Dog Attacks Passenger on 4 Train

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Here's the video:

 

 

What I want to know, when in the hell is the  going to stop dogs from riding on the subway? As far as I know this is not a service dog, so why isn't he in a dog carrier?  If I was the passenger, I'd sue the .  This person could've been mauled.

[R68OnBroadway]

21 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Here's the video:

 

 

What I want to know, when in the hell is the  going to stop dogs from riding on the subway? As far as I know this is not a service dog, so why isn't he in a dog carrier?  If I was the passenger, I'd sue the .  This person could've been mauled.

The only non-service dogs that should be allowed on the subway are ones that can fit in bags. Other than that, keep the dog at home or take an Uber or Lyft. I love dogs, but people can't act like they can be taken everywhere and pose no risk to others. What if someone has an allergy attack? What if the dog snaps? What if the dog gets on the track? People need to take responsibility for their pets...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

4 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

The only non-service dogs that should be allowed on the subway are ones that can fit in bags. Other than that, keep the dog at home or take an Uber or Lyft. I love dogs, but people can't act like they can be taken everywhere and pose no risk to others. What if someone has an allergy attack? What if the dog snaps? What if the dog gets on the track? People need to take responsibility for their pets...

The dog snapped in the video, and I posted it because I've been seeing more and more dogs on the trains and they aren't service dogs and they aren't in carriers.  The  needs to step up to the plate and stop this crap from happening. If this passenger was mauled by that dog, the  would be on the hook. I still wouldn't shocked if they sued because that dog shouldn't have been on the train regardless of why it attacked. From my understanding, the dog's owner put the dog on the seat or something, which if true, is even worse. Why is the dog sitting on the seats? Just unbelievable. Paying passengers can't get a seat because the dog is taking up seats.  

I've seen it a lot on the  train. The train is already crowded, and here comes this obnoxious passenger getting on all non-chalant with their dog.  If someone bangs into the dog accidentally or there's a sound that scares the dog, that's all it takes for a dog to go bonkers.  I hope someone from the  reads this thread because the situation is really out of hand.

[Lawrence St]

According to other sources, the man in the video had a fight with a lady over something, and then the man made the first move on the lady and when the lady attacked back the dog went biserk and bit the shoe.

 

But regardless, I've seen fights on the train happen because a gay guy told another guy to suck his d***. The MTA needs to step up their protection of passengers regardless.

[Coney Island Av]

Go right, commute tight, and don't let the bad dog bite! 

[LGA Link N Train]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The dog snapped in the video, and I posted it because I've been seeing more and more dogs on the trains and they aren't service dogs and they aren't in carriers.  The  needs to step up to the plate and stop this crap from happening. If this passenger was mauled by that dog, the  would be on the hook. I still wouldn't shocked if they sued because that dog shouldn't have been on the train regardless of why it attacked. From my understanding, the dog's owner put the dog on the seat or something, which if true, is even worse. Why is the dog sitting on the seats? Just unbelievable. Paying passengers can't get a seat because the dog is taking up seats.  

Come to think of it, didn't ban dogs from the subway? And this is a good reason as towards why. Dogs and other animals should NOT be in the subway whatsoever. This story and prior to that was a dog getting lost in the tunnels. Too many homeless. Signal Problems. Trains on Fire. crew not knowing what they're doing. Cuomo being an ass to  .

OH THE LIST COULD GO ON FOREVER. 

[R68OnBroadway]

5 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Come to think of it, didn't ban dogs from the subway? And this is a good reason as towards why. Dogs and other animals should NOT be in the subway whatsoever. This story and prior to that was a dog getting lost in the tunnels. Too many homeless. Signal Problems. Trains on Fire. crew not knowing what they're doing. Cuomo being an ass to  .

OH THE LIST COULD GO ON FOREVER. 

Imo the only dogs that should be let in the subway are service dogs and the dogs that can fit in carriers. I remember a few years ago the only dogs I would see would be people who would hide their tiny dogs in purses and bags, but now there seem to be more dogs, including large ones. I think dogs should be allowed on local buses though as the B/O sees the entire event and can stop quickly somewhere so that someone can take the dog off.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

19 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

According to other sources, the man in the video had a fight with a lady over something, and then the man made the first move on the lady and when the lady attacked back the dog went biserk and bit the shoe.

 

But regardless, I've seen fights on the train happen because a gay guy told another guy to suck his d***. The MTA needs to step up their protection of passengers regardless.

That dog is not that small and I've seen even bigger ones on the  train. Do the clerks buzz the passengers through with the dogs or do they slip under the turnstile or what?  

[Lawrence St]

You just answered your own question. They're clerks, they don't give a dam what goes through the turnstiles.

[CDTA]

Surely when you all say dogs shouldn't be allowed on the subway, you mean dogs outside of carriers, right?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

11 minutes ago, CDTA said:

Surely when you all say dogs shouldn't be allowed on the subway, you mean dogs outside of carriers, right?

That's correct. Those and service dogs. It used to be rare to see even service dogs. On occasion you'd see someone with a tiny dog in their purse or in the carrier at best, but now people just walk on with those dogs like it's nothing.

[kosciusko]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

If someone bangs into the dog accidentally or there's a sound that scares the dog, that's all it takes for a dog to go bonkers.

You really sound like you have no understanding of dog psych my dude. They aren't horses, dogs don't spook easily, and a dog that's been properly trained will not react to somebody bumping into it. Dogs are not wild animals, they have been domesticated alongside humans for thousands of years and have learned that 99% of the time it is not prudent to attack a human out of the blue. Even in the video that you posted, the guy filming said "she did attack him." Dogs have transportation needs to, banning dogs on the subway is just going to get people to buy fake service dog vests and pulling the "ESA" card.

[R68OnBroadway]

42 minutes ago, kosciusko said:

You really sound like you have no understanding of dog psych my dude. They aren't horses, dogs don't spook easily, and a dog that's been properly trained will not react to somebody bumping into it. Dogs are not wild animals, they have been domesticated alongside humans for thousands of years and have learned that 99% of the time it is not prudent to attack a human out of the blue. Even in the video that you posted, the guy filming said "she did attack him." Dogs have transportation needs to, banning dogs on the subway is just going to get people to buy fake service dog vests and pulling the "ESA" card.

Surely there are properly trained dogs, but what about people who don't train them well? They still will take their dog on the subway, or at least a few will. Sometimes dogs also have the tendency to snap at certain people or go after those who are terrified of them. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

32 minutes ago, kosciusko said:

You really sound like you have no understanding of dog psych my dude. They aren't horses, dogs don't spook easily, and a dog that's been properly trained will not react to somebody bumping into it. Dogs are not wild animals, they have been domesticated alongside humans for thousands of years and have learned that 99% of the time it is not prudent to attack a human out of the blue. Even in the video that you posted, the guy filming said "she did attack him." Dogs have transportation needs to, banning dogs on the subway is just going to get people to buy fake service dog vests and pulling the "ESA" card.

Are you kidding me? I grew up with a dog. When he was startled he would snap. The dog was well trained. As he became older, we noticed he would be easily startled and would snap more often. His health was failing so eventually he had to be put down. Aside from that, you seem to forget about all of the dog maulings in this City. The us supposed to only allow service dogs or dogs in carriers for a reason. 

[kosciusko]

33 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I grew up with a dog. When he was startled he would snap. The dog was well trained. As he became older, we noticed he would be easily startled and would snap more often.

Hate to break it to you, but he wasn't well trained. A dog that snaps when startled isn't well trained, period.

42 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Surely there are properly trained dogs, but what about people who don't train them well? They still will take their dog on the subway, or at least a few will. Sometimes dogs also have the tendency to snap at certain people or go after those who are terrified of them. 

Sure that's true, but I'd like to remind everyone that in the video posted, it's stated that the women attacked the dog. Most dogs will respond if they are attacked. People shouldn't attack or provoke animals they see, that's just common sense, and I'd be willing to bet that a good deal of dog maulings could be prevented by people just ignoring the dog.

Dogs have transportation needs, for-hire vehicles don't permit dogs, and are financially inaccessible for many New Yorkers. Dogs medium size and cannot be feasibly crated and transported via subway. It's on the responsibility of owner to make sure the dog is under control, and it's on the responsibility of passengers to not provoke animals that they see, just like you shouldn't provoke people.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

12 minutes ago, kosciusko said:

Hate to break it to you, but he wasn't well trained. A dog that snaps when startled isn't well trained, period.

Sure that's true, but I'd like to remind everyone that in the video posted, it's stated that the women attacked the dog. Most dogs will respond if they are attacked. People shouldn't attack or provoke animals they see, that's just common sense, and I'd be willing to bet that a good deal of dog maulings could be prevented by people just ignoring the dog.

Dogs have transportation needs, for-hire vehicles don't permit dogs, and are financially inaccessible for many New Yorkers. Dogs medium size and cannot be feasibly crated and transported via subway. It's on the responsibility of owner to make sure the dog is under control, and it's on the responsibility of passengers to not provoke animals that they see, just like you shouldn't provoke people.

Dogs have transportation needs? Here's the thing. They are not allowed on the subway unless they are in a carrier or a service dog, so this dog should've been in a carrier and wasn't, which is why everyone was yelling at the dog owner who is an idiot. Please don't try to excuse this behavior. We didn't have this problem until all of these transplants started moving here thinking that the rules don't apply to them. 

[P3F]

Quote

Except as otherwise provided in paragraph of this subdivision, no person may bring any animal on or into any conveyance or facility unless enclosed in a container and carried in a manner which would not annoy other passengers.

Paragraph of this subdivision does not apply to working dogs for law enforcement agencies, to service animals, or to animals which are being trained as service animals and are accompanying persons with disabilities, or to animals which are being trained as service animals by a professional trainer. All service animals and animals being trained as service animals must be harnessed or leashed.

Upon request by a police officer or designated employee of the Authority, a trainer must display proof of affiliation with a professional training school and that the animal is a licensed service animal or an animal being trained as a service animal. Upon request of a police officer or designated Authority personnel, a passenger must provide evidence that an animal claimed to be a service animal and thus exempt from the provisions of paragraph of this subdivision qualifies as such or is being trained as a service animal. Such evidence may be supplied through: the display of a service animal license issued by the Department of Health of the City of New York or by other governmental agencies in New York or elsewhere authorized to issue such licenses, the display of an identification from a professional training school that the animal is a trained service animal, the presence of a harness or a marking on a harness, or the credible verbal assurances of the person with a disability using the service animal or animal being trained as such. For purposes of this paragraph, credible verbal assurances may include a description of one or more tasks that the animal performs or is being trained to perform for the benefit of the person with a disability.

As an alternative to any of the methods described in paragraph of this subdivision for providing evidence that an animal meets the definition of service animal, persons with disabilities who use service animals who do not have a service animal license or other written documentation that the accompanying animal is a service animal may apply to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority for a service animal identification card.

Law enforcement officers or designated Authority personnel have the right to refuse admission to or eject any passenger accompanied by an animal, including a service animal, which poses a direct threat to the safety of other passengers.

Quote

“Service animal” means a guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability that such person is unable to perform due to such disability, such as guiding persons with impaired vision, alerting persons with impaired hearing to sounds, pulling a wheelchair, retrieving dropped items or providing rescue assistance. The term service animal does not include a therapy animal or animal used for emotional support.

Source: http://web.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm

Anybody actually defending the dog owner in this case, has no idea of what they are talking about.

[kosciusko]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Dogs have transportation needs? Here's the thing. They are not allowed on the subway unless they are in a carrier or a service dog, so this dog should've been in a carrier and wasn't, which is why everyone was yelling at the dog owner who is an idiot. Please don't try to excuse this behavior. We didn't have this problem until all of these transplants started moving here thinking that the rules don't apply to them. 

I'm not defending the owner, I'm just looking at it from a pragmatic perspective. It's stated in the video that the women attacked the dog, if she hadn't attacked dog, there would have been no issue. A dog that size cannot be crated and carried onto the subway, that's a fact. The crate would be far to big to be able to navigate up and down stairs, through the turnstiles, through the doors of the train, and back though all of those again on the way out. If one has to take their dog to the vet, and the vet is far away, the Subway is the only option.

[SevenEleven]

When the culture being garnered that the public can do whatever they want with zero consequences, stupid stuff like this will happen.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, kosciusko said:

I'm not defending the owner, I'm just looking at it from a pragmatic perspective. It's stated in the video that the women attacked the dog, if she hadn't attacked dog, there would have been no issue. A dog that size cannot be crated and carried onto the subway, that's a fact. The crate would be far to big to be able to navigate up and down stairs, through the turnstiles, through the doors of the train, and back though all of those again on the way out. If one has to take their dog to the vet, and the vet is far away, the Subway is the only option.

The owner should've thought of that before getting the dog. Stop making excuses for this guy. The dog shouldn't have been on the train and they are NOT allowed. Period. If they can't fit in a carrier and aren't service dogs there is no excuse for them being on the train. None.

[kosciusko]

Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The owner should've thought of that before getting the dog. Stop making excuses for this guy. The dog shouldn't have been on the train and they are NOT allowed. Period. If they can't fit in a carrier and aren't service dogs there is no excuse for them being on the train. None.

58 minutes ago, SevenEleven said:

When the culture being garnered that the public can do whatever they want with zero consequences, stupid stuff like this will happen.

Forget about the owner, not once did I make a case for the owner in any of my posts.

What is and isn't allowed by the  is irrelevant and people are going to buy large dogs regardless of what the  permits on the Subway, so that's not an argument. Additionally, it's apparent by the amount of large dogs I see on the subway that there is a need (demand) for it to happen, and when people in a society have a demand, the demand gets fulfilled regardless of legality. What is and isn't allowed is an arbitrary distinction, and the members of a society will choose what rules they view as just and will follow, and they also choose rules they view as unjust and will ignore. The regulations of a society should conform to the general will of its members, and to me it seems to me that the general will is for people to be able to bring their dogs on the subway. 

 

Additionally, you are just as likely to get bitten by a dog you see on the street, or in the park. You wouldn't advocate for banning dogs in public places would you?

 

Anyways you're failing to address my key point: It's said in the video that the lady attacked the dog, if she hadn't had attacked the dog, this wouldn't have happened. If you attack a dog, there will be consequences for you. Just like if you attack a human.

[P3F]

13 minutes ago, kosciusko said:

Forget about the owner, not once did I make a case for the owner in any of my posts.

What is and isn't allowed by the  is irrelevant and people are going to buy large dogs regardless of what the  permits on the Subway, so that's not an argument. Additionally, it's apparent by the amount of large dogs I see on the subway that there is a need (demand) for it to happen, and when people in a society have a demand, the demand gets fulfilled regardless of legality. What is and isn't allowed is an arbitrary distinction, and the members of a society will choose what rules they view as just and will follow, and they also choose rules they view as unjust and will ignore. The regulations of a society should conform to the general will of its members, and to me it seems to me that the general will is for people to be able to bring their dogs on the subway. 

 

Additionally, you are just as likely to get bitten by a dog you see on the street, or in the park. You wouldn't advocate for banning dogs in public places would you?

 

Anyways you're failing to address my key point: It's said in the video that the lady attacked the dog, if she hadn't had attacked the dog, this wouldn't have happened. If you attack a dog, there will be consequences for you. Just like if you attack a human.

"What is and isn't allowed by the is irrelevant."

"Members of a society will choose what rules they view as just and will follow, and they also choose rules they view as unjust and will ignore."

So anybody can just go break laws if they believe they are unjust? Right...

Did this guy ever have credibility?

[kosciusko]

4 minutes ago, P3F said:

So anybody can just go break laws if they believe they are unjust? Right...

Yeah that's literally how societies work idiot.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights_movement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attica_Prison_riot

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_resistance_to_apartheid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_resistance_to_Nazism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Uprising

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_European_anti-Communist_insurgencies

The list goes on...

[MysteriousBtrain]

If we really are going to fight over if a dog is on the subway, and if it's really that serious just do this and call it a day.

(To be clear idgaf about the law of animals on subways nor is it relavant to me. I'll probably still get the usual forum argument treatment though.)

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, kosciusko said:

Yeah that's literally how societies work idiot.

See:

<a list of further and further reaches>

The list goes on...

Oh Christ. This is not some righteous crusade to desegregate or fight for ones' rights. We aren't talking about booting Ms. Rosa Parks from her seat or Ghandi freeing the people. This is about the privilege of bringing a dog onto public transportation.

This sense of entitlement is what's wrong with this new generation of transplants. This video is why we can't have nice things, and why we don't let dogs on the subway unless absolutely necessary.