comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 5 minutes ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough JFDI. That's your opinion.
Personally I'd say there are no justifications for authorities to hand out the rough treatment seen (and reported) against a defenceless member of the public.
The fact he could have avoided it is no excuse for the actions IMO.
I'd argue it's an equally dangerous road to turn a blind eye whilst those that carry a badge get to act with impunity.
In hindsight, we are now all experts on aviation law...
But no doubt the guy, after being offered $800 to leave, was under the impression that it was a choice, not an order.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 36 seconds ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are perfectly entitled to view me as you wish, no skin off my nose. Mine may not be a popular view but it based on a little experience as well as opinion.
Personally I'd say there are no justifications for authorities to hand out the rough treatment seen (and reported) against a defenceless member of the public.
..............
Which is exactly what the US DoT have come out and said today and why the Security Guard is now on administrative leave.
....................
The fact he could have avoided it is no excuse for the actions IMO.
..................
Exactly.
You are perfectly entitled to view me as you wish
................
I don't require your permission.
You are being a pillock on a public forum.
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 2 minutes ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure
______________
But we've repeatedly been told that he was "just doing his job".
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
-----------------------------------------------------------l-----------
I thought so to but i try and ignore the dogs and respond as honestly and openly as i can.
I find it quite amusing how outraged some can become when your views differ.
comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 8 minutes ago
The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure
______________
But we've repeatedly been told that he was "just doing his job".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was.
Nobody said he was doing it well.
I find it quite amusing how outraged some can become when your views differ.
.............
I am not outraged by your views. I just find them utterly stupid.
Wonder if we will now see booking changes as a result of all this with additional fees added to air fares in to 'guarantee' a place on a flight?
comment by Cornelius Oofterom (U15867)
posted 1 minute ago
Wonder if we will now see booking changes as a result of all this with additional fees added to air fares in to 'guarantee' a place on a flight?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely no need to do that.
Just do what most airlines manage to do 95% of the time and resolve at the check in desk rather than the plane.
Or offer enough financial incentive to make the whole incident resolvable.
No need to change anything other than United's feck-wittery.
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardly the same Don
Anyway the question of his use of the term victim was asked because of his assertion that any lawyer would have to be desperate to take up this mans case in a possible law suit. Slapped wrists would be all the airline would be dolling out because it was the man's fault according to him
If he is a victim something bad happened to him. Seems to me like a good starting point for any lawyer
Then i feel for you as they are based on experience and knowledge, not to expert level but enough to know what I'm talking about.
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
Things went down hill because he did not cooperate with authorities, that is a fact. Everything that happens after is cause for debate.
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardly the same Don
Anyway the question of his use of the term victim was asked because of his assertion that any lawyer would have to be desperate to take up this mans case in a possible law suit. Slapped wrists would be all the airline would be dolling out because it was the man's fault according to him
If he is a victim something bad happened to him. Seems to me like a good starting point for any lawyer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like the car crash victim, the defence would argue the victim brought his injuries on himself by not following legitimate requests, please note i have used legitimate rather than fair, reasonable, etc.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
....................
That you have no clue about human nature. Especially old people.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like the car crash victim, the defence would argue the victim brought his injuries on himself by not following legitimate requests, please note i have used legitimate rather than fair, reasonable, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
kinda like this...a tony bit....perhaps...anyway, even if it's nothing like this, i need no excuse for posting one of my favourite youtube videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYVUb3i3GSo
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 13 seconds ago
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
....................
That you have no clue about human nature. Especially old people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really should not make claims you cannot back up and i know enough about human nature not to judge one person by another, regardless of age, in fact i prefer not to judge.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
He became a victim as soon as he was randomly selected not after the physical confrontation.
comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 1 minute ago
Laws are made by men and sometimes they need to be challenged. If the law states the airline can eject anyone for any reason (or no reason) then the law needs to be changed and people should resist it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what isn't shown on the video is that originally the airline wanted him to sit at the back of the plane...but he wasn't going to move for whitey.
FFS 😂
We are comparing an 60 year old man taking a flight along with his wife to the wreckless actions of a drunk driver and a drunk teenager giving lip to bouncers outside a nightclub
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 3 seconds ago
FFS 😂
We are comparing an 60 year old man taking a flight along with his wife to the wreckless actions of a drunk driver and a drunk teenager giving lip to bouncers outside a nightclub
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes, that's exactly what we have been doing...thank god you were paying attention
Sign in if you want to comment
Man brutally dragged out of a plane
Page 18 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 5 minutes ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough JFDI. That's your opinion.
Personally I'd say there are no justifications for authorities to hand out the rough treatment seen (and reported) against a defenceless member of the public.
The fact he could have avoided it is no excuse for the actions IMO.
I'd argue it's an equally dangerous road to turn a blind eye whilst those that carry a badge get to act with impunity.
posted on 11/4/17
In hindsight, we are now all experts on aviation law...
But no doubt the guy, after being offered $800 to leave, was under the impression that it was a choice, not an order.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 36 seconds ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are perfectly entitled to view me as you wish, no skin off my nose. Mine may not be a popular view but it based on a little experience as well as opinion.
posted on 11/4/17
Personally I'd say there are no justifications for authorities to hand out the rough treatment seen (and reported) against a defenceless member of the public.
..............
Which is exactly what the US DoT have come out and said today and why the Security Guard is now on administrative leave.
....................
The fact he could have avoided it is no excuse for the actions IMO.
..................
Exactly.
posted on 11/4/17
You are perfectly entitled to view me as you wish
................
I don't require your permission.
You are being a pillock on a public forum.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 2 minutes ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
posted on 11/4/17
The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure
______________
But we've repeatedly been told that he was "just doing his job".
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 39 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
-----------------------------------------------------------l-----------
I thought so to but i try and ignore the dogs and respond as honestly and openly as i can.
I find it quite amusing how outraged some can become when your views differ.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 8 minutes ago
The authorities have already said one of their agents didn't follow the correct procedure
______________
But we've repeatedly been told that he was "just doing his job".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was.
Nobody said he was doing it well.
posted on 11/4/17
I find it quite amusing how outraged some can become when your views differ.
.............
I am not outraged by your views. I just find them utterly stupid.
posted on 11/4/17
Wonder if we will now see booking changes as a result of all this with additional fees added to air fares in to 'guarantee' a place on a flight?
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Cornelius Oofterom (U15867)
posted 1 minute ago
Wonder if we will now see booking changes as a result of all this with additional fees added to air fares in to 'guarantee' a place on a flight?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely no need to do that.
Just do what most airlines manage to do 95% of the time and resolve at the check in desk rather than the plane.
Or offer enough financial incentive to make the whole incident resolvable.
No need to change anything other than United's feck-wittery.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardly the same Don
Anyway the question of his use of the term victim was asked because of his assertion that any lawyer would have to be desperate to take up this mans case in a possible law suit. Slapped wrists would be all the airline would be dolling out because it was the man's fault according to him
If he is a victim something bad happened to him. Seems to me like a good starting point for any lawyer
posted on 11/4/17
Then i feel for you as they are based on experience and knowledge, not to expert level but enough to know what I'm talking about.
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
Things went down hill because he did not cooperate with authorities, that is a fact. Everything that happens after is cause for debate.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt he is a victim, my view is that his actions caused him to become one. I can recognise a victim, that doesn't stop me fbelieving he could have avoided becoming one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was an odd query, perfectly normal to read about the "victim" of a car crash, even when the driver smashed his car into a wall when wasted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardly the same Don
Anyway the question of his use of the term victim was asked because of his assertion that any lawyer would have to be desperate to take up this mans case in a possible law suit. Slapped wrists would be all the airline would be dolling out because it was the man's fault according to him
If he is a victim something bad happened to him. Seems to me like a good starting point for any lawyer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like the car crash victim, the defence would argue the victim brought his injuries on himself by not following legitimate requests, please note i have used legitimate rather than fair, reasonable, etc.
posted on 11/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 11/4/17
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
....................
That you have no clue about human nature. Especially old people.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by JFDI (U1657)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But like the car crash victim, the defence would argue the victim brought his injuries on himself by not following legitimate requests, please note i have used legitimate rather than fair, reasonable, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
kinda like this...a tony bit....perhaps...anyway, even if it's nothing like this, i need no excuse for posting one of my favourite youtube videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYVUb3i3GSo
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 13 seconds ago
I believe the airline had a right to ask the victim to leave the plane, and i believe the injuries sustained could have been avoided if he had done as asked.
What is so stupid about that?
....................
That you have no clue about human nature. Especially old people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really should not make claims you cannot back up and i know enough about human nature not to judge one person by another, regardless of age, in fact i prefer not to judge.
posted on 11/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 11/4/17
He became a victim as soon as he was randomly selected not after the physical confrontation.
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 1 minute ago
Laws are made by men and sometimes they need to be challenged. If the law states the airline can eject anyone for any reason (or no reason) then the law needs to be changed and people should resist it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what isn't shown on the video is that originally the airline wanted him to sit at the back of the plane...but he wasn't going to move for whitey.
posted on 11/4/17
FFS 😂
We are comparing an 60 year old man taking a flight along with his wife to the wreckless actions of a drunk driver and a drunk teenager giving lip to bouncers outside a nightclub
posted on 11/4/17
comment by Roy's Keen (U11635)
posted 3 seconds ago
FFS 😂
We are comparing an 60 year old man taking a flight along with his wife to the wreckless actions of a drunk driver and a drunk teenager giving lip to bouncers outside a nightclub
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yes, that's exactly what we have been doing...thank god you were paying attention
Page 18 of 20
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20