran with a night in a hotel is peanuts compared to the suffering that the airline refusing to comply with the disability act caused the war veteran.

 

[markb5900]

From the LIMITED amount of information available and being a disabled vet myself, I conclude the following:
The Vet OVER REACTED to the entire incident.
Yes ADA can come into play, but IMHO "reasonable" is a two way street with both the disabled person and the "other" party.
It SOUNDS/LOOKS like the crew was trying to do their best in a bad situation. The PIC made a call to not have the passenger on the plane.

 

[Henning]

It seems that you have No Joy in your life at all.

The ADA says "Reasonable Accomodation must be made". The dog sitting in the seat unrestrained in the event of an accident becomes a flying projectile endangering the lives of everyone in front of it, not to mention it's own. That is not "reasonable" so the FARs and OPs manual over ride.

As for inhumane space, not buying it. Dogs are den animals and quite comfortable in tight spaces. An old girlfriend's Golden Retriever staked out the hat shelf in my Travelair when she could have had the whole back seat or luggage compartment. Ever seen the size of that hatshelf? It makes the legroom in an airliner seem spacious. My Great Pyreneese used to squeeze himself into the tiny space at the bottom between two round hay bales.

The key issue is the removing the guy, an agitated PTSD Vietnam Vet from the flight, here's why that was the exact correct thing to do, this is a lady I sail with frequently: if the link doesn't work on a desktop, just look on You Tube or Google for Kerry Gruson.

 

[denverpilot]

The ADA says "Reasonable Accomodation must be made". The dog sitting in the seat unrestrained in the event of an accident becomes a flying projectile endangering the lives of everyone in front of it, not to mention it's own. That is not "reasonable" so the FARs and OPs manual over ride.

No bulkhead seating on that particular aircraft, eh?

 

[Henning]

No bulkhead seating on that particular aircraft, eh?

At the point he becomes combative, it's time to get him off the plane.

 

[denverpilot]

At the point he becomes combative, it's time to get him off the plane.

Glad you changed your story.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Hypocrisy. Feel free to quote the part of the article that defies what I say. You have been asked to support your claims, you haven't. You've made false claims.

You're behaving like a troll. Even your user ID "cheap weenie" seems to brag that you are an uncivilized troll.

Ha! "Cheap Weenie" is a joking nickname a longtime friend gave me due to me being a tightwad and enjoying Sam's cheap weenies. You should look up the definition of a troll. I am honestly and consistently presenting my viewpoint. The fact that is does not jive with your viewpoint does not make me an "uncivilized troll". This is a discussion, there is supposed to be a back-and-forth exchange of viewpoints. Trolls usually don't supply their real first name either.


And, just for future reference, so you can use it correctly next time:

hy·poc·ri·sy
hiˈpäkrisē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies
1.
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

I do not think that word means what you think it means....



Here's the video of this encounter. Who is being unreasonable here? It's not the flight crew, that's for sure! Watch the whole video, and if you still think he's in the right, I don't know what to say about that...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Sdm_QzR9DM

 

[Skylane81E]

No bulkhead seating on that particular aircraft, eh?

Splat!

 

[denverpilot]

He acted like a lot of Vets from that era... a lot crusty, but harmless.

Looking at the video makes the "dog will become a projectile" comments hilarious above... and all the FAA rules stuff look pretty silly too.

Know what would have happened if they'd have just left the dog in the seat, as the guy pointed out the last airline did? Nothing.

Guy and dog would have gotten off at the next cattle car bus stop. Mooo.

Trying to make it out like it needed to be a big deal, is a bit of a reach. Works for the modern PC crowd, I'm sure... but I can remember a time when a similar scenario would have just led to, "Just leave the old guy alone and let's get outta here..."

 

[denverpilot]

Splat!

Not really. Hard to splat when you've only traveled two inches forward. LOL.

Airliners blow rainbow chunks.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

He acted like a lot of Vets from that era... a lot crusty, but harmless.

Looking at the video makes the "dog will become a projectile" comments hilarious above... and all the FAA rules stuff look pretty silly too.

Know what would have happened if they'd have just left the dog in the seat, as the guy pointed out the last airline did? Nothing.

Guy and dog would have gotten off at the next cattle car bus stop. Mooo.

Trying to make it out like it needed to be a big deal, is a bit of a reach. Works for the modern PC crowd, I'm sure... but I can remember a time when a similar scenario would have just led to, "Just leave the old guy alone and let's get outta here..."

PIC knows there is an improperly stowed 'object' in the cabin. PIC departs anyway. PIC gets caught and violated for it, and heads for the unemployment line. Are YOU willing to lose your job over it? It's both the FARs and likely company policy. 'PC' has nothing to do with it. (But you're right, it would have all been fine as it was, just not legal)

 

[denverpilot]

PIC knows there is an improperly stowed 'object' in the cabin. PIC departs anyway. PIC gets caught and violated for it, and heads for the unemployment line. Are YOU willing to lose your job over it?

Like I said, there once was a time... not anymore. The Almighty Policy and Procedure trump all common sense, and "Zero Tolerance" rules the day. Or at least that's how they want you to think, to keep you in line.

 

[No Joy]

The ADA says "Reasonable Accomodation must be made". The dog sitting in the seat unrestrained in the event of an accident becomes a flying projectile endangering the lives of everyone in front of it, not to mention it's own. That is not "reasonable" so the FARs and OPs manual over ride.

If restraints were really the issue, then how come there is no mention in the article? If restraints really was the issue, then how come other dogs and even pig(s) have been allowed to fly unrestrained? If restraints really are the issue, then how come airlines don't provide them, like seatbelt extensions for the obese?

If flying projectiles are really such a big concern to authorities, then why allow such flimsy overhead storage and carry-ons? Why so willing to compromise on safety for convenience, but not willing to compromise for disabilities?

As for inhumane space, not buying it. Dogs are den animals and quite comfortable in tight spaces. An old girlfriend's Golden Retriever staked out the hat shelf in my Travelair when she could have had the whole back seat or luggage compartment. Ever seen the size of that hatshelf? It makes the legroom in an airliner seem spacious. My Great Pyreneese used to squeeze himself into the tiny space at the bottom between two round hay bales.

By nature, most dogs are comfortable in tight spaces, but not all. As I've pointed out before, tight spaces might hinder a service dog's ability to do its job. If you were more knowledgeable of dogs, you would know that some dogs have difficulties with tight spaces, like dogs with dysplasia.

The key issue is the removing the guy, an agitated PTSD Vietnam Vet from the flight,

The key issue is whether or not the airline refused to make reasonable and fair accommodation. If the airline would have just let the dog sit in the seat like on so many other flights, then they wouldn't have agitated the war veteran.

Here's the video of this encounter. Who is being unreasonable here? It's not the flight crew, that's for sure! Watch the whole video, and if you still think he's in the right, I don't know what to say about that...

As I pointed out, it's important to know what happened, before the video started. The war veteran went off in the deep end. The question is was he pushed?

There is often more than one side of a story. Suggest watching the Caine Mutiny.

 

[Henning]

Why not just let the dog sit on the floor for TO and landing? the dog could have sat on the floor just fine. The dude is nuts, that's his 100% disability, that's the greater hazard than the dog. BTW, you really think the dog would not have become a projectile in an accident? Let me slap you with 80 lbs traveling 100mph. Why do you think seat belts are required?

 

[bbchien]

Looks like ? PTSD +/- sociopathy. Everything you do in this situation is a soft call.

 

[No Joy]

Why not just let the dog sit on the floor for TO and landing? the dog could have sat on the floor just fine.

Why do you ask questions that possible explanations have already given? You respond to post before reading them, because you think you know it all and everyone else is inferior? You're senile and can't remember? You're just plain nuts?

The dude is nuts, that's his 100% disability, that's the greater hazard than the dog.

You seem to be heading down the same path.

Who is more nuts, someone with disabilities, or someone that discriminates against them and harasses them until they go off the deep end? In my opinion the bully is more nuts.

BTW, you really think the dog would not have become a projectile in an accident? Let me slap you with 80 lbs traveling 100mph. Why do you think seat belts are required?

On the contrary. Why do you give a free pass to all the potential projectiles, to discriminately single out the dog? As I pointed out before, what about all the carry-ons? Do you really think overhead bins are secure? Do you really think carry-ons under seats and in foot spaces is secure and not capable of becoming projectiles?

 

[markb5900]

No Joy!
Are you a disabled vet?

 

[Henning]

Why do you ask questions that possible explanations have already given? You respond to post before reading them, because you think you know it all and everyone else is inferior? You're senile and can't remember? You're just plain nuts?

You seem to be heading down the same path.

Who is more nuts, someone with disabilities, or someone that discriminates against them and harasses them until they go off the deep end? In my opinion the bully is more nuts.

On the contrary. Why do you give a free pass to all the potential projectiles, to discriminately single out the dog? As I pointed out before, what about all the carry-ons? Do you really think overhead bins are secure? Do you really think carry-ons under seats and in foot spaces is secure and not capable of becoming projectiles?

What other projectiles? Why do you think they make you stow everything under the seats or in the overhead? Why do I discriminate against the insane on these issues? In case you missed the link before...

not to mention I almost lost my dad to one as well.

Why couldn't he follow a simple instruction? The dog would have been fine on the floor, they could have left. He was combative and couldn't follow instructions, he doesn't belong on an airplane endangering everyone else, simple as that.

 

[No Joy]

What other projectiles? Why do you think they make you stow everything under the seats or in the overhead?

Do you really think storing things under seats and in the overhead bins is secure? While storing things under seats and in overhead bins may reduce of the # of carry-ons that become projectiles, there still there are often hundreds if not thousands of projectiles that find their way out from under seats and overhead bins during significant mishaps. Haven't you had any aviation safety training?

Why couldn't he follow a simple instruction? The dog would have been fine on the floor, they could have left. He was combative and couldn't follow instructions, he doesn't belong on an airplane endangering everyone else, simple as that.

Why can't you? Can't you read or comprehend? Too blinded by bigotry? There are several POSSIBLE explanations, that already have been given.

 

[DavidWhite]

That's what I was wondering. Perhaps the airlines will look into those like fat people extenders and have a couple around.

I'd gladly sit next to a dog instead of a fat person.

 

[Henning]

Do you really think storing things under seats and in the overhead bins is secure? While storing things under seats and in overhead bins may reduce of carry-ons that become deadly projectiles. But still there are often hundreds if not thousands of projectiles that find their way out from under seats and overhead bins during significant mishaps. Haven't you had any aviation safety training?

Why can't you? Can't you read or comprehend? Too blinded by bigotry? There are several POSSIBLE explanations, that already have been given.

Why do you ignore the link I post? That is the REALITY of what a PTSD vet can do. THAT is why he was taken off the plane.