comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 19 minutes ago
I don't like to say it VC. I'm not on the airlines side in how they handled this. Sadly, it's true that had he just complied he wouldn't have been hurt.
................
Why should he comply. I wouldn't if I was that age ( I am not, and not even close yet, despite popular belief) and was being separated from my wife (who was 8 rows back).
As I keep telling you ignorant people on here, the Airline should not have boarded the passengers in the first place.
And non compliance by the passenger is not an excuse for what happened to him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, they all just sit on the tarmac until he dies of old age, and they can carry off his corpse?
It's absolutely his prerogative to refuse to move. Nevertheless, it's clear that the officers were briefed to remove anyone not complying with the request to get off the plane.
You're right, there is no excuse for what happened to him. I doubt even the airline could've foreseen what happened.
I'd imagine this exercise has played out a thousand times or more without incident.
If you'd read my earlier comment in its entirety then you would know that I'm not ignorant of the fact that they shouldn't have boarded the passengers before resolving the issue they knew must arise.
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
It shouldn't have happened in the first place - which is precisely what people are saying. Why is that so hard to understand?
-
It isn't. That's why every single person on this thread has been in agreement for hours that this should not have happened...
So what, they all just sit on the tarmac until he dies of old age, and they can carry off his corpse?
...................
It beats physically assaulting someone and dragging him off a plane in public view.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 41 seconds ago
faux outrage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
personally i prefer "falsum nefas"
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
It's absolutely his prerogative to refuse to move. Nevertheless, it's clear that the officers were briefed to remove anyone not complying with the request to get off the plane.
-----------------------------
Can't use that kind of force on an old man though. It just ain't right.
It never should have gotten to that point but once it did, what happened shouldn't have happened.
I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong
...............
You are wrong.
....................
this is tomorrows chip paper for me
....................
No one cares about you. People do, however, care about the treatment handed out to this old boy.
I am quite sure you would not have spouted the crap you have today if this happened to your grand father.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be amazed if it ever gets to court. The airline is dealing with a PR disaster and they'll want to (a) silence the critics and (b) get out looking like the good guys.
That'll be difficult given the idiotic CEO's comments but ultimately they're multi-billion dollar business. Chucking some money at this chap and apologising for his experience is the closest they'll get to coming out unscathed and is no skin off their nose.
Never mind the law, it's just good business sense in the face of potential customer backlash.
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
I like to think grandfather a would have moved when asked and grandfather b would have been to drunk to get on in the first place. Both are dead so we will never know.
comment by Can Solo (U6997)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be amazed if it ever gets to court. The airline is dealing with a PR disaster and they'll want to (a) silence the critics and (b) get out looking like the good guys.
That'll be difficult given the idiotic CEO's comments but ultimately they're multi-billion dollar business. Chucking some money at this chap and apologising for his experience is the closest they'll get to coming out unscathed and is no skin off their nose.
Never mind the law, it's just good business sense in the face of potential customer backlash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep, i have agreed with a similar view previously
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And everyone agrees that the passenger shares no blame whatsoever. 👍
I don't get what Lambro is trying to argue :/
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And everyone agrees that the passenger shares no blame whatsoever. 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, that sassy b*gger got what was coming to him... :|
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
I mean 5o say the authorities responsible for the safety of air travel.
i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place
............................
Are you an idiot?
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The airline and the United staff, and not the individual security officials, are most culpable for me.
None of the passengers should have been asked to move in the first place. And security should not have been summoned to remove the ageing gentleman.
United have problems with their policy, and with the decision making of their staff. Including their Chief Exec.
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The airline and the United staff, and not the individual security officials, are most culpable for me.
None of the passengers should have been asked to move in the first place. And security should not have been summoned to remove the ageing gentleman.
United have problems with their policy, and with the decision making of their staff. Including their Chief Exec.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not disagree with your statement but the law does.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Are you?
.........
No, but I ask, as you are supplying us with plenty of evidence that you are.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you calling him a victim if you feel he is responsible for what happened. He bought and paid for an airline ticket and boarded the flight with his wife. He posed not threat to, nor did he attempt to undermine the security of the flight.
Sign in if you want to comment
Man brutally dragged out of a plane
Page 17 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 19 minutes ago
I don't like to say it VC. I'm not on the airlines side in how they handled this. Sadly, it's true that had he just complied he wouldn't have been hurt.
................
Why should he comply. I wouldn't if I was that age ( I am not, and not even close yet, despite popular belief) and was being separated from my wife (who was 8 rows back).
As I keep telling you ignorant people on here, the Airline should not have boarded the passengers in the first place.
And non compliance by the passenger is not an excuse for what happened to him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, they all just sit on the tarmac until he dies of old age, and they can carry off his corpse?
It's absolutely his prerogative to refuse to move. Nevertheless, it's clear that the officers were briefed to remove anyone not complying with the request to get off the plane.
You're right, there is no excuse for what happened to him. I doubt even the airline could've foreseen what happened.
I'd imagine this exercise has played out a thousand times or more without incident.
If you'd read my earlier comment in its entirety then you would know that I'm not ignorant of the fact that they shouldn't have boarded the passengers before resolving the issue they knew must arise.
posted on 11/4/17
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
posted on 11/4/17
It shouldn't have happened in the first place - which is precisely what people are saying. Why is that so hard to understand?
-
It isn't. That's why every single person on this thread has been in agreement for hours that this should not have happened...
posted on 11/4/17
faux outrage
posted on 11/4/17
So what, they all just sit on the tarmac until he dies of old age, and they can carry off his corpse?
...................
It beats physically assaulting someone and dragging him off a plane in public view.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
posted on 11/4/17
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 41 seconds ago
faux outrage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
personally i prefer "falsum nefas"
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
posted on 11/4/17
It's absolutely his prerogative to refuse to move. Nevertheless, it's clear that the officers were briefed to remove anyone not complying with the request to get off the plane.
-----------------------------
Can't use that kind of force on an old man though. It just ain't right.
It never should have gotten to that point but once it did, what happened shouldn't have happened.
posted on 11/4/17
I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong
...............
You are wrong.
....................
this is tomorrows chip paper for me
....................
No one cares about you. People do, however, care about the treatment handed out to this old boy.
I am quite sure you would not have spouted the crap you have today if this happened to your grand father.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be amazed if it ever gets to court. The airline is dealing with a PR disaster and they'll want to (a) silence the critics and (b) get out looking like the good guys.
That'll be difficult given the idiotic CEO's comments but ultimately they're multi-billion dollar business. Chucking some money at this chap and apologising for his experience is the closest they'll get to coming out unscathed and is no skin off their nose.
Never mind the law, it's just good business sense in the face of potential customer backlash.
posted on 11/4/17
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
posted on 11/4/17
I like to think grandfather a would have moved when asked and grandfather b would have been to drunk to get on in the first place. Both are dead so we will never know.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Can Solo (U6997)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 12 seconds ago
given that people have won damages for being burned when sticking a cup of coffee between their legs whilst driving, or been made to pay child support after j!zzing in a woman's mouth who then spat it out and shoved it inside her, i would never bet on the outcome of a US lawsuit
..................
Not only that, but in the USA it is against the law to physically assault someone.
Sadly for the Airport Security Police in this instance it is all on video.
Not even one of trumps judges is going to go against public opinion on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be judged against the law, not public opinion. I'll loose no sleep if I'm wrong like i said, this is tomorrows chip paper for me (to lean on an old expression)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be amazed if it ever gets to court. The airline is dealing with a PR disaster and they'll want to (a) silence the critics and (b) get out looking like the good guys.
That'll be difficult given the idiotic CEO's comments but ultimately they're multi-billion dollar business. Chucking some money at this chap and apologising for his experience is the closest they'll get to coming out unscathed and is no skin off their nose.
Never mind the law, it's just good business sense in the face of potential customer backlash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep, i have agreed with a similar view previously
posted on 11/4/17
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And everyone agrees that the passenger shares no blame whatsoever. 👍
posted on 11/4/17
I don't get what Lambro is trying to argue :/
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm glad that after several hours of discussion, we can all agree that this thing that should not have happened, should not have happened...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And everyone agrees that the passenger shares no blame whatsoever. 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, that sassy b*gger got what was coming to him... :|
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
posted on 11/4/17
I mean 5o say the authorities responsible for the safety of air travel.
posted on 11/4/17
i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place
............................
Are you an idiot?
posted on 11/4/17
Are you?
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The airline and the United staff, and not the individual security officials, are most culpable for me.
None of the passengers should have been asked to move in the first place. And security should not have been summoned to remove the ageing gentleman.
United have problems with their policy, and with the decision making of their staff. Including their Chief Exec.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The airline and the United staff, and not the individual security officials, are most culpable for me.
None of the passengers should have been asked to move in the first place. And security should not have been summoned to remove the ageing gentleman.
United have problems with their policy, and with the decision making of their staff. Including their Chief Exec.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not disagree with your statement but the law does.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Are you?
.........
No, but I ask, as you are supplying us with plenty of evidence that you are.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because of the outrage it has caused. The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure and the airline said they would see what they could improve on.
There are always consequences to our actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realize that the outrage is a result of the actual treatment meated out to the passenger and not that the flight was overbooked.
The company according to you are already admitting correct procedures were not followed
This man is going to get a nice big settlement a consequence to the airlines actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know why people are outraged, i am not because i feel the victim could have prevented this himself by obeying a legal and legitimate request in the first place and by obeying 9nstricyoons from security officials subsequently.
I feel it would be a dangerous road to go down to undermine the authorities responsible for air travel, that's why i cant see it happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you calling him a victim if you feel he is responsible for what happened. He bought and paid for an airline ticket and boarded the flight with his wife. He posed not threat to, nor did he attempt to undermine the security of the flight.
Page 17 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20