>but, my opinion still stands on the fact that $60 isn't going to prevent
>an allergy!  in all of my numerous travels I have never once been asked
>"are you allergic to anything?..." "are you allergic to animals?" the fact
>being that i've been on several planes with animals and never once been
>asked.  Is this any more wrong than someone smuggling them on?  it doesn't
>matter how they get on the plane, your not going to know it until it's too
>late, unless by chance of happening to notice someone carrying the crate.
 
Generally when someone has an extreme medical condition they are expected
to make arrangements in advance for their care.  They may make a point of
requesting a flight with no animals on board and infore the airline itself
of the severity of their allergies.  The sixty dollars may not stop the
reaction from occuring, but documentation of the animal's presence on the
flight would give the other customer the opportunity to book another flight.
 
Beyond even that, I take it very personally when passengers in my car break
rules I have set for very specific reasons.  To them it may seem arbitrary,
but it's my car and they will abide by my rules, even if they are paying
for the gas.  As one person on the fml pointed out, it's their plane, their
rules.  It's always the one or two people who insist on bending the rules
(like not declaring an animal on a flight that actually allows them) that
get us all banned.
 
cjc
[Posted in FML issue 2921]