Your rights on a commercial aircraft - Page 7

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Your rights on a commercial aircraft (Page 7 of 10)

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:23:05 AM EDT

[#1]

They can remove you for just being there. It's all in the fine print on the back of your ticket that nobody reads. The fact of air travel is that airplanes are inherently dangerous machines. If you have a problem in the air you can't pull over and pop the hood. And air travel is dependent on having the lift and thrust to property carry the weight. Because of that there is a weight and balance clause on your ticket that basically states that to keep the operation of the airplane safe they have the ability to ask you and your fat ass to leave the plane to maintain proper weight and balance of the aircraft during flight.

Because of that safety requirement, they can remove you any time they want (basically)

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:27:01 AM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:
He broke the law the minute he didn't get his ass off the airplane, and stay off. Why is this hard for you to grasp?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

If he didn't break any laws, then under what authority did government agents use force to remove him from the aircraft?

He broke the law the minute he didn't get his ass off the airplane, and stay off. Why is this hard for you to grasp?

What law? CITADELGRAD87 isn't saying he broke a federal law and the one Chairborne referenced requires one to believe "Drag me down" is intimidating a flight crew member.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:27:35 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:
So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's been totally consistent too. Every person in this thread that is in the industry understands how and why these things turn out the way they do.
The few people that insist on rejecting reality in favor of their own fantasies have no experience in these matters to begin with. But suddenly they're legal experts on the subject.

Right, but when someone smarter than I am on a specific subject tells me I am wrong, and why I am wrong, I apologize, STFU, and move on.

The funny thing is, a lot of the people bitching in this thread about the airlines removing people will be the first ones to say "their business their rules" in another thread.

You can't have it both ways.

I believe any business is well within their right to discriminate based on anything. Race, body weight, smell, religion, anything. The BOR is restrictions on the government. Nobody is guaranteed anything inside a business or private area. You choose to be there and accept their policy or you don't. I am a firm believer of a free market business. Unfortunately we haven't lived in one in decades if not centuries and likely will never again.

So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

Absolutely. The remedy is breach of contract, not a free for all in the aisle.

Why cant you understand that breach of contract happens every single day. The law provides remedies that generwlly do not include forcing the breaching party to perform the contract.

You act like this is some earth shattering event that simply cant happen.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:28:01 AM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
They can remove you for just being there. It's all in the fine print on the back of your ticket that nobody reads. The fact of air travel is that airplanes are inherently dangerous machines. If you have a problem in the air you can't pull over and pop the hood. And air travel is dependent on having the lift and thrust to property carry the weight. Because of that there is a weight and balance clause on your ticket that basically states that to keep the operation of the airplane safe they have the ability to ask you and your fat ass to leave the plane to maintain proper weight and balance of the aircraft during flight.

Because of that safety requirement, they can remove you any time they want (basically)

View Quote

But that wasn't what happened in Chicago so that rule isn't relevant.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:30:55 AM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:
Nothing is crumbling, cupcake. Find a reference by me to he was a fake doctor or his sexual orientation, and i will quit posting. It didnt happen.

I also never said he violated federal law, so theres a trifecta of fail from you. Par for the course.

The incident was videotaped, he was carried out like a sack of potatoes, and hit his head resisting.

Show me video of him being beaten, or statements from someone in a position to have seen it.

ASSuming he was beaten because he ran back on, like a mental patient, with some blood on his face doesnt cut it. And, yes, if you are told you are going to be removed, and say you will have to drag me off, if you hit your head in the process, thats entirely on you. I guess you were raised to sit on the floor and blame others, which is fine. It doesnt change reality, though.

Actions have consequences. He was told what would happen, he told them to drag him off, and he got exactly what he asked for. Literally, he told them to drag him off.

Looks like his attorney way overplayed his hand, too. He should have asked for 5-10 and settled for 1-2 million on day one, promise them a press conference at noon and this would have gone away.

Theres only one reason hes still flapping his gums, amd thats because he wants too much money.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

He wasnt "beaten". He was pulling away and hit his own head on the armrest.

Please lay off the hyperbolic nonsense.

And has ANYONE been charged with any crime? Just curious.

The customer was forcibly dragged face forward into an arm rest across the aisle from where he was seated, and as a result was bloodied and loss a tooth or two.

But yeah, " he was pulling away and hit his own head on the armrest" since the aviation police who used force to resolve the matter on behalf of the airline bear no responsibly for man handling the passenger, and because you were there and saw exactly what transpired.

Others who were there said the 69 year old man was beaten.

At least we've gotten past the "he was a faggot felon fake doctor" narrative and the falsehood that "he had previously accepted the deal offered by the airline personnel and then changed his mind and reentered the aircraft and reclaimed his seat".

We're still at " he broke federal law" and "he got what he deserved" as well as the obscene "he's totally responsible for his own injuries".

Those will crumble like rotten melons as well.

Nothing is crumbling, cupcake. Find a reference by me to he was a fake doctor or his sexual orientation, and i will quit posting. It didnt happen.

I also never said he violated federal law, so theres a trifecta of fail from you. Par for the course.

The incident was videotaped, he was carried out like a sack of potatoes, and hit his head resisting.

Show me video of him being beaten, or statements from someone in a position to have seen it.

ASSuming he was beaten because he ran back on, like a mental patient, with some blood on his face doesnt cut it. And, yes, if you are told you are going to be removed, and say you will have to drag me off, if you hit your head in the process, thats entirely on you. I guess you were raised to sit on the floor and blame others, which is fine. It doesnt change reality, though.

Actions have consequences. He was told what would happen, he told them to drag him off, and he got exactly what he asked for. Literally, he told them to drag him off.

Looks like his attorney way overplayed his hand, too. He should have asked for 5-10 and settled for 1-2 million on day one, promise them a press conference at noon and this would have gone away.

Theres only one reason hes still flapping his gums, amd thats because he wants too much money.

I was speaking of those sorts of comments in these thread in general, not asserting that you specifically uttered those exact words although your words do put you clearly in the camp of those who assert that the customer's injuries were totally self inflicted and absolve both the airline and "aviation police" who used physical force against him of any responsibility; which, as the future will certainly bear out, is a foolish position to adopt.

In the real world; when some puffed up adversaries begin to use snot nose words such as "cupcake" it warms my heart since I know, right there and then, that I'll be leaving the situation tens, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars richer.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:34:52 AM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
They can remove you for just being there. It's all in the fine print on the back of your ticket that nobody reads. The fact of air travel is that airplanes are inherently dangerous machines. If you have a problem in the air you can't pull over and pop the hood. And air travel is dependent on having the lift and thrust to property carry the weight. Because of that there is a weight and balance clause on your ticket that basically states that to keep the operation of the airplane safe they have the ability to ask you and your fat ass to leave the plane to maintain proper weight and balance of the aircraft during flight.

Because of that safety requirement, they can remove you any time they want (basically)

View Quote

What exactly in the Contract of Carriage allowed United to remove a seated passenger for "just being there"?

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:35:23 AM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:
He broke the law the minute he didn't get his ass off the airplane, and stay off. Why is this hard for you to grasp?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

If he didn't break any laws, then under what authority did government agents use force to remove him from the aircraft?

He broke the law the minute he didn't get his ass off the airplane, and stay off. Why is this hard for you to grasp?

So what charges have been filed against him?

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:37:15 AM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:

But that wasn't what happened in Chicago so that rule isn't relevant.

View Quote

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:41:02 AM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:
So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's been totally consistent too. Every person in this thread that is in the industry understands how and why these things turn out the way they do.
The few people that insist on rejecting reality in favor of their own fantasies have no experience in these matters to begin with. But suddenly they're legal experts on the subject.

Right, but when someone smarter than I am on a specific subject tells me I am wrong, and why I am wrong, I apologize, STFU, and move on.

The funny thing is, a lot of the people bitching in this thread about the airlines removing people will be the first ones to say "their business their rules" in another thread.

You can't have it both ways.

I believe any business is well within their right to discriminate based on anything. Race, body weight, smell, religion, anything. The BOR is restrictions on the government. Nobody is guaranteed anything inside a business or private area. You choose to be there and accept their policy or you don't. I am a firm believer of a free market business. Unfortunately we haven't lived in one in decades if not centuries and likely will never again.

So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

Depends on what the contract is and if it is legally binding. Either way, I support a business to conduct itself shitty, I also support the market in choosing to go elsewhere for that business if they don't approve.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:44:38 AM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

View Quote

One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:45:14 AM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:
Depends on what the contract is and if it is legally binding. Either way, I support a business to conduct itself shitty, I also support the market in choosing to go elsewhere for that business if they don't approve.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's been totally consistent too. Every person in this thread that is in the industry understands how and why these things turn out the way they do.
The few people that insist on rejecting reality in favor of their own fantasies have no experience in these matters to begin with. But suddenly they're legal experts on the subject.

Right, but when someone smarter than I am on a specific subject tells me I am wrong, and why I am wrong, I apologize, STFU, and move on.

The funny thing is, a lot of the people bitching in this thread about the airlines removing people will be the first ones to say "their business their rules" in another thread.

You can't have it both ways.

I believe any business is well within their right to discriminate based on anything. Race, body weight, smell, religion, anything. The BOR is restrictions on the government. Nobody is guaranteed anything inside a business or private area. You choose to be there and accept their policy or you don't. I am a firm believer of a free market business. Unfortunately we haven't lived in one in decades if not centuries and likely will never again.

So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

Depends on what the contract is and if it is legally binding. Either way, I support a business to conduct itself shitty, I also support the market in choosing to go elsewhere for that business if they don't approve.

And that is what we are talking about here. Did United have the contractual right to drag a paying customer off the plane because they decided at the last minute that they wanted those seats back.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:45:46 AM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:
That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

But that wasn't what happened in Chicago so that rule isn't relevant.

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

They don't have the right for any reason. There are a list of reasons in their contract of carriage and "any time for any reason" isn't one of them.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:47:49 AM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:
One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

People keep saying this, but I just want to see where it is written either in the contract or in the law.

A tradition is not legally binding.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:48:02 AM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:
And that is what we are talking about here. Did United have the contractual right to drag a paying customer off the plane because they decided at the last minute that they wanted those seats back.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's been totally consistent too. Every person in this thread that is in the industry understands how and why these things turn out the way they do.
The few people that insist on rejecting reality in favor of their own fantasies have no experience in these matters to begin with. But suddenly they're legal experts on the subject.

Right, but when someone smarter than I am on a specific subject tells me I am wrong, and why I am wrong, I apologize, STFU, and move on.

The funny thing is, a lot of the people bitching in this thread about the airlines removing people will be the first ones to say "their business their rules" in another thread.

You can't have it both ways.

I believe any business is well within their right to discriminate based on anything. Race, body weight, smell, religion, anything. The BOR is restrictions on the government. Nobody is guaranteed anything inside a business or private area. You choose to be there and accept their policy or you don't. I am a firm believer of a free market business. Unfortunately we haven't lived in one in decades if not centuries and likely will never again.

So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

Depends on what the contract is and if it is legally binding. Either way, I support a business to conduct itself shitty, I also support the market in choosing to go elsewhere for that business if they don't approve.

And that is what we are talking about here. Did United have the contractual right to drag a paying customer off the plane because they decided at the last minute that they wanted those seats back.

Doesn't matter. Even if it was under contract ( I don't believe it was, based on what I have heard from professionals in the field, that they can remove anybody for almost any reason) they can breach it, happens all the time. Bad business, but its free business, and people can choose to go elsewhere.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:53:56 AM EDT

[#15]

Those that believe our airline transportation system is representative of a functioning free market system don't understand economics. A whole lot of feelz in this thread..

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:54:29 AM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:

They don't have the right for any reason. There are a list of reasons in their contract of carriage and "any time for any reason" isn't one of them.

View Quote

They certainly can and obviously do, you can't argue that as it just happened. And they will continue to do so until forced to change their behavior. But the real question is will anyone spend the tens of thousands of dollars to sue an airline and fight any appeals over a $300 ticket?

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:56:59 AM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:
One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

The captain apparently didn't make " the call, " nor has the company alleged that this matter presented any safety issue at all, and in fact, the United Airlines pilots association issued a written statement placing the blame on the aviation police and Republic Airlines, the operator of the United Express flight, and in addition, stating the United Airlines Pilot's anger at the way their customer was treated.

No charges have been filed against the customer for violating any laws, federal or local; nor has it been alleged by the police or anyone else directly involved, that the customer's insistence of remaining seated represented any safety hazard or breach of law.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:58:04 AM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
Those that believe our airline transportation system is representative of a functioning free market system don't understand economics. A whole lot of feelz in this thread..

View Quote

There is no such thing as a free market system anymore but it doesn't mean I can't support a business when they do what they want anyway.

ETA: I don't necessarily support the businesses decision unless I agree with it but I support their ability to make the decision to do what they want.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:59:22 AM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
People keep saying this, but I just want to see where it is written either in the contract or in the law.

A tradition is not legally binding.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

That rule is why the airlines have the *right* (their business their rules) to remove anyone at any time for any reason. Their digression. Don't like it? Sue them and have the rules changed. Otherwise as it stands they can remove you because you farted and offended the old lady 3 rows up.

One last bit, I'm sitting on 750,000mi of travel over the last 10y. I've seen all kinds of people removed in all manner of ways. Quietly escorted off, cops removed some, air marshal removed one. Heck, I've even been removed for weight and balance. Couple that with one of my protégé's moving over to American Airlines about 8y ago and now being a captain confirming it. They can kick you off for any reason. But due to the negative publicity of such an event it is highly unlikely they would do so without a compelling reason. My buddy's direct quote was, "It's ultimately the Captain's call as he is responsible for the safety of the plane and passengers, but the unwritten rule is deliver the passengers without getting in the news, that means no incidents of any caliber.".

People keep saying this, but I just want to see where it is written either in the contract or in the law.

A tradition is not legally binding.

People also say the Squirrel Cops have Extra Constitutional Powers, it do not make it so.

Posted: 4/25/2017 11:59:50 AM EDT

[#20]

Double Tap.

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:00:47 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:

They certainly can and obviously do, you can't argue that as it just happened. And they will continue to do so until forced to change their behavior. But the real question is will anyone spend the tens of thousands of dollars to sue an airline and fight any appeals over a $300 ticket?

View Quote

They are also going to pay for it, mightily.

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:00:54 PM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:

They don't have the right for any reason. There are a list of reasons in their contract of carriage and "any time for any reason" isn't one of them.

View Quote

that is a matter for the court to decide.

and the contract of carriage cannot supersede the FARs. period.

if the action was illegal, the remedy is with the court, not with the crew on the aircraft, nor with the police. This isn't a difficult concept.

there's been a shit ton of people who thought they were in the right, only to have their legal expertise destroyed in an actual court of law. Not complying goes a long ways towards an unfavorable outcome.

the smart move is to comply and then seek damages. The dumb move is to cause a problem and risk it not turning out favorably.

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:04:04 PM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:
They are also going to pay for it, mightily.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

They certainly can and obviously do, you can't argue that as it just happened. And they will continue to do so until forced to change their behavior. But the real question is will anyone spend the tens of thousands of dollars to sue an airline and fight any appeals over a $300 ticket?

They are also going to pay for it, mightily.

Business should be able to choose and live or die with their business practices.

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:10:27 PM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:
that is a matter for the court to decide.

and the contract of carriage cannot supersede the FARs. period.

if the action was illegal, the remedy is with the court, not with the crew on the aircraft, nor with the police. This isn't a difficult concept.

there's been a shit ton of people who thought they were in the right, only to have their legal expertise destroyed in an actual court of law. Not complying goes a long ways towards an unfavorable outcome.

the smart move is to comply and then seek damages. The dumb move is to cause a problem and risk it not turning out favorably.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

They don't have the right for any reason. There are a list of reasons in their contract of carriage and "any time for any reason" isn't one of them.

that is a matter for the court to decide.

and the contract of carriage cannot supersede the FARs. period.

if the action was illegal, the remedy is with the court, not with the crew on the aircraft, nor with the police. This isn't a difficult concept.

there's been a shit ton of people who thought they were in the right, only to have their legal expertise destroyed in an actual court of law. Not complying goes a long ways towards an unfavorable outcome.

the smart move is to comply and then seek damages. The dumb move is to cause a problem and risk it not turning out favorably.

I agree. And United chose the dumb move.

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:21:12 PM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:
There is no such thing as a free market system anymore but it doesn't mean I can't support a business when they do what they want anyway.

ETA: I don't necessarily support the businesses decision unless I agree with it but I support their ability to make the decision to do what they want.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Those that believe our airline transportation system is representative of a functioning free market system don't understand economics. A whole lot of feelz in this thread..

There is no such thing as a free market system anymore but it doesn't mean I can't support a business when they do what they want anyway.

ETA: I don't necessarily support the businesses decision unless I agree with it but I support their ability to make the decision to do what they want.

Absolutely! That is your personal opinion based upon your personal philosophy and values. I am commenting g on opinions based upon a misunderstanding of economics (and criminal AND civil law).

Posted: 4/25/2017 12:30:06 PM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:
I was speaking of those sorts of comments in these thread in general, not asserting that you specifically uttered those exact words although your words do put you clearly in the camp of those who assert that the customer's injuries were totally self inflicted and absolve both the airline and "aviation police" who used physical force against him of any responsibility; which, as the future will certainly bear out, is a foolish position to adopt.

In the real world; when some puffed up adversaries begin to use snot nose words such as "cupcake" it warms my heart since I know, right there and then, that I'll be leaving the situation tens, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars richer.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

He wasnt "beaten". He was pulling away and hit his own head on the armrest.

Please lay off the hyperbolic nonsense.

And has ANYONE been charged with any crime? Just curious.

The customer was forcibly dragged face forward into an arm rest across the aisle from where he was seated, and as a result was bloodied and loss a tooth or two.

But yeah, " he was pulling away and hit his own head on the armrest" since the aviation police who used force to resolve the matter on behalf of the airline bear no responsibly for man handling the passenger, and because you were there and saw exactly what transpired.

Others who were there said the 69 year old man was beaten.

At least we've gotten past the "he was a faggot felon fake doctor" narrative and the falsehood that "he had previously accepted the deal offered by the airline personnel and then changed his mind and reentered the aircraft and reclaimed his seat".

We're still at " he broke federal law" and "he got what he deserved" as well as the obscene "he's totally responsible for his own injuries".

Those will crumble like rotten melons as well.

Nothing is crumbling, cupcake. Find a reference by me to he was a fake doctor or his sexual orientation, and i will quit posting. It didnt happen.

I also never said he violated federal law, so theres a trifecta of fail from you. Par for the course.

The incident was videotaped, he was carried out like a sack of potatoes, and hit his head resisting.

Show me video of him being beaten, or statements from someone in a position to have seen it.

ASSuming he was beaten because he ran back on, like a mental patient, with some blood on his face doesnt cut it. And, yes, if you are told you are going to be removed, and say you will have to drag me off, if you hit your head in the process, thats entirely on you. I guess you were raised to sit on the floor and blame others, which is fine. It doesnt change reality, though.

Actions have consequences. He was told what would happen, he told them to drag him off, and he got exactly what he asked for. Literally, he told them to drag him off.

Looks like his attorney way overplayed his hand, too. He should have asked for 5-10 and settled for 1-2 million on day one, promise them a press conference at noon and this would have gone away.

Theres only one reason hes still flapping his gums, amd thats because he wants too much money.

I was speaking of those sorts of comments in these thread in general, not asserting that you specifically uttered those exact words although your words do put you clearly in the camp of those who assert that the customer's injuries were totally self inflicted and absolve both the airline and "aviation police" who used physical force against him of any responsibility; which, as the future will certainly bear out, is a foolish position to adopt.

In the real world; when some puffed up adversaries begin to use snot nose words such as "cupcake" it warms my heart since I know, right there and then, that I'll be leaving the situation tens, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars richer.

]

Exact words? Wrong again. I said NOTHING about his past or his proclivities.

Grasp at straws much?

Your declaration of what will "certainly" come to pass is wanting. The attoreny VASTLY overplayed this.

Sure, you're winning because I called you cupcake. You've never been in a mediation with me.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:03:03 PM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
Explain one thing to me and I will accept the situation and shut up.

Why does United's contract of carriage have a list of reasons you can be denied boarding that includes being oversold, and a second list of reasons you can be removed that is much smaller?

View Quote

I'll speculate - I'm not an airline employee.

But I would imagine the difference exists because if the boarding agents are doing their job, you will never get on the plane to begin with, if your seat is needed for another reason. Theoretically, once you have boarded, the seat should be yours, unless you become an asshole.

However, that does not change the fact that airline personnel make mistakes. Not does it change the fact that if the airline wants you off the plane, you are getting off the plane. You may not like it, you may not understand it. Heck, the airline may even be in the wrong, violating their own rifles, and introduce a pending lawsuit. But none of that changes the fact that if the airline wants you off, you're getting off.

Multiple airline captains have explained that this is the way it is. I don't really like it either, but at the end of the day, the situation must allow for the airline to have unilateral authority over who travels on their planes.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:23:17 PM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:
So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

View Quote

That's not fair. Passengers aren't told to "piss off". If they are rebooked, it's often with a large compensation to the passenger, an upgrade, and the next available flight.

And anyone who thinks buying an airline ticket guarantees their on-time arrival at the destination is an idiot. Plenty of circumstances exist outside the airlines control to prevent this, not too mention over bookings, maintenance, etc.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:23:34 PM EDT

[#29]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'll speculate - I'm not an airline employee.

But I would imagine the difference exists because if the boarding agents are doing their job, you will never get on the plane to begin with, if your seat is needed for another reason. Theoretically, once you have boarded, the seat should be yours, unless you become an asshole.

However, that does not change the fact that airline personnel make mistakes. Not does it change the fact that if the airline wants you off the plane, you are getting off the plane. You may not like it, you may not understand it. Heck, the airline may even be in the wrong, violating their own rifles, and introduce a pending lawsuit. But none of that changes the fact that if the airline wants you off, you're getting off.

Multiple airline captains have explained that this is the way it is. I don't really like it either, but at the end of the day, the situation must allow for the airline to have unilateral authority over who travels on their planes.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Explain one thing to me and I will accept the situation and shut up.

Why does United's contract of carriage have a list of reasons you can be denied boarding that includes being oversold, and a second list of reasons you can be removed that is much smaller?

I'll speculate - I'm not an airline employee.

But I would imagine the difference exists because if the boarding agents are doing their job, you will never get on the plane to begin with, if your seat is needed for another reason. Theoretically, once you have boarded, the seat should be yours, unless you become an asshole.

However, that does not change the fact that airline personnel make mistakes. Not does it change the fact that if the airline wants you off the plane, you are getting off the plane. You may not like it, you may not understand it. Heck, the airline may even be in the wrong, violating their own rifles, and introduce a pending lawsuit. But none of that changes the fact that if the airline wants you off, you're getting off.

Multiple airline captains have explained that this is the way it is. I don't really like it either, but at the end of the day, the situation must allow for the airline to have unilateral authority over who travels on their planes.

OK. I feel like you and I are starting to get closer on this discussion. {hug}

So if the whole situation was caused by a mistake on the part of the gate agent, then why did the city rent-a-cops use force to cover for her mistake? I don't think that would ever be done for my benefit.

Something else that I would love to know, we are told that these four employees were 'must fly'. But it seems that this was only decided at the last moment (guessing because otherwise they would have been able to bump people before they were on the plane). What would have happened if the door was closed and the plane pushed back when these four people showed up at the gate? Would the plane have gone back to the gate? How about during taxi? After takeoff?

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:29:25 PM EDT

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:
That's not fair. Passengers aren't told to "piss off". If they are rebooked, it's often with a large compensation to the passenger, an upgrade, and the next available flight.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
So you would support a company writing a contract, offering a service, taking your money, and then telling you to piss off?

That's not fair. Passengers aren't told to "piss off". If they are rebooked, it's often with a large compensation to the passenger, an upgrade, and the next available flight.

But those are unilateral decisions. The airline decides everything once it gets to that point. Your opinion doesn't matter a bit. There is also the fact that in this case United needed those four people on the plane for their business reasons without any concern to the passenger's business reasons for already being on the plane.

Quoted:
And anyone who thinks buying an airline ticket guarantees their on-time arrival at the destination is an idiot. Plenty of circumstances exist outside the airlines control to prevent this, not too mention over bookings, maintenance, etc.

I am well aware of that, but it is irrelevant because none of those situations apply.

Now I do have to be fair. I have had airlines jump through some hoops for me. It was a few years ago, but I was flying back from overseas to Omaha, Nebraska and when I got to the airport for my layover I was told that the next leg was canceled due to weather. Luckily for me I was flying on a full fare paper ticket which (at least at the time) would become valid on any airline once an employee of the issuing airline signed it. So the gate agent signed it, I ran to a gate where another airline was still flying and got on.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:33:20 PM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:
OK. I feel like you and I are starting to get closer on this discussion. {hug}

So if the whole situation was caused by a mistake on the part of the gate agent, then why did the city rent-a-cops use force to cover for her mistake? I don't think that would ever be done for my benefit.

Something else that I would love to know, we are told that these four employees were 'must fly'. But it seems that this was only decided at the last moment (guessing because otherwise they would have been able to bump people before they were on the plane). What would have happened if the door was closed and the plane pushed back when these four people showed up at the gate? Would the plane have gone back to the gate? How about during taxi? After takeoff?

View Quote

Clearly the airport rent-a-cops were in the wrong, but I'm not sure the gate agent actually made a mistake. The passengers could have been boarded prior to the gate agent being notified of the need for the 4 seats.

I'm sure these airport cops were $10/hour employees, probably 6 months out of the military, and were responding to a call of an "unruly passenger". They think they are about to save the airport from a terrorist, and respond accordingly.

My guess is the employees were "must fly", because there is a departing flight at their destination that will not be able to depart until the employees get there. I doubt they would have had the airplane return to the gate for these employees, but I'm not sure.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:41:21 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:

Now I do have to be fair. I have had airlines jump through some hoops for me. It was a few years ago, but I was flying back from overseas to Omaha, Nebraska and when I got to the airport for my layover I was told that the next leg was canceled due to weather. Luckily for me I was flying on a full fare paper ticket which (at least at the time) would become valid on any airline once an employee of the issuing airline signed it. So the gate agent signed it, I ran to a gate where another airline was still flying and got on.

View Quote

I view these situations kinda like I look at cops. They do the right thing 99.99% of the time. And I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt every time, until it's is clear there was misconduct.

Airlines deal with hundreds, if not thousands, of these situations daily. The vast majority without incident, so you assume the passengers are somewhat satisfied. Or are at least reasonable people, and understand things happen.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:47:53 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:
Clearly the airport rent-a-cops were in the wrong, but I'm not sure the gate agent actually made a mistake. The passengers could have been boarded prior to the gate agent being notified of the need for the 4 seats.

I'm sure these airport cops were $10/hour employees, probably 6 months out of the military, and were responding to a call of an "unruly passenger". They think they are about to save the airport from a terrorist, and respond accordingly.

My guess is the employees were "must fly", because there is a departing flight at their destination that will not be able to depart until the employees get there. I doubt they would have had the airplane return to the gate for these employees, but I'm not sure.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
OK. I feel like you and I are starting to get closer on this discussion. {hug}

So if the whole situation was caused by a mistake on the part of the gate agent, then why did the city rent-a-cops use force to cover for her mistake? I don't think that would ever be done for my benefit.

Something else that I would love to know, we are told that these four employees were 'must fly'. But it seems that this was only decided at the last moment (guessing because otherwise they would have been able to bump people before they were on the plane). What would have happened if the door was closed and the plane pushed back when these four people showed up at the gate? Would the plane have gone back to the gate? How about during taxi? After takeoff?

Clearly the airport rent-a-cops were in the wrong, but I'm not sure the gate agent actually made a mistake. The passengers could have been boarded prior to the gate agent being notified of the need for the 4 seats.

I'm sure these airport cops were $10/hour employees, probably 6 months out of the military, and were responding to a call of an "unruly passenger". They think they are about to save the airport from a terrorist, and respond accordingly.

My guess is the employees were "must fly", because there is a departing flight at their destination that will not be able to depart until the employees get there. I doubt they would have had the airplane return to the gate for these employees, but I'm not sure.

Leaving the area of known facts and going to feelings and assumptions.

If the passengers were boarded before those employees needed the seats, then maybe the gate agent should have pushed back on scheduling and said it couldn't be done.
And if the gate agent called the cops and reported an "unruly passenger" then I would categorize that as a mistake.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:49:50 PM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:
I view these situations kinda like I look at cops. They do the right thing 99.99% of the time. And I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt every time, until it's is clear there was misconduct.

Airlines deal with hundreds, if not thousands, of these situations daily. The vast majority without incident, so you assume the passengers are somewhat satisfied. Or are at least reasonable people, and understand things happen.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Now I do have to be fair. I have had airlines jump through some hoops for me. It was a few years ago, but I was flying back from overseas to Omaha, Nebraska and when I got to the airport for my layover I was told that the next leg was canceled due to weather. Luckily for me I was flying on a full fare paper ticket which (at least at the time) would become valid on any airline once an employee of the issuing airline signed it. So the gate agent signed it, I ran to a gate where another airline was still flying and got on.

I view these situations kinda like I look at cops. They do the right thing 99.99% of the time. And I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt every time, until it's is clear there was misconduct.

Airlines deal with hundreds, if not thousands, of these situations daily. The vast majority without incident, so you assume the passengers are somewhat satisfied. Or are at least reasonable people, and understand things happen.

Part of the problem is that the understanding only goes one way. If the flight is late then the airlines respond with a shrug. If the passenger is late then the airlines take their seat and resell it again even if the passenger could have made it.

For me, if the airlines want understanding then they need to be willing to be understanding as well.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:50:52 PM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:
I don't understand how these guys can be told the way it is, by the people who do it for a living, and still not believe it.

Just because they don't like reality, doesn't make it so.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

He's not going to accept the truth of this statement in 3, 2, 1

I don't understand how these guys can be told the way it is, by the people who do it for a living, and still not believe it.

Just because they don't like reality, doesn't make it so.

Appology accepted.

Posted: 4/25/2017 1:59:33 PM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

View Quote

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

Posted: 4/25/2017 2:03:58 PM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:
Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

How many zeros do you guess it will be for this seat?

Posted: 4/25/2017 2:07:36 PM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:

How many zeros do you guess it will be for this seat?

View Quote

Honestly, this will be settled out of court. If I had to guess? $2.5 mil. But we'll never know. Curious who will bear the majority of the liability. My guess is the airport and the cop's company.

But the whole issue, imo, is the over-zealous rent-a-cops who were trying to save the world from terrorism.

Posted: 4/25/2017 3:47:18 PM EDT

[#39]

Quote History

Quoted:
Explain one thing to me and I will accept the situation and shut up.

Why does United's contract of carriage have a list of reasons you can be denied boarding that includes being oversold, and a second list of reasons you can be removed that is much smaller?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

He's not going to accept the truth of this statement in 3, 2, 1

I don't understand how these guys can be told the way it is, by the people who do it for a living, and still not believe it.

Just because they don't like reality, doesn't make it so.

Explain one thing to me and I will accept the situation and shut up.

Why does United's contract of carriage have a list of reasons you can be denied boarding that includes being oversold, and a second list of reasons you can be removed that is much smaller?

Denied boarding is refusal to take you.

Removal is they have decided to take you , you are in the process of being taken, and you do something and they are going to go back to gate, divert, etc and remove you

Posted: 4/25/2017 3:50:46 PM EDT

[#40]

forget it

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:03:39 PM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:
Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:05:57 PM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
Denied boarding is refusal to take you.

Removal is they have decided to take you , you are in the process of being taken, and you do something and they are going to go back to gate, divert, etc and remove you

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

He's not going to accept the truth of this statement in 3, 2, 1

I don't understand how these guys can be told the way it is, by the people who do it for a living, and still not believe it.

Just because they don't like reality, doesn't make it so.

Explain one thing to me and I will accept the situation and shut up.

Why does United's contract of carriage have a list of reasons you can be denied boarding that includes being oversold, and a second list of reasons you can be removed that is much smaller?

Denied boarding is refusal to take you.

Removal is they have decided to take you , you are in the process of being taken, and you do something and they are going to go back to gate, divert, etc and remove you

OK. They decided to take him. He was in the process of being taken. He did nothing and they removed him.

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:17:52 PM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:
And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:33:52 PM EDT

[#44]

Quote History

Quoted:
The government isn't even of a single mind. For flying hours the definition is pushback to park. For the NTSB part 830 defines a flight as when the first person boards to fly until everyone is off. For the DoD a flight is weight off wheels to touchdown. I haven't found a definition for general FAA purposes.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I say it's when the towbar flexes or at smaller airports I have seen a/c use thrust reversers to back up, yes at that point when the door is closed, the jetway is gone and he has to maneuver an a/c thru a maze of taxiways to sequence at the active runway

http://code7700.com/images/kdfw_airport_diagram.png

It's odd that there is disagreement on this, but that shows what a tricky point it is. The Captain has complete authority when the aircraft is "in flight". You would think that would be when it leaves the ground, but it seems the "flight" begins from the government's point of view when the airplane starts moving with the intent to become airborne.

Anyone know for sure?

The government isn't even of a single mind. For flying hours the definition is pushback to park. For the NTSB part 830 defines a flight as when the first person boards to fly until everyone is off. For the DoD a flight is weight off wheels to touchdown. I haven't found a definition for general FAA purposes.

Gate agent boards passengers gets the ok from the ramp that all external appendages are shut and all cargo and bags aboard, then tells the flight crew yes, the door is shut the jetway is moved back chocks are removed and a tow bar gets pressure from a tug who requests a pushback from the CAPT, I say it's right then and there the CAPT knows he is the main responsibility for the a/c where he is untethered

ETA the ground crew pushing him back is still with the CAPT until they unhook the tow bar, the ground crew is at an advantage being able to see and avoid other a/c and vehicles as he is pushed back, once the ground crew is clear they will request the CAPT to brake park and start engines, them you have freedom of flight a true a/c

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:41:25 PM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

Thank you for your in depth analysis. Your contribution is invaluable.

Posted: 4/25/2017 4:48:52 PM EDT

[#46]

I was involved in an airplane accident that was clipped by a poo poo truck, the jetway was back, the door was shut and about to be pushed back, the plane did not move. No flight crew or ground crew or gate crew had to be walked off and piss tested, it was only the poo poo man. Jetway moved back, PAX bag and cargo dump and finally flight crew walked off to another complex, it would have been a different situation if the plane was untethered and in motion, it would a lot more people involved

That's why I say a plane on its own is the sole responsibility of the CAPT

Posted: 4/25/2017 6:06:55 PM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
Thank you for your in depth analysis. Your contribution is invaluable.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

Thank you for your in depth analysis. Your contribution is invaluable.

Your welcome

Posted: 4/25/2017 6:20:13 PM EDT

[#48]

Quote History

Quoted:
Your welcome

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Appology accepted.

Haha I'm not apologizing for anything, nor am I conceding anyone else's point.

Right or wrong, like it or not, if the airline wants you off the plane, your ass is getting off the plane. The details and justifications may be worked out later with the passenger, if the passenger pursues it. But if the airline wants that seat, you're not flying. Simple as that.

And if a mugger wants your wallet they are going to get your wallet. Doesn't mean they have a legal right to it.

Thank you for your in depth analysis. Your contribution is invaluable.

Your welcome

My welcome, what?

Posted: 4/25/2017 6:23:44 PM EDT

[#49]

Quote History

Quoted:
OK. They decided to take him. He was in the process of being taken. He did nothing and they removed him.

View Quote

What is the point that you want made? That once in your seat, if not misbehaving, the airline should be forced to allow you to stay on the plane no matter what?

Posted: 4/25/2017 6:36:54 PM EDT

[#50]

Quote History

Quoted:

What law? CITADELGRAD87 isn't saying he broke a federal law and the one Chairborne referenced requires one to believe "Drag me down" is intimidating a flight crew member.

View Quote

You have to obey the instructions of the flight crew. "Get off the plane" is a valid instruction. If you do nto obey that, you have broken the law.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Your rights on a commercial aircraft (Page 7 of 10)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us