How to jerk an MD off an airliner, without going to jail ...

[sear]

By now you may have seen the video which has gone viral.

The video is of an Asian man being removed bodily & against his will from a commercial airliner.

And that extractee appears at times bloody, and at other times unconscious or non-responsive.

Tuesday's news reports indicate one of the three LEO has received disciplinary consequence.

FOR WHAT?!

I'm not endorsing the extraction.

I'm not endorsing the method or style of the extraction.

BUT !!

If the order was lawful, and

if the execution of the order was lawful,

then why punish one of the LEO in the trenches, doing the job,

and not the commander that gave the order?

Please bear in mind:

a) I have not seen the video in entirety.

b) I have not closely examined it.

c) I'm aware there may be extenuating circumstances. All are invited to post them.

Factor all that in, my topic question is:

If these law enforcement officers (LEO) were following orders, and

if those orders being followed were not illegal

and if police SOP was not violated in the execution of the extraction,

why punish the boots on the ground guys?

Does the airline, or police command bear no responsibility for this?

btw
The airline has already reportedly apologized at least 3 times.

[Abbey Marie]

I expect there is plenty of blame to go around for both United and the officer(s). And much depends on if the officer followed protocol or used excessive force, no?

To to be frank, I may be the only person who thinks this doctor has a share of the blame for resisting in the first place.

(Don't hate me, Rev!).

[Kathianne]

I expect there is plenty of blame to go around for both United and the officer(s). And much depends on if the officer followed protocol or used excessive force, no?

To to be frank, I may be the only person who thinks this doctor has a share of the blame for resisting in the first place.

(Don't hate me, Rev!).

I think there's been more than a few problems here. Like jury duty, 1. the 'randomness' in this case should have excused a doctor-provided he could prove he had rounds the next morning. 2. the implication that it was Chicago police, it was airport police, should have been made clear. Chicago PD does enough wrong, without adding to their list. 3. the airline should have kept raising the incentive to take their offer. 4. baring a change in allowing for bumping those paying, these types of 'volunteer opportunities' should be done before boarding-thus crews needing to get from point A to point B should be required to be at the gate more than an hour before boarding. 4. smears against the 'victim' should not have been allowed-his past problems were not relevant, it's not like he was trying to hijack the dang plane. 5. United leadership needs to go back to school regarding how to treat paying customers.

[sear]

"I may be the only person who thinks this doctor has a share of the blame for resisting in the first place." A #2

"1. the 'randomness' in this case should have excused a doctor-provided he could prove he had rounds the next morning." K #3

If I may split this baby in two:
This good doctor may have taken the hypocratic oath, which includes: "do no harm".

How can setting doctor's appointments and then not attending them be construed as not harmful.

///////////\\\\\\\\\\\

Other questions are raised.

Did our good doctor not have alphabet in his name? Smith MD?

My point in opening this topic:
It seems they're trying to snuff the blame out with the front-line troops.

I believe the blame belongs substantially further up the chain.

AND !!

If they treat firing this one COP as a solution, then the cause of the problem will remain embedded in the system, and they risk it happening again.

Their crocodile tears apology suggests to me they're more interested in stifling the bad publicity than they are in making it right.
But if they don't make this right, they deserve to fold like a cheap camera.

[Balu]

On our TV they said that it was worth 250,000 million $ loss for this air company. The passengers started returning tickets in mass.
(Thanks to Putin for this info)

[NightTrain]

United really screwed up.

The 4 seats that they needed for the other United crew should have been held and never given out - so that clearly was a mistake made by United employees. They offered $400, then $800 to entice passengers to give up their seats with no takers... a couple of articles said they last offered $1000 but no takers. Supposedly a computer randomly selected the 4 unlucky passengers, but I'm pretty sure that those 4 were bumped based on what price they paid for their ticket, their lack of travel history on United and not completely random. I guarantee that 1st Class wasn't involved in that lottery.

Considering that they've lost millions so far over this debacle, they would have been well advised to offer $2k and even $5k per passenger - they could have offloaded half the plane in short order with willing customers and everyone would have been happy.
Kathianne yeah, his personal past had nothing to do with anything and no one knew that beforehand but... did you see the shit this doctor had been involved in? Narcotic prescriptions for homo sex. Karma? He'll undoubtedly reap a few million for his troubles on United, but Karma came to mind. It always catches up to you.

There's been a few times that I was waiting to board an Alaska Airlines flight and they'd overbooked. I nabbed a free ticket anywhere they fly a few times over those deals when I had the luxury to delay for a few hours.

[Abbey Marie]

My feeling is this guy will reap way more financial benefit than his injuries warrant, with lots of punitive damages. Much worse, some law firm will get a huge undeserved payday.

Companies (and security guys) are made up of people, and people make mistakes all the time. I would hate to see a major airline be in financial trouble, a thought that so many I see on the Internet seem to salivate over.

If I was flying anywhere soon, I'd purposely buy United. :dunno:

[NightTrain]

My feeling is this guy will reap way more financial benefit than his injuries warrant, with lots of punitive damages. Much worse, some law firm will get a huge undeserved payday.

Companies (and security guys) are made up of people, and people make mistakes all the time. I would hate to see a major airline be in financial trouble, a thought that so many I see on the Internet seem to salivate over.

If I was flying anywhere soon, I'd purposely buy United. :dunno:

Yeah, mistakes do happen. United screwed up, but the real blame lies with the overzealous Airport Cop. They're not really cops and they really get gung-ho demonstrating their authority... my ex-wife got cuffed-n-stuffed by one back in '99 because he was hot to make his first arrest. Did I ever tell you that story?

[Abbey Marie]

Yeah, mistakes do happen. United screwed up, but the real blame lies with the overzealous Airport Cop. They're not really cops and they really get gung-ho demonstrating their authority... my ex-wife got cuffed-n-stuffed by one back in '99 because he was hot to make his first arrest. Did I ever tell you that story?

I so agree about some cops getting "overly-enthusiastic". It seems to happen a lot to those who don't see enough action, doesn't it?

I'm not sure about the story- please do tell! :cool:

[sear]

K #3 may have beaten me to it.

The biggest blunder here was allowing the to-be-bumped passengers to board in the first place. That was a HUGE blunder. & UAL is paying the penalty, reportedly in the $millions.

Other notes from this case:

Dr. Dao & his wife from Kentucky

Airport security, not police officers dragged Dr. Dao out of his seat.

Full investigation results due April 30.

Compensation for being bumped can range from a few $hundred up to $1,350.oo

[NightTrain]

I so agree about some cops getting "overly-enthusiastic". It seems to happen a lot to those who don't see enough action, doesn't it?

I'm not sure about the story- please do tell! :cool:

So back in '99 I was living in Fairbanks and flying weekly to Anchorage for work. As my wife was driving me to the airport to drop me off, we were in the middle of a huge argument... I can't remember what it was about, but we were both extremely pissed. I got out of the truck and stomped into the airport without even saying goodbye.

We both cooled down and patched things up that night on the phone, all was well.

I flew back the next night and went out to the truck to have a smoke while waiting for my luggage. She'd parked right in front of the drop-off area like everyone did until the airport cops came up and shooed you away. So I got into the truck and she was wearing nothing but a lingerie covered with one of my large arctic jackets.

She unzipped the top showing me some mighty fine cleavage and just then there was a rapping on the driver's window - there was an airport cop, about 22 years old or so, getting an eyeful of this half-naked chick. She cracked the window while zipping the jacket up all the way and he spluttered something about moving the truck over to short-term parking while we waited. No problem, I got out of the truck and said I'd be back with my bags.

The airport cop went back to his car and ran the plates to find out who owned the boobs he'd just seen, and it came back that she'd bounced a check for her license renewal, and so there was an administrative suspension on her license. Really not a big deal, but Fairbanks' Finest had his first lawbreaking criminal in his sights!

I came out, got in the truck, and within 100' he had us pulled over, lights & siren and everything. With his hand on his gun, he ordered her out of the truck and to assume the position against the vehicle. I told him this was crazy and that we had my young son at home whom she was breastfeeding. I was threatened with getting cuffed, too, if I didn't STFU and sit there quietly. I did - this kid was a loose cannon and there was no stopping this.

After a couple of minutes cuffing & stuffing her into the backseat of his car, he came up and told me to get the truck off airport property or he'd have it impounded, so I drove home and he drove her to the Fairbanks jail.

I walked in just as the phone was ringing off the hook - she was blubbering uncontrollably and told me everyone at the jail thought she was a hooker because she was wearing nothing but that skimpy outfit and a big jacket. They wouldn't give her any socks because she was so distraught and suspected she might be suicidal and hang herself - instead of the obvious reason that she was mortified beyond belief. Who knows what that airport cop told them when they booked her - this whole thing was madness.

Anyway, I loaded my infant son into the truck and we went down and bailed her out for like $250 or something. The charge was dismissed, of course, as soon as I paid the $35 check she'd bounced.

And the Happy Fun Time she'd had planned for us with the make-up sex didn't happen... she wasn't in the mood anymore.

And she never, ever, went anywhere again from home without being 100% fully clothed. Didn't stop her from bouncing checks, though, I think that's in her DNA.



Edit : This was my ex-wife - just to be clear that it wasn't Sharon!!

[Abbey Marie]

So back in '99 I was living in Fairbanks and flying weekly to Anchorage for work. As my wife was driving me to the airport to drop me off, we were in the middle of a huge argument... I can't remember what it was about, but we were both extremely pissed. I got out of the truck and stomped into the airport without even saying goodbye.

We both cooled down and patched things up that night on the phone, all was well.

I flew back the next night and went out to the truck to have a smoke while waiting for my luggage. She'd parked right in front of the drop-off area like everyone did until the airport cops came up and shooed you away. So I got into the truck and she was wearing nothing but a lingerie covered with one of my large arctic jackets.

She unzipped the top showing me some mighty fine cleavage and just then there was a rapping on the driver's window - there was an airport cop, about 22 years old or so, getting an eyeful of this half-naked chick. She cracked the window while zipping the jacket up all the way and he spluttered something about moving the truck over to short-term parking while we waited. No problem, I got out of the truck and said I'd be back with my bags.

The airport cop went back to his car and ran the plates to find out who owned the boobs he'd just seen, and it came back that she'd bounced a check for her license renewal, and so there was an administrative suspension on her license. Really not a big deal, but Fairbanks' Finest had his first lawbreaking criminal in his sights!

I came out, got in the truck, and within 100' he had us pulled over, lights & siren and everything. With his hand on his gun, he ordered her out of the truck and to assume the position against the vehicle. I told him this was crazy and that we had my young son at home whom she was breastfeeding. I was threatened with getting cuffed, too, if I didn't STFU and sit there quietly. I did - this kid was a loose cannon and there was no stopping this.

After a couple of minutes cuffing & stuffing her into the backseat of his car, he came up and told me to get the truck off airport property or he'd have it impounded, so I drove home and he drove her to the Fairbanks jail.

I walked in just as the phone was ringing off the hook - she was blubbering uncontrollably and told me everyone at the jail thought she was a hooker because she was wearing nothing but that skimpy outfit and a big jacket. They wouldn't give her any socks because she was so distraught and suspected she might be suicidal and hang herself - instead of the obvious reason that she was mortified beyond belief. Who knows what that airport cop told them when they booked her - this whole thing was madness.

Anyway, I loaded my infant son into the truck and we went down and bailed her out for like $250 or something. The charge was dismissed, of course, as soon as I paid the $35 check she'd bounced.

And the Happy Fun Time she'd had planned for us with the make-up sex didn't happen... she wasn't in the mood anymore.

And she never, ever, went anywhere again from home without being 100% fully clothed. Didn't stop her from bouncing checks, though, I think that's in her DNA.

Lol! This sounds like an object lesson, along the lines of "Always wear clean underwear in case you're in an accident".

I can't help but wonder if the cop hauled her in to get a longer look at her "assets".

Sorry about the loss of make-up sex. That's not-to-be-missed!

[sear]

PS A #9

"I so agree about some cops getting "overly-enthusiastic". It seems to happen a lot to those who don't see enough action, doesn't it?" A #9

Lord Acton is widely paraphrased as having said:

"Power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
BUT !!

It may be that power attracts the corruptible.

I'm sure there are COPs that choose their profession not despite the fact that it may mean applying physical force, but because of it.

But let's be clear:
these encounters can be deadly. Freddie Gray comes to mind. It seems the police first fractured his spine, and he was dead a few weeks later.

In retrospect:
if indeed this negative publicity has resulted in $millions in $losses (reportedly a lot of that in China), it would have been cheaper to UAL to leave Dr. Dao seated, and charter a flight for their own personnel.

This all is a near "perfect storm" of fup-upedness. Stupidity and poor training at numerous levels.

note:
A competent martial artist that understands pressure-points should be able to roust a passenger from a seat without drawing blood. The goose-neck come-along is but one example.
But these clowns weren't COPs. They were airport security guards. They may have had little or no training for this, and were apparently in over their heads with it.

[Kathianne]

My feeling is this guy will reap way more financial benefit than his injuries warrant, with lots of punitive damages. Much worse, some law firm will get a huge undeserved payday.

Companies (and security guys) are made up of people, and people make mistakes all the time. I would hate to see a major airline be in financial trouble, a thought that so many I see on the Internet seem to salivate over.

If I was flying anywhere soon, I'd purposely buy United. :dunno:

I usually agree that 'outrageous' compensation should not be given. In this case though, with videos being the rule of the day, he was humiliated not only on the plane, (not including all who saw this travesty being traumatized), the video of course went viral, (which will figure into his payoff). Most of these suits are people that did something really stupid, then blaming the company. This wasn't that.

I know what he was charged with, heck everyone now knows-adding to his payoff. Yes, he committed felonies, was punished, and still was being monitored. Again, this had nothing to do with that, again adding to his payoff since he will likely lose income from loss of patients or loss of new patients. Indeed, probably because he was in a probationary status, he really couldn't blow off showing up the next day.

I was bumped once from an American flight to CA where I was going to a course that began two days from then. They asked for volunteers while waiting at the gate for a free round trip ticket. After the plane was boarded, one of the attendants came up to me and said there were 'no shows,' so I was welcome to move to first class and I still got the round trip ticket. It was awesome! LOL!

All of those people on the plane should have been offered some sort of apology payment, in kind or cash. There was a teacher with a group of students who deboarded all of them when the man came running back onto the plane, all bloodied.

United handled this very badly, there is no excuse. Right now I'd avoid flying with them.

[Kathianne]

A step in the right direction: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/united-pledges-review-policies-removal-passengers-46743041


United: Airline won't use police to remove passengers

By DON BABWIN, ASSOCIATED PRESS

CHICAGO — Apr 12, 2017, 4:28 PM ET

...

In the future, law enforcement will not be involved in removing a "booked, paid, seated passenger," Munoz said. "We can't do that."
...

Munoz called the embarrassment a "system failure" and said United would reassess its procedures for seeking volunteers to give up their seats when a flight is full. United was trying to find seats for four employees, meaning four passengers had to deplane.


It was at least Munoz's fourth statement about the confrontation.


After the video first emerged, he said the airline was reaching out to the man to "resolve this situation."


Hours later on Monday, his tone turned defensive. He described the man as "disruptive and belligerent."


By Tuesday afternoon, almost two days after the Sunday evening events, Munoz issued another apology.


"No one should ever be mistreated this way," Munoz said.

...


Attorneys for Dao filed court papers Wednesday asking the airline and the city of Chicago to preserve evidence in the case. Those documents are often the first steps toward a lawsuit.


Airport officials have said little about Sunday's events and nothing about Dao's behavior before he was pulled from the jet that was bound for Louisville, Kentucky. Likewise, the Chicago Aviation Department has said only that one of its employees who removed Dao did not follow proper procedures and has been placed on leave.


No passengers on the plane have mentioned that Dao did anything but refuse to leave the plane when he was ordered to do so.
...



I just heard on FOX, Your World, that United has now offered cash payments to everyone that was on that flight.

[NightTrain]

Would have been cheaper in the long run to charter a private jet for every person on that plane by the time this is all finished.

Gramps used to tell me : "Boy, a good education is never cheap!".

[Kathianne]

Would have been cheaper in the long run to charter a private jet for every person on that plane by the time this is all finished.

Gramps used to tell me : "Boy, a good education is never cheap!".

Indeed, it certainly would have been cheaper to have chartered a plane for the flight crew or put them on another flight for full fares. However, the airline had the 'right' to do this at the time. They've been doing so for years, though not literally beating up a paying customer. My guess is we're now going to see new rules about both 'overbooking' and 'bumping for flight crews.'

[Abbey Marie]

Indeed, it certainly would have been cheaper to have chartered a plane for the flight crew or put them on another flight for full fares. However, the airline had the 'right' to do this at the time. They've been doing so for years, though not literally beating up a paying customer. My guess is we're now going to see new rules about both 'overbooking' and 'bumping for flight crews.'

Soon to be followed by higher fares for everyone.

[Kathianne]

Soon to be followed by higher fares for everyone.


People can choose how to travel. The costs should be what they are. Considering that United has been making 10's of billions in profits for the past several years does give one pause.

The whole 'making flying torture' began when United realized that by leaving one ingredient off of salads would save tens of thousands per day. The discovered that not feeding anyone outside of first class, saved much more.

I'm not anti-business, not at all. However I've also always said that companies that behave badly-whether to their employees, customers, vendors, etc., should pay a price. It's either hold each company responsible or get wholesale regulations.

[Abbey Marie]

People can choose how to travel. The costs should be what they are. Considering that United has been making 10's of billions in profits for the past several years does give one pause.

The whole 'making flying torture' began when United realized that by leaving one ingredient off of salads would save tens of thousands per day. The discovered that not feeding anyone outside of first class, saved much more.

I'm not anti-business, not at all. However I've also always said that companies that behave badly-whether to their employees, customers, vendors, etc., should pay a price. It's either hold each company responsible or get wholesale regulations.

That's fine, but people who want an overhaul of the overbooking policy need to accept the consequences, including higher fares. Can't have it both ways. But you know they will be the first to complain bitterly.

As for United, it was airport security that behaved badly. Perhaps United needs to overhaul these particular rules, but until then, they need to enforce their rules once expressed. Or end up like Obama drawing lines in the sand that people scoff at. We really do need order and compliance on our aircraft.

[Kathianne]

That's fine, but people who want an overhaul of the overbooking policy need to accept the consequences, including higher fares. Cant have it both ways. But you know they will be the first to complain bitterly.

As for United, it was airport security that behaved badly. Perhaps United needs to overhaul these particular rules, but until then, they need to enforce their rules once expressed. Or end up like Obama drawing lines in the sand that people scoff at. We really do need order and compliance on our aircraft.

We rarely disagree on things, but in this case we do. It was United that called in the airport police, which they now say they will not do again.

The airlines have gotten by with overbooking for years, at a huge increase to their profits. I doubt many complained about it, like me they could find someone or several to take a free round-trip, upgrades, etc. However, to call the airport police when a customer gave a valid reason for declining, they should have employed some commonsense. They didn't. Now the airport security perhaps should have suggested that commonsense prevail, "Look you attendents, start offering more money or see if one of the crew can jump seat. Do something, we are not your gestapo." But they did.

Then the CEO sends an email talking trash about the customer and 'standing behind the employees,' not genius move there.

[Gunny]

I usually agree that 'outrageous' compensation should not be given. In this case though, with videos being the rule of the day, he was humiliated not only on the plane, (not including all who saw this travesty being traumatized), the video of course went viral, (which will figure into his payoff). Most of these suits are people that did something really stupid, then blaming the company. This wasn't that.

I know what he was charged with, heck everyone now knows-adding to his payoff. Yes, he committed felonies, was punished, and still was being monitored. Again, this had nothing to do with that, again adding to his payoff since he will likely lose income from loss of patients or loss of new patients. Indeed, probably because he was in a probationary status, he really couldn't blow off showing up the next day.

I was bumped once from an American flight to CA where I was going to a course that began two days from then. They asked for volunteers while waiting at the gate for a free round trip ticket. After the plane was boarded, one of the attendants came up to me and said there were 'no shows,' so I was welcome to move to first class and I still got the round trip ticket. It was awesome! LOL!

All of those people on the plane should have been offered some sort of apology payment, in kind or cash. There was a teacher with a group of students who deboarded all of them when the man came running back onto the plane, all bloodied.

United handled this very badly, there is no excuse. Right now I'd avoid flying with them.Ha! I got bumped of a MAC flight at Hickam by a dead body!:laugh: I felt important. :laugh:

Airlines re ridiculous now. Somebody better have moments to live that I actually give a crap about to get me on a plane. They overbook on purpose. Then these planes they fly now? I have to sit almost sideways because of my shoulders. Guess I could book 2 seats.:rolleyes:

Didn't used to be like that. I remember when the stewardesses were nice to you and the plane had plenty of room. It's a bus ride now. Actually, you have more room on a bus. And I can't stand cops period so imagine where the wannabe's fall on the scale. We got a job at San Antonio airport and come walking in with our tools. I'm like really? You want us to go through the metal detector? We were working on the FBI office and only those of us that had clearances were allowed to begin with.

But Oh Hell NO. We get Inspector Cluseau at the door. Gee, J Edgar ... what do suppose is in the tool bag? Crayons? We don't us the llittle Tonk Tool set. And you bet I rode and ridiculed his ass. That made my day. :laugh2: He threatened to arrest me and I'm like for what? You're going to arrest me because you're a dumbass? :laugh2: The FBI guys actually came down and squared his ass away.

[revelarts]

...
United handled this very badly, there is no excuse. Right now I'd avoid flying with them.

that's the shorthand and bottom line.



Soon to be followed by higher fares for everyone.
so the price of lower fares is some passagers have to put up with getting their Asres kicked from time to time? seriously?

that's what i get out of that statement. sorry. that's just how i see what you said . i know you didn't "say" those words.
But the practical outworking is exactly that Abbey sorry. nothing personal Abbey but uh no, just nope.

Lets all thankfully eat craptastic even inhuman services as long as the fares stay low. 'th th thank you mr airlines, please let me fly with you, i won't cause no troubles... take my money... yes you can feel me up 1st.. and the baby and grandma too of course... thank you.. kick me off the plane no problem right away... sorry i bothered you vankyouuu ' shesh . i don't think so. this is crazy.

there's few if any other services that you PAY for the services but people expect the possibility of NOT getting it.
overbooking means they are being paid twice for the same singular service. what a racket.
the airlines only a few years back were caught colluding in price fixing schemes, lining their pockets at customers expense.
Now United has merged with Continental narrowing the competition even more meaning higher prices .. not out of necessity but for more profits.

I'm pro freemarket but this is the kind of stuff that makes the market 'self correct' a company (or an industry) into bankruptcy. IF there's enough competition..
Seems to me this incident is the epitome of SH**TY service and paying customers should NOT have to expect anything in the ballpark of this kind of treatment. Just the opposite. Every customer should be treated like GOLD. Because #1 they are human beings, 2. because the lifetime values of a customer is thousands or tens of thousands of dollars.
United was STUPID to do this. the officers were STUPID and thuggish and the Airline initial follow up was STUPID socially and business wise.

no customer is guaranteed.
Big Corps (much like the gov't) too often forget who's working for who.

[Kathianne]

that's the shorthand and bottom line.



so the price of lower fares is some passagers have to put up with getting their Asres kicked from time to time? seriously?

that's what i get out of that statement. sorry. that's just how i see what you said . i know you didn't "say" those words.
But the practical outworking is exactly that Abbey sorry. nothing personal Abbey but uh no, just nope.

Lets all thankfully eat craptastic even inhuman services as long as the fares stay low. 'th th thank you mr airlines, please let me fly with you, i won't cause no troubles... take my money... yes you can feel me up 1st.. and the baby and grandma too of course... thank you.. kick me off the plane no problem right away... sorry i bothered you vankyouuu ' shesh . i don't think so. this is crazy.

there's few if any other services that you PAY for the services but people expect the possibility of NOT getting it.
overbooking means they are being paid twice for the same singular service. what a racket.
the airlines only a few years back were caught colluding in price fixing schemes, lining their pockets at customers expense.
Now United has merged with Continental narrowing the competition even more meaning higher prices .. not out of necessity but for more profits.

I'm pro freemarket but this is the kind of stuff that makes the market 'self correct' a company (or an industry) into bankruptcy. IF there's enough competition..
Seems to me this incident is the epitome of SH**TY service and paying customers should NOT have to expect anything in the ballpark of this kind of treatment. Just the opposite. Every customer should be treated like GOLD. Because #1 they are human beings, 2. because the lifetime values of a customer is thousands or tens of thousands of dollars.
United was STUPID to do this. the officers were STUPID and thuggish and the Airline initial follow up was STUPID socially and business wise.

no customer is guaranteed.
Big Corps (much like the gov't) too often forget who's working for who.

I had to thank Rev's post, it highlights what my fear is towards this sort of mismanagement. It will be used to justify more 'regulations' that instead of acknowledging the wrongs and giving the market a chance to rectify, including no doubt paying out likely tens of millions.

If memory serves, one of the most heavily regulated industries, was given this 'perk' towards increased profits in overbooking and more quietly, the issues that arise via moving personnel from one locale to another where needed. The initial reaction of the CEO was so tone deaf it compounded the problems. 3 days later, seems he's getting it.

Now if all the airline managements came together and stated that they are implementing new, self-imposed rules at minimum that lack of available seats will be addressed prior to plane boarding. Indeed, that was the first big mistake in this instance and would have been very easy to avoid.

[revelarts]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/cc/e1/65/cce165133a021f40ca1c18e4c247d054.jpg

[Black Diamond]

They decided they didn't want Jack Soo on the plane anymore.

[sear]

At the 1:PM/ET hour, radio news reports Dr. Dao has suffered a concussion, a broken nose, and lost teeth in the UAL incident.

Dr. Dao is planning a law suit.

BUT !!

UAL would be crazy to let it go to trial. I would think UAL would wish to settle out of court, where often the $settlement $amount is by legal agreement, kept confidential.
If it goes to a jury, the whole world will know.

PS
This radio report also indicates there's now legal question about the "officers" (security guards) that performed the extraction even had legal authorization to board the plane to do so.

[revelarts]

http://media.giphy.com/media/QbqODGpw9yVGM/giphy.gif
United Airline Training Video.
Flight Attendant,
then Airport manager
then the CEO

[revelarts]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/242/248/a96.jpg

[Black Diamond]

A step in the right direction: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/united-pledges-review-policies-removal-passengers-46743041



I just heard on FOX, Your World, that United has now offered cash payments to everyone that was on that flight.
You know who looks like the biggest ass and why? You probably touched on it already, but the ceo whose initial statement was the passenger was being difficult, etc. then he reverses himself the next day....

Now he is offering cash payments??

[Kathianne]

You know who looks like the biggest ass and why? You probably touched on it already, but the ceo whose initial statement was the passenger was being difficult, etc. then he reverses himself the next day....

Now he is offering cash payments??


Interestingly the lawyers reading the 'fine print' have found that forcibly removing a passenger that's been boarded on a flight that wasn't overbooked, is NOT legal within the fine print. This flight wasn't 'overbooked' it was United's own personnel issues that was problematic for the airline.

That's going to hurt.

[Abbey Marie]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/242/248/a96.jpg


:laugh: That is too funny!

[Russ]

I expect there is plenty of blame to go around for both United and the officer(s). And much depends on if the officer followed protocol or used excessive force, no?

To to be frank, I may be the only person who thinks this doctor has a share of the blame for resisting in the first place.

(Don't hate me, Rev!).

You are not the only person thinking that way (as you know :cool:). Although I think United acted like idiots for trying to get seated passengers to get up and leave the plane, my primary thought when seeing this story was that this "doctor" is totally a symbol of how a large percentage of our country has devolved into a bunch of whining, crying, spoiled-brat, immature twerps.

First, in regard to United, they should not let people board until they are sure they don't need the seats for employees or anyone else. Once everyone is seating, they should consider the seats 'gone'. Bumping people who haven't boarded yet is so much simpler and low-risk. [NOTE - one end result of this event will be that everyone will have to wait 20 minutes longer before they are allowed to board their flights]

Second, in regard to the "doctor" - the video of this guy disgusts me. Would any of the guys on this board behave that way? I don't think so. The "doctor" whines like a baby, and resists getting up from his seat like a spoiled-brat 3-year-old. Maybe the video makes me less likely to buy United, but even more so it makes me think that if this guy were my doctor, I'd change doctors. It disgusts me even more that this guy will probably get a lot of money for acting like a brattish twerp. What happened to dignified behavior in this country?

And I have to say I feel bad for the security guys. I've seen the video, and they appear to be using as little force as they could, given that they'd been assigned the task of removing the guy from the airplane. The "doctor" received his injuries because of his own behavior, not because of overly aggressive security guys. I just hope that United doesn't try to throw these security guys under the bus, just for trying to do the task that United asked them to do.

[Russ]

United really screwed up.

The 4 seats that they needed for the other United crew should have been held and never given out - so that clearly was a mistake made by United employees.

NT, my impression is that United didn't know about the 4 employees need for seats until after the passengers had boarded, but I'm not sure. Even so, I kept wondering why the employees couldn't just stand up and serve drinks, like the flight attendants. :beer::cheers2:

[Abbey Marie]

NT, my impression is that United didn't know about the 4 employees need for seats until after the passengers had boarded, but I'm not sure. Even so, I kept wondering why the employees couldn't just stand up and serve drinks, like the flight attendants. :beer::cheers2:


Lol, it would probably end up being, "One for you, Two for me!"

[Russ]

We rarely disagree on things, but in this case we do. It was United that called in the airport police, which they now say they will not do again.

The airlines have gotten by with overbooking for years, at a huge increase to their profits. I doubt many complained about it, like me they could find someone or several to take a free round-trip, upgrades, etc. However, to call the airport police when a customer gave a valid reason for declining, they should have employed some commonsense. They didn't. Now the airport security perhaps should have suggested that commonsense prevail, "Look you attendents, start offering more money or see if one of the crew can jump seat. Do something, we are not your gestapo." But they did.

Then the CEO sends an email talking trash about the customer and 'standing behind the employees,' not genius move there.

Au contraire - I think I'd rather keep the lower fares and let them keep offering $800 (or tickets) to bump passengers. I don't like the idea of forcibly bumping people that are already seated, but I think this episode will be enough of a deterrent for them to stop doing that.

[Kathianne]

Au contraire - I think I'd rather keep the lower fares and let them keep offering $800 (or tickets) to bump passengers. I don't like the idea of forcibly bumping people that are already seated, but I think this episode will be enough of a deterrent for them to stop doing that.

I think this incident is going to cost United a bundle and likely result in more regulations.

[Russ]

So back in '99 I was living in Fairbanks and flying weekly to Anchorage for work. As my wife was driving me to the airport to drop me off, we were in the middle of a huge argument... I can't remember what it was about, but we were both extremely pissed. I got out of the truck and stomped into the airport without even saying goodbye.

We both cooled down and patched things up that night on the phone, all was well.

I flew back the next night and went out to the truck to have a smoke while waiting for my luggage. She'd parked right in front of the drop-off area like everyone did until the airport cops came up and shooed you away. So I got into the truck and she was wearing nothing but a lingerie covered with one of my large arctic jackets.

She unzipped the top showing me some mighty fine cleavage and just then there was a rapping on the driver's window - there was an airport cop, about 22 years old or so, getting an eyeful of this half-naked chick. She cracked the window while zipping the jacket up all the way and he spluttered something about moving the truck over to short-term parking while we waited. No problem, I got out of the truck and said I'd be back with my bags.

The airport cop went back to his car and ran the plates to find out who owned the boobs he'd just seen, and it came back that she'd bounced a check for her license renewal, and so there was an administrative suspension on her license. Really not a big deal, but Fairbanks' Finest had his first lawbreaking criminal in his sights!

I came out, got in the truck, and within 100' he had us pulled over, lights & siren and everything. With his hand on his gun, he ordered her out of the truck and to assume the position against the vehicle. I told him this was crazy and that we had my young son at home whom she was breastfeeding. I was threatened with getting cuffed, too, if I didn't STFU and sit there quietly. I did - this kid was a loose cannon and there was no stopping this.

After a couple of minutes cuffing & stuffing her into the backseat of his car, he came up and told me to get the truck off airport property or he'd have it impounded, so I drove home and he drove her to the Fairbanks jail.

I walked in just as the phone was ringing off the hook - she was blubbering uncontrollably and told me everyone at the jail thought she was a hooker because she was wearing nothing but that skimpy outfit and a big jacket. They wouldn't give her any socks because she was so distraught and suspected she might be suicidal and hang herself - instead of the obvious reason that she was mortified beyond belief. Who knows what that airport cop told them when they booked her - this whole thing was madness.

Anyway, I loaded my infant son into the truck and we went down and bailed her out for like $250 or something. The charge was dismissed, of course, as soon as I paid the $35 check she'd bounced.

And the Happy Fun Time she'd had planned for us with the make-up sex didn't happen... she wasn't in the mood anymore.

And she never, ever, went anywhere again from home without being 100% fully clothed. Didn't stop her from bouncing checks, though, I think that's in her DNA.



Edit : This was my ex-wife - just to be clear that it wasn't Sharon!!


Wow, what a story! Started on a down note, picked up big-time in the middle, but then the major downward-spiral after that. I guess the moral of the story is "pay off those checks", or maybe "drive off quickly before they can check your plates". I especially liked the "it wasn't Sharon!!" disclaimer at the end.

[Abbey Marie]

Yup.

https://youtu.be/8a9edl1gfAc

[revelarts]

Hey Russ WasSup.


...

Second, in regard to the "doctor" - the video of this guy disgusts me. Would any of the guys on this board behave that way? I don't think so. The "doctor" whines like a baby, and resists getting up from his seat like a spoiled-brat 3-year-old. Maybe the video makes me less likely to buy United, but even more so it makes me think that if this guy were my doctor, I'd change doctors. It disgusts me even more that this guy will probably get a lot of money for acting like a brattish twerp. What happened to dignified behavior in this country?

And I have to say I feel bad for the security guys. I've seen the video, and they appear to be using as little force as they could, given that they'd been assigned the task of removing the guy from the airplane. The "doctor" received his injuries because of his own behavior, not because of overly aggressive security guys. I just hope that United doesn't try to throw these security guys under the bus, just for trying to do the task that United asked them to do.

Sorry Rus this to me is one of those excuses like a wife beater uses.
"If She wasn't such whinny B**** i wouldn't have to smacked her around."
What does the brattiness of a paying customer have to do with the airline or the fine well trained professional LEOs sloppy thuggery.
It's like saying that a customer in a restaurant DESERVED to get his food spit in because he was whining like a baby about them not letting him eat the food he paid for.
WTH Russ?
the guy is not deserving of sympathy or a settlement for his injuries because he doesn't live up your standards of "dignity"?
I don't get that.

I don't get why so many, when the cops obviously beat the crap out of people for no good reason, always want to dig into the lives and personalities of the victims to smear them as much or MORE than the scmbag bad cops that have committed criminal assaults. If they didn't have badges on it would simply be assault.






SaveSave

[Gunny]

Hey Russ WasSup.



Sorry Rus this to me is one of those excuse like a wife beater uses.
"If She wasn't such whinny B**** i wouldn't have to smacked her around."
What does the brattiness of a paying customer have to do with the airline or the fine well trained professional LEOs sloppy thuggery.
It's like saying that a customer in a restaurant DESERVED to get his food spit in because he was whining like a baby about them not letting him eat the food he paid for.
WTH Russ?
the guy is not deserving of sympathy or a settlement for his injuries because he doesn't live up your standards of "dignity"?
I don't get that.

I don't get why so many, when the cops obviously beat the crap out of people for no good reason, always want to dig into the lives and personalities of the victims to smear them as much or MORE than the scmbag bad cops that have committed criminal assaults. If they didn't have badges on it would simply be assault.






SaveSave
Two different topics. I don't agree with removing a seated customer without cause. BUT .... like Russ, I can't stand adults who act like toddlers.

[Abbey Marie]

Two different topics. I don't agree with removing a seated customer without cause. BUT .... like Russ, I can't stand adults who act like toddlers.

You two would get along by great- Russ despises whining!

[revelarts]

Two different topics. I don't agree with removing a seated customer without cause. BUT .... like Russ, I can't stand adults who act like toddlers.

"removing a seated customer without cause."
that's a mild way to put it.

But OK, So which is worse Gunny?
knocking someones the teeth out while taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.

[Gunny]

You two would get along by great- Russ despises whining!Well, if he's starting a club tell him he"s got a life member already in the wings.

[Kathianne]

"removing a seated customer without cause."
that's a mild way to put it.

But OK, So which is worse Gunny?
knocking someones the teeth out taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.


I have to agree with this one, in this instance. I don't subscribe broadly regarding 'real police.' As always, 'there are bad cops, most are not.'

[revelarts]

Hey Russ WasSup.
....
I don't get why so many, when the cops obviously beat the crap out of people for no good reason, always want to dig into the lives and personalities of the victims to smear them as much or MORE than the scmbag bad cops that have committed criminal assaults. If they didn't have badges on it would simply be assault.
Save
Save


And i never said ALL cops. I never have.

[Gunny]

"removing a seated customer without cause."
that's a mild way to put it.

But OK, So which is worse Gunny?
knocking someones the teeth out while taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.I don't think there's a "right" here. I don't agree wit what the rent a cops nor the airlines did. I also don't agree with the immature reaction that escalated the situation. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[sear]

G #47

In the United States of America, there's an thin and implausible pretense of egalitarianism.

And the flag of that egalitarianism flies majestically on Guano Mountain.

R.H.I.P.

We treat the POTUS differently than we treat the guy that sleeps in a cardboard box on the sidewalk.

And we have a tradition of bending the rules to favor MD's.

I'm not justifying it. I'm acknowledging it.

Causing Dr. Dao to miss his scheduled appointments has a more severe impact on our society than causing Mr. Smith to miss the birthday party.

G #47 may have expressed it wisely, in terms of a right.

BUT !!

Is there not a contract involved? A passenger agrees to pay ticket price, in exchange for reasonable effort for the airline to fulfill their end of the bargain?

I'm a recreational pilot. I like flying. But I haven't flown commercial since 09/11/01, and I intend never to do so.

[Gunny]

G #47

In the United States of America, there's an thin and implausible pretense of egalitarianism.

And the flag of that egalitarianism flies majestically on Guano Mountain.

R.H.I.P.

We treat the POTUS differently than we treat the guy that sleeps in a cardboard box on the sidewalk.

And we have a tradition of bending the rules to favor MD's.

I'm not justifying it. I'm acknowledging it.

Causing Dr. Dao to miss his scheduled appointments has a more severe impact on our society than causing Mr. Smith to miss the birthday party.

G #47 may have expressed it wisely, in terms of a right.

BUT !!

Is there not a contract involved? A passenger agrees to pay ticket price, in exchange for reasonable effort for the airline to fulfill their end of the bargain?

I'm a recreational pilot. I like flying. But I haven't flown commercial since 09/11/01, and I intend never to do so.I do not disagree. I pay for a plant ticket and show up early enough to get seated, I expect my ride. However, I'm not going to throw a hissy fit. I am very stoic and have a horrid temper. I'm not allowed to lose it. And i'm certainly not going to act like a damned baby.

The airlines would pay. This is costing UA WAY more than that seat was worth. Not only in punitive damages but reputation as well. Was it worth it? Over one seat? I'm thinking no.

It still doesn't excuse the behavior of the individual.

[revelarts]

I don't think there's a "right" here. I don't agree wit what the rent a cops nor the airlines did. I also don't agree with the immature reaction that escalated the situation. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Gunny please don't dodge.
I didn't say either was right. lets agree both are wrong, what I asked is, which is WORSE?
knocking someones the teeth out while taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.

since you didn't really give a strait answer I'm left to guess what you think.

IMO there's not even a question. the bully and thief is worse than a whiner.
At worse a whiner is annoying the other is an aggressive violent thief.

the so called undignified whining is nearly a complete NON-issue in this case.
If it had been a woman or and older person
or handicapped vet standing his ground/seat in a "dignified" way
i get the impression from some of the comments that some here would still find some fault with the person who gets their teeth knocked out.

[sear]

G #49

That's fine.
But the distinction I was trying to make was:

- Personal preference: - I wanna attend the party - and

- Professional responsibility: - I'm an MD, I have the power of life & death over my patients, and a duty to keep them alive -

I'm not saying all parties handled it perfectly.

BUT !!

The "good doctor *" did try to communicate his justification for priority. The rent-a-cops ignored him.

BUT !!

You've given me a potentially $huge $money $making $idea for the airlines.

Perhaps they should have a two tier ticket price schedule:

- One lower ticket price, that's almost guaranteed to get the passenger to destination without being bumped. AND !!

- A higher ticket price, the premium paid as insurance against being bumped the way UAL tried w/ Dr. Dao. [I realize, 1st class (& frequent) fliers already are less likely to get bumped.]

a) It would help airlines dodge public relations nightmares like this.

b) It could substantially $jazz $up their revenue stream.

c) It could help reduce obstinance of bumpees like Dr. Dao.

* I know. He's been in court before. That doesn't negate his professional responsibility.

[Gunny]

Gunny please don't dodge.
I didn't say either was right. lets agree both are wrong, what I asked is, which is WORSE?
knocking someones the teeth out while taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.

since you didn't really give a strait answer I'm left to guess what you think.

IMO there's not even a question. the bully and thief is worse than a whiner.
At worse a whiner is annoying the other is an aggressive violent thief.

the so called undignified whining is nearly a complete NON-issue in this case.
If it had been a woman or and older person
or handicapped vet standing his ground/seat in a "dignified" way
i get the impression from some of the comments that some here would still find some fault with the person who gets their teeth knocked out.What exactly am i dodging? I've addressed the issue from both sides. There is no "worse". You're making a mountain out of a molehill. As usual. I despise bullies. Try growing up with one for a father. But I refused to cry in front of that f*cker. I put him through closet door in the end. Never touched me again.

BUT ... I know how to choose a battle and when and where. I avoid authority. You're not going to win. They always do. So it isn't about right n wrong nor what you perceive as "worse". It's about reality. You trap me in a cabin with morons? Bring body bags. The first click with me is "Is it worth it?" A $200 seat vs my freedom? I'll walk away. I got nothing to prove.

[Kathianne]

Delta came out with, (I think a questionable), announcement that they have given their crews the ability to offer nearly $10k incentive to give up seats. Now that people know the 'cap' there won't be takers for less.

Not expensive just for United.

As I said before, I think this is going to result in more regulations, which is not necessarily good for the many.

Personally I think that businesses that make very idiotic decisions, whether it's locking doors after their workers enter, then get caught in an 'accidental fire,' and many are needlessly killed or an airline that treats its immature passengers badly, the businesses should pay the price. When warranted, they should face criminal prosecution.

Industries shouldn't be punished by the decisions of one.

Delta is now trying to head off the backlash, others will follow in some form.

[Abbey Marie]

Delta came out with, (I think a questionable), announcement that they have given their crews the ability to offer nearly $10k incentive to give up seats. Now that people know the 'cap' there won't be takers for less.

Not expensive just for United.

As I said before, I think this is going to result in more regulations, which is not necessarily good for the many.

Personally I think that businesses that make very idiotic decisions, whether it's locking doors after their workers enter, then get caught in an 'accidental fire,' and many are needlessly killed or an airline that treats its immature passengers badly, the businesses should pay the price. When warranted, they should face criminal prosecution.

Industries shouldn't be punished by the decisions of one.

Delta is now trying to head off the backlash, others will follow in some form.

Yes, the whole industry will suffer. And as I've said, the consumer will suffer as well. All over one instance. This is what happens when social media blows up with hysterical people calling for blood. We get blood.

[Abbey Marie]

Did anyone look at the video I posted? Did you not think the guy made any valid points? For those who did not, it shows Dr Dao's behavior leading up to the incident.

And Rev, why does Gunny need to say which is worse? Two wrongs do not make a right. There is blame to go around.

[sear]

Social media may have played a role here. But in deference to Marshall McLuhan, the medium is not the message.
I've NEVER done social media, and I understand the issue, and have seen video from the incident.

Passengers that would not be aboard upon destination arrival should never have been permitted to board in the first place. The air carrier boinked up here.

[Russ]

Hey Russ WasSup.

Sorry Rus this to me is one of those excuses like a wife beater uses.
"If She wasn't such whinny B**** i wouldn't have to smacked her around."
What does the brattiness of a paying customer have to do with the airline or the fine well trained professional LEOs sloppy thuggery.
It's like saying that a customer in a restaurant DESERVED to get his food spit in because he was whining like a baby about them not letting him eat the food he paid for.
WTH Russ?
the guy is not deserving of sympathy or a settlement for his injuries because he doesn't live up your standards of "dignity"?
I don't get that.

I don't get why so many, when the cops obviously beat the crap out of people for no good reason, always want to dig into the lives and personalities of the victims to smear them as much or MORE than the scmbag bad cops that have committed criminal assaults. If they didn't have badges on it would simply be assault.

SaveSave


Hey Rev, WasSup!


Good to see you back around. :) If I had seen anyone in the video hitting the guy, or doing anything else other than trying to remove him from his seat, I would agree with you. But the video I saw only showed them trying to pull him out of his seat, and then dragging him down the aisle. As far as I can tell, the guy's injuries must all have happened when they finally separated him from the seat that he was clutching onto with both hands, and his head hit on an armrest. I don't like that either, but in my opinion the security guys used the minimum force necessary to get him out the the seat. If there is some other video showing further force being applied to the guy, then I'm open to changing my mind.

Don't forget that I said in my previous post that I think United is a bunch of idiots for even trying to remove seated passengers from their seats. I'm not an apologist for them. I think they should have made other plans for their employees, such as having them stand in the aisles and serve drinks, like extra attendants. And I don't like seeing the guy get injured; I just really think he was behaving badly. I really don't equate him with abused spouses or victims of brutality.

How bad would it be if he didn't get home that day? I don't know - but unless he's never taken a sick day, it wouldn't be any worse than that. I like to hear if he's taken any sick days in the last year.

I guess my main statement is just that if most guys had been in this situation, they might have been unhappy but would have taken their luggage, their $800, and peacefully gotten off the plane. They wouldn't have said "you can't make me!", and started clutching the arms of their seat and squealing like a 4-year-old. And now we're going to have more people acting like this after this guy gets rewarded.

[Russ]

Delta came out with, (I think a questionable), announcement that they have given their crews the ability to offer nearly $10k incentive to give up seats. Now that people know the 'cap' there won't be takers for less.

Not expensive just for United.



Good point, Kathianne, but a lot of people will accept for less just because they're afraid some other passengers will take the offer when it's still at the $2k level.

[Russ]

Gunny please don't dodge.
I didn't say either was right. lets agree both are wrong, what I asked is, which is WORSE?
knocking someones the teeth out while taking away something that a person paid for
or
an immature adult whining about not getting what he paid for.

since you didn't really give a strait answer I'm left to guess what you think.

IMO there's not even a question. the bully and thief is worse than a whiner.
At worse a whiner is annoying the other is an aggressive violent thief.

the so called undignified whining is nearly a complete NON-issue in this case.
If it had been a woman or and older person
or handicapped vet standing his ground/seat in a "dignified" way
i get the impression from some of the comments that some here would still find some fault with the person who gets their teeth knocked out.

But in this case, there would have been no bully if the thief hadn't clutched his seat and said "You will have to bully me to get me out of this seat!"

I'm also wondering how this guy lost teeth and got a concussion, from the video that I saw. Is there something terrible that happened that didn't make it to video?

[sear]

"I think they should have made other plans for their employees, such as having them stand in the aisles and serve drinks, like extra attendants." R #57

Clever, resourceful, but probably illegal.
I'm not absolutely certain, but I gather FAA regulations require by law that everyone aboard, including passengers and crew each have both a seat, and a seatbelt.

SRO is allowed on Broadway, but not on airliners.

[Gunny]

Social media may have played a role here. But in deference to Marshall McLuhan, the medium is not the message.
I've NEVER done social media, and I understand the issue, and have seen video from the incident.

Passengers that would not be aboard upon destination arrival should never have been permitted to board in the first place. The air carrier boinked up here.First, I hate to dial you in but this board is social media.

Second, no one has agreed the airline was right. We're just not letting clown boy off the hook either. Had the issue been a one sided affair, I'd be totally on his side. I hate rent-a-cops and airlines. I can't stand crybabies. I'm the retired jarhead here, remember? I don't want to hear no damned crying. Suck the crap up and deal. And act like you got a pair.

As for the rest, I agree with Kath ... just going to create more damned rules.

[sear]

"this board is social media." G #61

Whatever you say.

a) I've never heard topical message boards called that, but whatever you say.

b) I thought "social media" was like FacePlant, and ButtPage, and those stupid sites where drunks post their personal private information for the entire cosmos to view.

It's not clear to me what's "social" about this medium; but thrice: whatever you say.

[Gunny]

"this board is social media." G #61

Whatever you say.

a) I've never heard topical message boards called that, but whatever you say.

b) I thought "social media" was like FacePlant, and ButtPage, and those stupid sites where drunks post their personal private information for the entire cosmos to view.

It's not clear to me what's "social" about this medium; but thrice: whatever you say.You're preaching to the choir. I don't go on any of that crap. This board and youtube comprise my social media. However, you are interacting socially with the people on this boards through a media format.

And we are quite social. You suffer from "anyone that disagrees with me hates me so I will hate them back and hold a grudge" syndrome. Dude, I forget you the second I change threads. Most of us do that on this board. There's not one person on this board I haven't been to knock-down drag out war with. Except maybe Abbey. I look at it same as I did martial arts. I'm here to kick your ass. I'll help you up at the end of the match.

Most of the people here can be the best of friends. IF you let them. I used to not. I was always angry and smarter than everyone else. I was off the net PERIOD for several years. But it wasn't everyone else I needed to get a grip on. It was me. I came back on MY terms. Yeah, I flash my temper every so often, but I learned how to just walk away. I can log out in a second.

Food for thought.

[sear]

"you are interacting socially with the people on this boards through a media format.
And we are quite social." G

While I revere the OED as the gold standard for English language dictionaries, AHD is my preference for American English; the source of the following quoted definition:

social media
<header class="main-header oneClick-disabled cts-disabled head-medium">


Examples (http://www.debatepolicy.com/source-example-sentences)
Word Origin (http://www.debatepolicy.com/source-word-origin)


</header> <section class="def-pbk ce-spot" data-collapse-expand="{&quot;target&quot;: &quot;.def-set&quot;, &quot;type&quot;: &quot;def&quot;}"> <header class="luna-data-header"> noun, ( usually used with a plural verb) Digital Technology. </header>
websites and other online means of communication that are used by large groups of people to share information and to develop social and professional contacts: Many businesses are utilizing social media to generate sales. *
Since the previous millennium I've thought of it as "recreational", or perhaps "amateur", but not social.
My bad.
It's because I don't care about ad hom considerations. My attention is focused on the topic, with distinct preference for interesting, and or informative pov.

On Facebook I gather (but do not know) sites use real names, not pseudonyms, etc, and flaunt themselves, not others. [Don't know. Mine is an ignorant opinion. I've never checked it. What I know of it is from screen-grabs from TV.]

In any case I concede the point. AHD seems to support your point. Thank you for the correction.

"You suffer from "anyone that disagrees with me hates me so I will hate them back and hold a grudge" syndrome. *

You couldn't possibly be more wrong. I have nowhere near the emotional investment necessary to have passion about posters.
You for example have posted lies about me (including the one I just refuted), and been gratuitously discourteous to me. If I was the type to hold a grudge, don't you think I'd have put you on ignore by now?

I sincerely appreciate your military service. And I've recently inferred you have significant possibly service connected disability.
It is not in my nature to turn my back on such persons, though I reserve my right to ignore posts that are topic content free (generally ad hom).

No problem G.
Harbor any character disparaging delusion about me you like.
But you were constructive enough to correct me on "social media". I'd be less than candid if I didn't correct you on your grotesquely wide of the mark mischaracterization of me.



</section>

You may be the best martial artist ever born. But you are CLEARLY no psychologist. Not in training. Not in aptitude.

* http://www.dictionary.com/browse/social-media

[Gunny]

"you are interacting socially with the people on this boards through a media format.
And we are quite social." G

While I revere the OED as the gold standard for English language dictionaries, AHD is my preference for American English; the source of the following quoted definition:

Since the previous millennium I've thought of it as "recreational", or perhaps "amateur", but not social.
My bad.
It's because I don't care about ad hom considerations. My attention is focused on the topic, with distinct preference for interesting, and or informative pov.

On Facebook I gather (but do not know) sites use real names, not pseudonyms, etc, and flaunt themselves, not others. [Don't know. Mine is an ignorant opinion. I've never checked it. What I know of it is from screen-grabs from TV.]

In any case I concede the point. AHD seems to support your point. Thank you for the correction.

"You suffer from "anyone that disagrees with me hates me so I will hate them back and hold a grudge" syndrome. *

You couldn't possibly be more wrong. I have nowhere near the emotional investment necessary to have passion about posters.
You for example have posted lies about me (including the one I just refuted), and been gratuitously discourteous to me. If I was the type to hold a grudge, don't you think I'd have put you on ignore by now?

I sincerely appreciate your military service. And I've recently inferred you have significant possibly service connected disability.
It is not in my nature to turn my back on such persons, though I reserve my right to ignore posts that are topic content free (generally ad hom).

No problem G.
Harbor any character disparaging delusion about me you like.
But you were constructive enough to correct me on "social media". I'd be less than candid if I didn't correct you on your grotesquely wide of the mark mischaracterization of me.





You may be the best martial artist ever born. But you are CLEARLY no psychologist. Not in training. Not in aptitude.

* http://www.dictionary.com/browse/social-mediaSo YOU are the martial artist? I'm not the one calling someone else a liar because they disagree with me. Your response is emotional. Some martial artist. And I had to know psychology for my job as a Marine, Strike Two.

Strike 3 ... I harbor no delusions about you. I may bust your chops but that's about all it's worth. Look at all the long term members here ... they'll ride my ass and I just go along. They EARNED that position. YOU have not. EARN the position.

You're not going to change the world on DP. You CAN make some friends. Try it.

[sear]

"Your response is emotional." G #65

The lies continue.

[Gunny]

"Your response is emotional." G #65

The lies continue.Lame. I'm about as emotional as a stick. I'm trying to get you to quit making enemies of good people. I have 2 emotions -- detached and pissed off. I can tell you this ... I don't know where the fuck your lame ass is from, but calling someone a liar down here will get you shot. I see you for exactly what you are. Some self important piece if shit. You don't even ever know what the fuck you're rambling about.

Don't fuck with me. I'll hand you your ass and you won't know what happened. I got references. Play fucking nice, asshole. If you call me a liar again I'm going to embarrass you and rip you from head to toe. You want to talk shit? You picked the wrong motherfucker.

You don't know nothing about not caring.

[sear]

"I'm about as emotional as a stick." G

a) piffle

b) "as emotional as a stick" and as sharp as a bowling ball.

G-man,
bud-A!

You've repeatedly attributed to emotion, where the Ockham's Razor explanation lies elsewhere.

I have no wish to squabble.

The emperor has no clothes. You think you're competent to distinguish emotion from objective analysis on my part.

You've repeatedly failed, and aren't smart enough to know it.

I've already warned you:

"Don't show your @$$." comedienne Wanda Sykes quoting her mother's advice to her

The one you're embarrassing is you.

"I'm trying to get you to quit making enemies of good people. I have 2 emotions -- detached and pissed off. I can tell you this ... I don't know where the fuck your lame ass is from, but calling someone a liar down here will get you shot." G

Well that's just extra special cupcake.

In New York we tell it like it is; EVEN if that means calling a liar on it.


"I see you for exactly what you are." http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1 http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1 http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1

E X C E L S I O R !!!

[Gunny]

"I'm about as emotional as a stick." G

a) piffle

b) "as emotional as a stick" and as sharp as a bowling ball.

G-man,
bud-A!

You've repeatedly attributed to emotion, where the Ockham's Razor explanation lies elsewhere.

I have no wish to squabble.

The emperor has no clothes. You think you're competent to distinguish emotion from objective analysis on my part.

You've repeatedly failed, and aren't smart enough to know it.

I've already warned you:

"Don't show your @$$." comedienne Wanda Sykes quoting her mother's advice to her

The one you're embarrassing is you.

"I'm trying to get you to quit making enemies of good people. I have 2 emotions -- detached and pissed off. I can tell you this ... I don't know where the fuck your lame ass is from, but calling someone a liar down here will get you shot." G

Well that's just extra special cupcake.

In New York we tell it like it is; EVEN if that means calling a liar on it.


"I see you for exactly what you are." http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1 http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1 http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9868&stc=1

E X C E L S I O R !!!Only one looking the fool here is YOU, junior. Don't take your inability to understand when someone is trying to be nice to you and extend a hand cloud your judgement any further. You can't hang on your best day and my worst. You don't even know how to use the quote function properly. Start from there. A - B - C - D - E - F - G ........ Then when you climb out of those Huggies after master that alphabet thingy, I might let you take on my 4 years old granddaughter.

[Russ]

I just read that "Doctor" David Dao still hasn't headed home to Kentucky, despite being discharged from the hospital 3 1/2 days ago. What happened to his altruistic concern for his patients? They've been waiting for over a week now, for the life-saving hands of David Dao to come and save them. Now they're sitting in Kentucky, waiting in vain for Dr. Dao and getting sicker by the day, while the doctor just "hangs out" in Chicago.

I guess that while Dao considers his patients more important than respecting authority (or maintaining any personal dignity), he does not consider them more important than spending time with his new-found lawyer friends. And in the meantime he's enjoying himself playing poker and handing out illegal pain-killer prescriptions for money and kinky sex. :laugh:

[DLT]

By now you may have seen the video which has gone viral.

The video is of an Asian man being removed bodily & against his will from a commercial airliner.

And that extractee appears at times bloody, and at other times unconscious or non-responsive.

Tuesday's news reports indicate one of the three LEO has received disciplinary consequence.

FOR WHAT?!

I'm not endorsing the extraction.

I'm not endorsing the method or style of the extraction.

BUT !!

If the order was lawful, and

if the execution of the order was lawful,

then why punish one of the LEO in the trenches, doing the job,

and not the commander that gave the order?

Please bear in mind:

a) I have not seen the video in entirety.

b) I have not closely examined it.

c) I'm aware there may be extenuating circumstances. All are invited to post them.

Factor all that in, my topic question is:

If these law enforcement officers (LEO) were following orders, and

if those orders being followed were not illegal

and if police SOP was not violated in the execution of the extraction,

why punish the boots on the ground guys?

Does the airline, or police command bear no responsibility for this?

btw
The airline has already reportedly apologized at least 3 times.


Seriously..... this United fiasco has provided yet another opportunity for the study of human nature. It's fascinating. When this story first broke, I was amazed at how many "supposedly righties" started pontificating about how the airlines was perfectly within its rights to have done what they did ....and however they did it....even without all of the facts of the case yet revealed. Even to the point of demonizing Dao in the defense of United. Still shaking my head in disbelief at how anyone that calls themselves a Republican OR a conservative could have given United a carte blanche pass on this incident.

[Abbey Marie]

Seriously..... this United fiasco has provided yet another opportunity for the study of human nature. It's fascinating. When this story first broke, I was amazed at how many "supposedly righties" started pontificating about how the airlines was perfectly within its rights to have done what they did ....and however they did it....even without all of the facts of the case yet revealed. Even to the point of demonizing Dao in the defense of United. Still shaking my head in disbelief at how anyone that calls themselves a Republican OR a conservative could have given United a carte blanche pass on this incident.

I'm not sure who you have interacted with about this, but no one here has given United a "carte blanche pass".

As for demonizing Dao, when the shoe fits, you wear it.

[sear]

"Doctor" David Dao still hasn't headed home to Kentucky, despite being discharged from the hospital 3 1/2 days ago. What happened to his altruistic concern for his patients? They've been waiting for over a week now, for the life-saving hands of David Dao to come and save them. Now they're sitting in Kentucky, waiting in vain for Dr. Dao and getting sicker by the day, while the doctor just "hangs out" in Chicago." R #70

The appointments were missed.
If there are more appointments he needs to get back to attend, he'd have reason to.
If not, they'll reschedule.

Meanwhile if he's licensed to practice medicine, I think he can figure out efficient time management.

"I guess that while Dao considers his patients more important than respecting authority (or maintaining any personal dignity), he does not consider them more important than spending time with his new-found lawyer friends." R #70

That's most likely a wrong guess.

a) It isn't the good doctor that's come around to the airline's perspective on it.
The airline has come around to the doctor's.

b) Doctors and lawyers, professionals, often socialize.

D #71

Agreed. This is the kind of story that sells newspapers.

"no one here has given United a "carte blanche pass".
As for demonizing Dao, when the shoe fits, you wear it." A #72

Some that do not post here may have. In addition, read post #70.

[Russ]

"Doctor" David Dao still hasn't headed home to Kentucky, despite being discharged from the hospital 3 1/2 days ago. What happened to his altruistic concern for his patients? They've been waiting for over a week now, for the life-saving hands of David Dao to come and save them. Now they're sitting in Kentucky, waiting in vain for Dr. Dao and getting sicker by the day, while the doctor just "hangs out" in Chicago." R #70

The appointments were missed.
If there are more appointments he needs to get back to attend, he'd have reason to.
If not, they'll reschedule.

Meanwhile if he's licensed to practice medicine, I think he can figure out efficient time management.

"I guess that while Dao considers his patients more important than respecting authority (or maintaining any personal dignity), he does not consider them more important than spending time with his new-found lawyer friends." R #70

That's most likely a wrong guess.

a) It isn't the good doctor that's come around to the airline's perspective on it.
The airline has come around to the doctor's.

b) Doctors and lawyers, professionals, often socialize.

D #71

Agreed. This is the kind of story that sells newspapers.

"no one here has given United a "carte blanche pass".
As for demonizing Dao, when the shoe fits, you wear it." A #72

Some that do not post here may have. In addition, read post #70.


I will call out Dao for bad behavior if I choose to. And at no point have I given United a carte blanche pass for anything. I think (and have said) that they behaved badly also. My posts focus on Dao because his bad behavior is overlooked by most people, and is a large factor in what happened to him. I also suspect (but don't know) that his excuse of being a doctor and patients needing him was a lie, and that suspicion seems to be getting confirmed by his current behavior.

It is clear from your post that you give him a pass for anything he's done or ever will do.

[sear]

"I also suspect (but don't know) that his excuse of being a doctor and patients needing him was a lie" R #74

News reaching my part of the State of New York confirms his doctoral status via reports that:

a) He's fairly well known in his location of practice, and

b) that it's well publicized that he was convicted of a prescription drug for sex racket, which resulted in the suspension of his license to practice medicine.

"and that suspicion seems to be getting confirmed by his current behavior." R #74

You've previously explained your reasoning on that, and I've previously debunked it.

"It is clear from your post that you give him a pass for anything he's done or ever will do." R

You had an opportunity to make a valid point here, but because you expressed it in such extreme, absurd terms, you've rendered your posted comment false.

My posted words were:

a) "It isn't the good doctor that's come around to the airline's perspective on it.
The airline has come around to the doctor's." s

That is far from: "you give him a pass for anything he's done or ever will do."

[Gunny]

Seriously..... this United fiasco has provided yet another opportunity for the study of human nature. It's fascinating. When this story first broke, I was amazed at how many "supposedly righties" started pontificating about how the airlines was perfectly within its rights to have done what they did ....and however they did it....even without all of the facts of the case yet revealed. Even to the point of demonizing Dao in the defense of United. Still shaking my head in disbelief at how anyone that calls themselves a Republican OR a conservative could have given United a carte blanche pass on this incident.I was and am not giving UA a pass. I can't stand civilian authority. I REALLY hate the TSA. I in no way think what was done by them was right nor smart. Looks like it's costing them more than plane ride. And a MD can afford the price of suing them.

I'm just not willing to excuse the other end of the deal. Act like a man. Use your head and use your edge. You aren't going to win an argument with an idiot with a badge. THAT is reality. You take them down later. Fighting them just gives them cause to pile charges on and they, at the time, have the authority, agree or not. If you don't like the rules? Change the rules. Do you suppose DR D*ckhead is going to spend one dime of the punitive damages trying to change the rules? Or do you think he'll go to Honolulu on vacation?

[sear]

G #76

Is there a plausible explanation less flattering to the doctor than that?

I'm not fluent in ancient Greek or Latin.
But there's an ancient Latin legal maxim that translates to: No reputation is a good reputation.
It's much akin to our presumption of innocence among our standards of jurisprudence.

G #76 may be right.
But it's also possible the doctor was determined to keep his schedule.
Reports of the incident indicate the doctor specifically stated that, perhaps they knocked his teeth out and gave him a concussion.

Fine. So he's no choir boy.
But being guilty of something doesn't render him guilty of everything.

And if the doctor is such a bad guy, why has UAL so quickly announced a new policy that no paying passenger will be bumped, not just once they're seated, but according to the report I got of it, once that passenger boards the plane.

However evil the doctor is, this all would be a non-story if UAL had reserved enough seats for their priority passengers (employees) so physical extraction would not have been necessary.

But I agree w/ G's implication the rent-a-cops acted like thugs.

Giving them also the benefit of doubt, I'll presume they're not willful thugs like the Rodney King beaters, but simply lacked the training for this specific task.
There's no reason a trained enforcer could not perform such extraction without inflicting need for medical attention (in this case, reportedly hospitalization).

[Russ]

"I also suspect (but don't know) that his excuse of being a doctor and patients needing him was a lie" R #74

News reaching my part of the State of New York confirms his doctoral status via reports that:

a) He's fairly well known in his location of practice, and

b) that it's well publicized that he was convicted of a prescription drug for sex racket, which resulted in the suspension of his license to practice medicine.

"and that suspicion seems to be getting confirmed by his current behavior." R #74

You've previously explained your reasoning on that, and I've previously debunked it.



Ha! I have to chuckle when I see you say that you've "previously debunked" someone else's statement. Half the time you've previously made a weak argument, and the other time you've made no argument at all. It's like you're living in a world of your own. No offense.

[sear]

"Ha! I have to chuckle when I see you say that you've "previously debunked" someone else's statement. Half the time you've previously made a weak argument, and the other time you've made no argument at all." R #78

The latter in this case.
There's no need to litigate the squabble.
Instead I called attention to the intrinsic nature of refutation and persuasion, and observed that the words against me were entirely unsubstantiated accusation, essentially groundless insult.

Perhaps a person that performs to your standards would simply counter-insult: I'm the doody-head?! No! YOU are the doody-head!

Splendid.
I'm a little past that.

"It's like you're living in a world of your own." R

I substantially am.
But that's immaterial.
The standards I apply are those that prevail in any competent high school debate.
It may be my own world. But they are not my own rules, even if these widely respected standards are rare in this forum.

"No offense." R #78

None taken.

HOWEVER!!
If you or anyone else here would like to impress me with how profoundly deficient I am as a person or poster,
the formula to use is:

a) concisely quote my posted words:

b) explain why the assertion is in error

c) correct the record, proving me wrong.

If you would but do that I would genuflect to your Mecca 5 times per day.

Until you do, I dismiss it as prattle. Name calling is entirely unpersuasive to me.

[Gunny]

G #76

Is there a plausible explanation less flattering to the doctor than that?

I'm not fluent in ancient Greek or Latin.
But there's an ancient Latin legal maxim that translates to: No reputation is a good reputation.
It's much akin to our presumption of innocence among our standards of jurisprudence.

G #76 may be right.
But it's also possible the doctor was determined to keep his schedule.
Reports of the incident indicate the doctor specifically stated that, perhaps they knocked his teeth out and gave him a concussion.

Fine. So he's no choir boy.
But being guilty of something doesn't render him guilty of everything.

And if the doctor is such a bad guy, why has UAL so quickly announced a new policy that no paying passenger will be bumped, not just once they're seated, but according to the report I got of it, once that passenger boards the plane.

However evil the doctor is, this all would be a non-story if UAL had reserved enough seats for their priority passengers (employees) so physical extraction would not have been necessary.

But I agree w/ G's implication the rent-a-cops acted like thugs.

Giving them also the benefit of doubt, I'll presume they're not willful thugs like the Rodney King beaters, but simply lacked the training for this specific task.
There's no reason a trained enforcer could not perform such extraction without inflicting need for medical attention (in this case, reportedly hospitalization).You will have to address the poster that brought up his history. I did not. I am a addressing THIS situation. Arguing with a cop is stupid because you are arguing with enforcers. They don't give a damn what your reasoning is. You argue before the judge. So you have to figure out what's worth arguing about.

As was pointed out ... if this guy's patients were so important why's he sitting around 4 days later? I'd have caught the next available bird out. You'd have to kill me to stop me, but I'm going to use my head. Getting myself locked up doesn't save my troops. I save my troops. I am responsible for more than me. There's no difference and the parallel is easy. I was responsible for lives. My personal sh*t goes on the back burner. I watched my best friend and roomie get shot dead beside me. I STILL had to lead. I knew his wife and kids. We got up and moved. I had 135 other Marines counting on ME.

This pussy? Fuck his whiny ass shit. He doesn't know what responsible is.

[sear]

"As was pointed out ... if this guy's patients were so important why's he sitting around 4 days later?" G #80

I've already addressed that at least once.

[Gunny]

"As was pointed out ... if this guy's patients were so important why's he sitting around 4 days later?" G #80

I've already addressed that at least once.And? you've required more than one reaeaddressment. You talk in circles. And if you fuck with Abbey I will fuck you right the fuck up. Certain things are off limits. She's one. You want to be here? Play nice. You won't know what the fuck hit you.

[jimnyc]

The lawsuit is already started of course. And this guy needed surgery for his nose? Methinks he will do whatever necessary for the largest payout/settlement. And with the way this went viral, he'll in fact get a lot. And before anyone scoffs - I know of at least 2 people that pushed to get surgeries that they didn't need, in order to extend disability & increase chances in a lawsuit or settlement. Hell, with a small surgery, other medical attention, "suffering" since, embarrassment since it's worldwide now.... he's gonna get millions.

[sear]

jc #83

Fine.

And while I'm glad the doctor will be compensated, that's secondary.

I'd like to see the lawyers bleed UAL dry.

This air carrier should be punished so severely that they'll never again subordinate customer service or customer relations to internal concerns as trivial as shuffling their employees about.

Skinner.

[jimnyc]

jc #83

Fine.

And while I'm glad the doctor will be compensated, that's secondary.

I'd like to see the lawyers bleed UAL dry.

This air carrier should be punished so severely that they'll never again subordinate customer service or customer relations to internal concerns as trivial as shuffling their employees about.

Skinner.

I don't think their policy is to rough up customers, so I don't blame the entire company. And they have changed the way they will handle these things in the future, as far as how and if someone should be removed under similar circumstances. They also increased the amount they might potentially pay someone to be kept off a flight to like $10k I read. I hope I get bumped!!

I think the guys on the plane should be fired if they haven't already. If the captain was there and seeing what was taking place, it's his bird, he should also be held accountable. Of course United is ultimately held responsible as it's their company, their plane and their hired help. But I don't think they need to be bled dry. This wasn't something they taught. Their "fault" as a company in all of this, IMO, was/is a shit ass policy for bumping paid passengers AND for doing so to a passenger already on board. But it wasn't their policy that had this guy refuse. Nor was it their policy for the thug idiots to get physical with him. I'm not saying this guy deserved any thing whatsoever. But if he complied, this never happens. But that in NO WAY allows for ANYONE to do what they did to this guy.

He'll end up with millions over this. And the money SHOULD come from those that committed the acts and harmed him. But of course we know that United has deeper pockets, and even though I don't think they made this happen, it's still their employees and any court will hold them responsible.

[sear]

"I don't think their policy is to rough up customers, so I don't blame the entire company." jc

I didn't either.

a) A putrefying fish stinks from the head down.

b) The buck stops here.

c) Though the thugs that hospitalized the doctor aren't worth half their salary; they wouldn't have been ordered to the task if the problem wasn't higher up.

"And they have changed the way they will handle these things in the future, as far as how and if someone should be removed under similar circumstances." jc

Indeed! SO INSPIRATIONAL !!
Lock the barn door AFTER the horses are stolen !! BRILLIANT !

"They also increased the amount they might potentially pay someone to be kept off a flight to like $10k I read. I hope I get bumped!!" jc

OK
I get it.
You don't get it.
That's fine.
I'll spell it out for you.

All the changes you cite, have resulted not from conscientious diligence; but out of turd tornado of publicity they brought upon themselves.
This isn't repentant humanitarianism.
This is corporate damage control pure and simple.

"I think the guys on the plane should be fired if they haven't already. If the captain was there and seeing what was taking place, it's his bird, he should also be held accountable." jc

Airline pilots have command over their aircraft, including I believe the legal authority to perform marriages in international airspace.

BUT !!

1) The bird was on the ground.

2) In this case, if not most or all others, "command authority" does not include authority to trump employer company policy. If the airline owner's policy is shuttle employees can bump paying customers, what the $#@! is the pilot supposed to do about that?

"Of course United is ultimately held responsible as it's their company, their plane and their hired help. But I don't think they need to be bled dry." jc

Study B.F. Skinner, and "operant conditioning" in general, and "negative reinforcement" in particular. A slap on the wrist here will promote more of the same. Human beings shouldn't be treated like this. And I'm seriously considering never flying commercial again.

If I have to go to Europe, I'll see if I can get a ride on a boat.
If not, I'll get a plane, and fly myself.

"But it wasn't their policy that had this guy refuse."

If he didn't want the ride, why would he have bought the ticket?

If there was something important enough for you to buy an airline ticket, and you'd buckled in, and suddenly 3 thugs show up and try to rip you out of the seat; would you leap to your feet and say: "Sure! No problem!"

I DOUBT it.

"Nor was it their policy for the thug idiots to get physical with him." jc

OF COURSE it is!!

Were it otherwise they could have sent the smallest stewardess aboard, and had her tell him.

No!
They sent 3 young men with badges, precisely because they knew there could be trouble; and they didn't give a flying %$#@.

[jimnyc]

"I don't think their policy is to rough up customers, so I don't blame the entire company." jc

I didn't either.

I clipped off the rest. In order to reply appropriately, it would mean ME then clipping off areas an inputting the appropriate code. I'm not following suit with the gibberish I get lost in when reading your posts. Again, no offense personally, but I'm not always going to wade through posts and try and figure out who is being responded to and who's writing is what.

In this instance I'll reply to your opening here. You say you didn't either. But it was you that said any compensation to the doctor was secondary, and that the lawyers should go after and bleed dry the company. I didn't see a single peep about going after anyone directly involved, only the company. While I understand they are the owners and fully responsible - I also like to concentrate on people that actually commit crimes or assault people. While it's great that the company as a whole will ultimately be held accountable, the guys that actually used their hands should not be forgotten. Nor, IMO, should it be implied that they were taught in anyway to commit assault in the manner they did, at least not without some sort of proof. Outside of that, I believe we had a couple of assholes that thought they were the sheriffs and went WAY overboard in removing a passenger from a plane.

[Gunny]

jc #83

Fine.

And while I'm glad the doctor will be compensated, that's secondary.

I'd like to see the lawyers bleed UAL dry.

This air carrier should be punished so severely that they'll never again subordinate customer service or customer relations to internal concerns as trivial as shuffling their employees about.

Skinner.I don't think UAL alone should suffer. The entire industry should. Airports are like anthills. The people are rude as Hell and act like they're doing you a favor because they decided to show up for work. I guarantee if you go through Dallas you will land at gate2 and have to get to gate 42 in 10 minutes. Only about 3/4 0f a mile. I've literally had to run through that airport. Houston is worse and Atlanta is right there with them.

Courtesy? That went out the window in the 80s.

[Russ]

"As was pointed out ... if this guy's patients were so important why's he sitting around 4 days later?" G #80

I've already addressed that at least once.

Public Service Announcement: Do not assume that when Sear says he's "already addressed" something, or has "already debunked" something, that he actually did either of those things. Usually it means maybe he thought of something clever, but then forgot to write it down. I think.

By the way, I recently heard that David Dao's medical license was only partially restored in 2015, and he's actually only allowed to practice medicine one day a week - and even then under the supervision of another doctor. Still think he wasn't lying when he said he had to get home right away because he has patients that need him?

[Kathianne]

Public Service Announcement: Do not assume that when Sear says he's "already addressed" something, or has "already debunked" something, that he actually did either of those things. Usually it means maybe he thought of something clever, but then forgot to write it down. I think.

By the way, I recently heard that David Dao's medical license was only partially restored in 2015, and he's actually only allowed to practice medicine one day a week - and even then under the supervision of another doctor. Still think he wasn't lying when he said he had to get home right away because he has patients that need him?

That may be the reason he HAD to get home, because it was a provisional license with parameters. I gave that as one of the possibilities when the 'smears' started in the press.

[Russ]

That may be the reason he HAD to get home, because it was a provisional license with parameters. I gave that as one of the possibilities when the 'smears' started in the press.

Sorry, Kathianne, but 'a provisional license that says you can only practice medicine 1 day a week - and don't leave town'? That sounds ridiculous to me. But fine, I will stop posting about this guy.

[Kathianne]

Sorry, Kathianne, but 'a provisional license that says you can only practice medicine 1 day a week - and don't leave town'? That sounds ridiculous to me. But fine, I will stop posting about this guy.

Oh we agree on that, I was thinking more along the lines of requirements to keep to schedule. There wouldn't be any questions IF the man was allowed to have gone about his business and he'd received the service he'd paid for.

We can disagree on a point, without ridicule, right?

[revelarts]

https://pics.onsizzle.com/this-seat-is-taken-liam-neeson-over-booked-they-picked-19194383.png
Should be titled likedTAKEN 15
They took the wrong man's seat on the Plan


"If you give me back my seat right now they'll be no questions and no no problems from me.
But it you don't give me back my seat, I have a specific set of skills...."

[revelarts]

Somehow i have the feeling that some people would STILL put some... if not all... of the fault on "Liam" even though he wasn't a "Whiny baby". in this case he was "too aggressive" or he should have done X, or Y Or Z just SOMETHING anything to accommodate and obey the Airline that's doing him such a huge favor by taking his money and maybe giving him a ride.

[Abbey Marie]

Somehow i have the feeling that some people would STILL put some... if not all... of the fault on "Liam" even though he wasn't a "Whiny baby". in this case he was "too aggressive" or he should have done X, or Y Or Z just SOMETHING anything to accommodate and obey the Airline that's doing him such a huge favor by taking his money and maybe giving him a ride.

Well, Rev, I always knew you had a deep animosity towards airport security, but was not aware it extended to the airlines, too. How will you feel when a passenger decides to disobey an employee's order in flight, and causes chaos? Cause there's a good chance that's where we are headed. Why not? Just think of the windfall!

And imo, this failed doctor is a whiny creep. Even if you think that doesn't matter.

[Russ]

Oh we agree on that, I was thinking more along the lines of requirements to keep to schedule. There wouldn't be any questions IF the man was allowed to have gone about his business and he'd received the service he'd paid for.

We can disagree on a point, without ridicule, right?

I don't mean the ridicule, Kathianne, sorry it sounded that way!
Kathianne

[revelarts]

Well, Rev, I always knew you had a deep animosity towards airport security, but was not aware it extended to the airlines, too. How will you feel when a passenger decides to disobey an employee's order in flight, and causes chaos?
was there a safety issues here at all?
no.
that's the thing Abbey.
no one's talking about "disobeying" during an emergency in fight.


Look, if you were at Wal-Mart had just paid for $150 worth of groceries. had everything bagged up and your pushing your cart toward the door and the cashier said you had to leave your cart, leave it all. because some store employees needed your food RIGHT NOW. That you had been picked at random to give up your food to them. And you weren't going to get your items for a few hours or maybe the next day.

would you simply quietly OBEY?

I suspect a lot of women (and guys) would be whinny creeps.
And If Wal-mart security dragged, bloodied and knocked a few women's teeth out
I'd still say it doesn't matter at all WHAT kinda creeps they were.
WAl-mart would be wrong and committed thief and assault.





...Cause there's a good chance that's where we are headed. Why not? Just think of the windfall!

Is that where it's going Abbey really? seems to me it's going in the exact opposite direction. with people upset when people don't "OBEY". Basically saying that if people don't OBEY Corporations and "officials" every BS whim and injustice then those people DESERVE to get their teeth knocked out or even be shot dead without consequence or serious concern.
I'm far more concerned with us heading that way, seems to me we're well on that road.
Please don't ask me to post examples.

[Abbey Marie]

was there a safety issues here at all?
no.
that's the thing Abbey.
no one's talking about "disobeying" during an emergency in fight.


Look, if you were at Wal-Mart had just paid for $150 worth of groceries. had everything bagged up and your pushing your cart toward the door and the cashier said you had to put your cart leave it all. because some store employees needed your food RIGHT now. you had been picked at random. and you weren't going to get your items for a few hours or maybe the next day.

would you simply OBEY?

I suspect a lot of women (and guys) would be whinny creeps.
And If Wal-mart security dragged, bloodied and knocked a few women's teeth out
I'd still say it doesn't matter at all WHAT kinda creeps they were.
WAl-mart would be wrong and committed thief and assault.





Is that where it's going Abbey really? seems to me it's going in the exact opposite direction. with people upset when people don't "OBEY". Basically saying that if people don't OBEY Corporations and "officials" every BS whim and injustice then those people DESERVE to get their teeth knocked out or even be shot dead without consequence or serious concern.
I'm far more concerned with us heading that way, seems to me we're well on that road.
Please don't ask me to post examples.

Rev, you know I love you, but the bolded is hyperbole and certainly not based on my posts.

This is no Proctor & Gamble or Mattel Corp.; it is an airline. And I am sure that you are aware that since 9/11 the airlines are understandably touchy about disruptive passengers.

No one is saying you need to blindly obey any whim, as you've so youthfully put it. And if sexual harasser/drug peddler/whiner Dao had gotten off the plane and then given United a hard time for doing so off the plane, I'm ok with it. Did you know he ran back on the plane after being hauled off, btw? Is this the kind of behavior you really want to become the norm in this country? What if I just don't feel like I should obey the police? The FBI? My teacher? After all, they are just asking me to do something "on a whim", right?

And you cannot really deny that once people see that this behavior rakes in millions, there will no doubt be other people causing a ruckus, on the ground and in the air.

I think United could have had a better policy than removing seated passengers. But that does not mean this guy was right in resisting.

[revelarts]

Rev, you know I love you, but the bolded is hyperbole and certainly not based on my posts.
This is no Proctor & Gamble or Mattel Corp.; it is an airline. And I am sure that you are aware that since 9/11 the airlines are understandably touchy about disruptive passengers.

No one is saying you need to blindly obey any whim, as you've so youthfully put it. And if sexual harasser/drug peddler/whiner Dao had gotten off the plane and then given United a hard time for doing so off the plane, I'm ok with it. Did you know he ran back on the plane after being hauled off, btw? Is this the kind of behavior you really want to become the norm in this country? What if I just don't feel like I should obey the police? The FBI? My teacher? After all, they are just asking me to do something "on a whim", right?

And you cannot really deny that once people see that this behavior rakes in millions, there will no doubt be other people causing a ruckus, on the ground and in the air.

I think United could have had a better policy than removing seated passengers. But that does not mean this guy was right in resisting.

Abbey we're just going to disagree here so I'll just leave it at that with just a comment on 2 bits.


"What if I just don't feel like I should obey the police? The FBI? My teacher? After all, they are just asking me to do something "on a whim", right?"

Yes sometimes it is on a whim and completely unlawfully done Abbey.
as many great cops teachers and FBI there are SOMETIMES they ask people to do BS that should not be obeyed.

please notice my qualifiers Abbey.
If ANY authority tells you to do something that you KNOW is wrong then YES you've got good grounds to disobey.
it's a hard choice, but Yes.
Some cops have raped women, If a cop tells a woman to obey those orders should she?

The authorities have certain legal and moral limits Abbey when they exceed their authority they've lost their legitimacy.
That clearly does not mean that EVERYONE should ALWAYS IGNORE authorities.
I'm not sure why that's such a difficult thing for everyone to embrace.
the authorities are not infallible gods/heroes. They are men and women with important but LIMITED jobs. when they work within the limits I'm with them, but when they cross the line THEY"VE committed a crime. they have NO more authority than you or I at that point. And as you know many of my post over the years go to the unconstitutional "legalization" of MORE and more authority to officials to the acquiescence and cheers of the public to a more authoritarian gov't under the guise of safety.


"And you cannot really deny that once people see that this behavior rakes in millions, there will no doubt be other people causing a ruckus, on the ground and in the air."

Maybe, we'll see.
How many coffee lawsuits has Mcdonld's endured since the lady sued them for her coffee burn?
As i said I'm FAR more concerned about the how the airlines are treating paying customers. and this is SO FAR out of line that it's bizarre to me some people want to talk about the customer "resisting". and the horror of of his weirdness and him trotting back on the plane.
sorry i just don't care at all. He could run back on the plane pissed on the crew that took his seat after his teeth were knocked out and i'd still think it's a NON-issue comparatively.

[revelarts]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/d3/4d/e1/d34de1ef2983bc3470eaa288cfeb7206.jpg
OBEY AND WE'LL GET ALONG JUST FIIIINE.

[Black Diamond]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/d3/4d/e1/d34de1ef2983bc3470eaa288cfeb7206.jpg
OBEY AND WE'LL GET ALONG JUST FIIIINE.

Offering a Pepsi doesn't hurt

[Gunny]

Offering a Pepsi doesn't hurtYou forgot "Video will play after the ad".

[Kathianne]

I don't mean the ridicule, Kathianne, sorry it sounded that way!
@Kathianne (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=8)

Thank you. It's usually me that unintentionally hurts others feelings. If anyone understands putting things in a way someone might take offense at, it's me. No problem.

[Gunny]

Thank you. It's usually me that unintentionally hurts others feelings. If anyone understands putting things in a way someone might take offense at, it's me. No problem.Yes, you do. Don't feel lonely in the boat. I offend people by just looking at them. :)

This is April, right? Is April National Overly Sensitive Month? Been a lot of tears dripping around here lately.

[Abbey Marie]

Yes, you do. Don't feel lonely in the boat. I offend people by just looking at them. :)

This is April, right? Is April National Overly Sensitive Month? Been a lot of tears dripping around here lately.

Thats mean!

[Abbey Marie]

So now we have a woman crying hysterically because a flight attendant on American Airlines took her stroller from her on the plane to be checked. And then a male passenger threatening to knock out the flight attendant for the "way he talked to the woman".
On. the. plane.
$$ given out, apologies given by American, flight attendant suspended. Perhaps my prediction of passengers becoming emboldened are coming true.

[Gunny]

So now we have a woman crying hysterically because a flight attendant on American Airlines took her stroller from her on the plane to be checked. And then a male passenger threatening to knock out the flight attendant for the "way he talked to the woman".
On. the. plane.
$$ given out, apologies given by American, flight attendant suspended. Perhaps my prediction of passengers becoming emboldened are coming true.Okay ... first obviously dumbass question ... what exactly are you going to do with a stroller on a plane? They wouldn't even fit on the old school planes that actually had room for people much less the buses with wings flying Matchbox cars they have now.

I DO agree with your assessment.

[Abbey Marie]

Okay ... first obviously dumbass question ... what exactly are you going to do with a stroller on a plane? They wouldn't even fit on the old school planes that actually had room for people much less the buses with wings flying Matchbox cars they have now.

I DO agree with your assessment.

I don't know what the mom was thinking. It's tough enough fitting a carry- on bag in the overhead; not sure where a stroller would go. But once again, people can't just accept a rule and follow it. Have to make it into a big thing. (Side note/ pet peeve: some people sitting in the back like to use the front overhead bins. I guess it's too much trouble to lug their bag to the back. Grrr).

It must be stressful working as a flight attendant since 9-11. And now they have to walk on eggshells on top of it.

I primarily blame the lawyers and a system that lets them partake of punitive damages. It bred incredible greed- so many people looking for that big payoff.

And how on earth does a guy get away with threatening to deck a flight attendant on a plane?

[Gunny]

I don't know what the mom was thinking. It's tough enough fitting a carry- on bag in the overhead anymor; not sure where a stroller would go. But once again, people can't just accept a rule and follow it. Have to make it into a big thing. (Side note/ pet peeve: some people sitting in the back like to use the front overhead bins. I guess it's too much trouble to lug their bag to the back. Grrr).

It must be stressful working as a flight attendant since 9-11. And now they have to walk on eggshells on top of it.

I primarily blame the lawyers and a system that lets them partake of punitive damages. It bred incredible greed- so many people looking for that big payoff.

And how on earth does a guy get away with threatening to deck a flight attendant on a plane?I want to know why you WOULD want to deck a flight attendant on a plane? That's the guy with the drink cart. :laugh:

They need to put a halt to all these class action lawsuits. I thought Bush did. But Geez ... I can sue you for me not reading my medication instructions. "I wasn't properly informed". Oh, so that 3 pages that comes with the medication doesn't tell you anything? You need Kathianne with a chalkboard in a classroom to draw you a picture in big block letters.

And Tx is one of the worst states I've lived in about that class action crap. They'll sue you for breathing.

[Kathianne]

In this incident it seems nearly as much is unknown as known. From what I read over the course of two days regarding it, I gathered she had baby twins and another young child. It was an international flight. She had a telescoping stroller and was told it would fit and was acceptable before boarding the plane. She'd been able to load it into the overhead as told, it counted as 'carry on.' Then an employee joined the flight and it was his/her bag that was one too many. The flight attendant removed the stroller, in favor of the extra bag. The mother protested, 3 young children-1 adult. Pulling match between mother and attendant-again this was all BEFORE take off-mother was struck in head with stroller, then began to cry, one of babies nearly hit.

That is when the male passenger got involved.

Here's the rub for me. I cannot find anything that states all of the above in one place. What I 'gathered' was from multiple 'reports' and I do think that coming on the heels of the United story, it's weird. The video is after all the 'pulling and such' over the stroller was done-we get the guy who got involved with crying mom on video.

Part of the reason there may not be a 'summation' report may be due to the facts that AA intervened very quickly, again in light of United.

What has been reported is what AA did to try to keep this from escalating after the incident happened. The man that 'intervened' has expressed regret at his over reaction and behavior. What AA did wrong, for safety's sake, in my opinion, was to keep all these actors on the plane during the flight. The AA employees were not grounded until the plane reached its destination. That was a possible powder keg situation, again imo.

[Kathianne]

Now just came across this article, which tells a much different story. It's near impossible to tell which ones really are explaining things as they occurred, and which have their own narrative they are presenting.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/jennifervanlaar/2017/04/23/update-mom-hit-with-stroller-on-american-airlines-flight-tried-to-bring-large-stroller-on-plane-n2316989?utm_content=buffer50147&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[Gunny]

In this incident it seems nearly as much is unknown as known. From what I read over the course of two days regarding it, I gathered she had baby twins and another young child. It was an international flight. She had a telescoping stroller and was told it would fit and was acceptable before boarding the plane. She'd been able to load it into the overhead as told, it counted as 'carry on.' Then an employee joined the flight and it was his/her bag that was one too many. The flight attendant removed the stroller, in favor of the extra bag. The mother protested, 3 young children-1 adult. Pulling match between mother and attendant-again this was all BEFORE take off-mother was struck in head with stroller, then began to cry, one of babies nearly hit.

That is when the male passenger got involved.

Here's the rub for me. I cannot find anything that states all of the above in one place. What I 'gathered' was from multiple 'reports' and I do think that coming on the heels of the United story, it's weird. The video is after all the 'pulling and such' over the stroller was done-we get the guy who got involved with crying mom on video.

Part of the reason there may not be a 'summation' report may be due to the facts that AA intervened very quickly, again in light of United.

What has been reported is what AA did to try to keep this from escalating after the incident happened. The man that 'intervened' has expressed regret at his over reaction and behavior. What AA did wrong, for safety's sake, in my opinion, was to keep all these actors on the plane during the flight. The AA employees were not grounded until the plane reached its destination. That was a possible powder keg situation, again imo.Don't get me wrong. I pretty much refuse to fly. All I'm saying is when you put yourself at the mercy of these people, you're at their mercy. Trying to argue with them at the moment is a waste of time and just escalates the situation. I understand dragging a couple of kids on a plane very well. I understand being 4 with a 2 years old brother going on an international flight and my mom was stuck. From Turkey to NYC.

Like you said ... circumstances. You couldn't pay me to take 3 kids on an airplane and NO ONE wants that baby there.

[Abbey Marie]

Now just came across this article, which tells a much different story. It's near impossible to tell which ones really are explaining things as they occurred, and which have their own narrative they are presenting.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/jennifervanlaar/2017/04/23/update-mom-hit-with-stroller-on-american-airlines-flight-tried-to-bring-large-stroller-on-plane-n2316989?utm_content=buffer50147&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I'm not surprised to see it titled woman "not following the rules". Bad stuff so easily follows that.
More concerning to me by far though, are the actions of the interfering male passenger who threatened to deck the attendant. This is what I predicted- a feeling of empowerment by passengers to disobey flight crew and attendants. His subsequent sheepishness doesn't count for much to me. Attendant suspended, guy's actions in the news, damage done. More to follow, no doubt.

[Gunny]

I'm not surprised to see it titled woman "not following the rules". Bad stuff so easily follows that.
More concerning to me by far are the actions of the interfering male passenger who threatened to deck the attendant. This is what I predicted- a feeling of empowerment by passengers to disobey flight crew and attendants. His subsequent sheepishness doesn't count for much to me. Attendant suspended, guy's actions in the news, damage done. More to follow, no doubt.I got this simple rule Ms Abs ... You start interfering with the crew at 30 K ft, the Gunny light is ON. You can cry when the bird comes to a halt on the deck.

There's no call for all of this crap.

[Kathianne]

I'm not surprised to see it titled woman "not following the rules". Bad stuff so easily follows that.
More concerning to me by far are the actions of the interfering male passenger who threatened to deck the attendant. This is what I predicted- a feeling of empowerment by passengers to disobey flight crew and attendants. His subsequent sheepishness doesn't count for much to me. Attendant suspended, guy's actions in the news, damage done. More to follow, no doubt.

I hear you, it does fit with your position. I can't help myself though, I read from many sources and the stories are conflicting. I purposefully added this one because it makes your points. I don't think there is a clear story being told on this incident, nor do I think there will be.

[Gunny]

I hear you, it does fit with your position. I can't help myself though, I read from many sources and the stories are conflicting. I purposefully added this one because it makes your points. I don't think there is a clear story being told on this incident, nor do I think there will be.I honestly think there are 2 wrongs here. It goes back to my original argument. I don't agree with the airlines. I also do not agree with the behavior of the passenger. She's doing exactly what Abs alluded to .. looking for a payday over something trivial. Let's be real ... you can't use a stroller on a plane. Common sense. Math. Even an umbrella stroller won't fit in the overhead bins. They won't fit down the aisles.

Not to mention being so rude as to inconvenience every other passenger by dragging your 3-ring circus on the plane.

[Abbey Marie]

I hear you, it does fit with your position. I can't help myself though, I read from many sources and the stories are conflicting. I purposefully added this one because it makes your points. I don't think there is a clear story being told on this incident, nor do I think there will be.

I thought you did, and that was thoughtful and fair-minded of you, Ms. Kath. :thumb:

[Kathianne]

I'm sure by now everyone has seen the latest example of airline respect for their customers via Delta. While I do have a problem with the airline's behavior, whether it be by their own employees or the security personnel they call in, there are fair concerns regarding the safety of all passengers. In these instances though, the problems are occurring while the planes are on the ground. In each instance it's been due to overbooking or demanding that paying customers accommodate the airline's employees for one reason or another.

The following takes a gander at the difference between what personnel are saying/demanding/threatening in comparison to actual FAA requirements:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/05/deltas-turn-sorry-threatening-customer-jail-overbooked-flight/


Delta’s turn: We’re sorry for threatening our customer with jail on overbooked flight

POSTED AT 10:41 AM ON MAY 5, 2017 BY ED MORRISSEY


...
On the video, Brian Schear can be heard talking with a person off-camera — it is not clear whether that person is a Delta employee, a security officer, or somebody else.
After Schear says that he won’t leave — the airline will have to remove him — the person off-camera replies, “You and your wife will be in jail … it’s a federal offense if you don’t abide” by an airline crew’s order.

“I bought that seat,” Schear protests.

Schear then suggests that his wife could hold one of the toddlers during takeoff and then put the youngster in the car seat. Another person, who appears to be a Delta supervisor, tells him that federal rules require that children under 2 must stay in a parent’s lap throughout the flight.



Er … about that …


That is false. The Federal Aviation Administration (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/federal-aviation-administration.htm) “strongly urges” that infants be in a car seat, although it permits those under 2 to be held in a parent’s lap. On its website, Delta recommends that parents buy a seat for children under 2 and put them in an approved child-safety seat.



Oopsie! However, there may have been another reason (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2017/05/04/family-booted-from-delta-flight-and-threatened-with-jail-after-refusing-to-give-up-toddlers-seat/?utm_term=.2e1909c5f8a0) for Delta’s initial demand to have the toddler sit in the father’s lap. The Schears originally bought the seat for their 18-year-old son, but they bought him a separate ticket on an earlier flight in order to be able to use the seat for the toddler in his car seat — as Delta and the FAA recommend. It’s unclear whether the Schears updated the passenger information:

“I bought the seat,” Brian Schear is seen telling the agents in a video of the incident, explaining that he initially purchased the seat for his 18-year-old son but sent the teen home early on another flight so that the toddler would have a seat on the plane. “It’s a red-eye. He won’t sleep unless he’s in his car seat. So, otherwise, he’d be sitting in my wife’s lap, crawling all over the place, and it’s not safe.” …

The issue, it seems, is transferring airline tickets from one passenger to another. Delta Air Lines maintains on its website (http://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/support/faqs/general/customer-care-faqs.html) that “all tickets are nontransferable per the fare rules. Name changes are not permitted.”



Note, however, that is a Delta rule, not an FAA regulation. The FAA allows transfers as long as the names get changed early enough for a TSA check on the new passenger. Regardless, that alone could have been grounds to refuse service, but that’s clearly not the objection raised in this instance. If that was the problem, they would have asked them all to deplane right from the start, and shouldn’t have allowed them on the flight in the first place. Delta wanted the seat for another passenger, despite the fact that the Schears had paid for it, and then kicked them all off the flight for refusing to give it up — even after Brian Schear finally conceded the point and agreed to fly with his son in his lap.

...

After this string of viral videos, two things will happen. First, customers will become a lot more emboldened to stand up to airline employees, especially in overbooking situations, and second, airlines will have to try to eliminate those opportunities as fast as possible. This is a good demonstration of the marketplace at work. We may not need Congressional action on overbooking — airlines now have a strong interest in ending the practice. Markets being what they are, though, expect prices to rise to cover those sunk costs in empty seats, and expect cancellation fees and policies to get a lot tougher, which would have happened whether Congress drove these changes or not.