Ping Dudley Hanks

On 6/20/14 9:24 PM, in article , "Floyd L.
Davidson" wrote:

George Kerby wrote:
On 6/20/14 5:02 PM, in article ,
"George Kerby" wrote:

On 6/20/14 11:07 AM, in article , "Floyd L.
Davidson" wrote:

George Kerby wrote:
On 6/19/14 8:58 AM, in article , "Floyd L.
Davidson" wrote:

George Kerby wrote:
Thought about you when I saw this. These idiots think that a guide dog
can
be "stowed" under the seat like a carry-on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rxCasItGvM

Nothing on that video suggests that anyone would "think"
that a guide dog can or should be stowed under a seat in
the manner of carry-on baggage. Not to mention that the
dog is clearly too large.

And "stay under the seat" is not stowing to you, eh?!?

You ever pay attention to the standard annoucement at the beginning of the
flight? The part about "stowing under the seat, or in the overhead"?!?

Thought not...

You thought not, but should have thought at least a little.

The standard announcement is specifically about luggage,
not a guide dog, and of course requires that the item be
small enough fit.

The dog pictured in the video is never going to fit
under an airline seat.

DUUUUHHHHHH! REALLY?!?

WHOOSH

"Whoosh" is a very appropriate description for *your*
discussion. Very clearly the problem was *not* that the
dog wouldn't stay under the seat. The news commentator
used those words, but clearly didn't actually mean
stuffing the dog under a seat!

And nothing in the news clip suggested the dog should
have been under the seat to anyone with an ounce of
sense.


You know, I see exactly what Tony was talking about in another post that you
are applying the same illogical reasoning.

You are like arguing with a rock, I am wasting my time...