Sounds like United Airlines muffed it

[Edwin Santos]

I agree about the chaos, but with all due respect, what would you do if faced with my little 'game'?

I would honor the commitment I made to give the guy a ride to the big game for the $5 I took from him. To me, offering to give the $5 back and even offering to increase it to $10 is basically a new deal that he declined. My teenager's change of heart is a separate problem that in my case would have to go down as a life lesson for him/her.

This is only my take of course, but just because I own the car doesn't afford me a special right to unilaterally change my mind, renege on the deal I made (and solicited), and I definitely don't have the right to use force to get my way in the scenario you've described. By the same token, if I were a landlord, just because I own the property, doesn't give me the right to renege on the lease deal I made and throw my tenants out because of some reason for my own convenience.

Also, with regard to the centuries of maritime history that are intended to protect the safety of ALL passengers, have you seen any evidence that the doctor was a threat to the safety of the other passengers? I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

[Malcolm McLeod]

I would honor the commitment I made to give the guy a ride to the big game for the $5 I took from him. To me, offering to give the $5 back and even offering to increase it to $10 is basically a new deal that he declined. My teenager's change of heart is a separate problem that in my case would have to go down as a life lesson.

This is just my take of course, but just because I own the car doesn't afford me a special right to unilaterally change my mind, renege on the deal I made (and solicited), and I definitely don't have the right to use force to get my way in the scenario you've described.

By the way, with regard to the centuries of maritime history that are intended to protect the safety of ALL passengers, have you seen any evidence that the doctor was a threat to the safety of the other passengers? I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

Fair enough. Thank you.

[Paul McGaha]

I know better than to pursue this since it has dragged on and on, but we must have seen different videos?

The TV news I saw played the video in agonizingly slow-motion, frame, by frame, by frame. The good Dr. passenger wasn't beaten (in the video I saw). The police threw no punches, swung no batons, slammed no body parts into the floor, and did not even kneel on his good Dr. head (in the video I saw).

In the frame-by-frame video replay and analysis I saw, the police pulled the good Dr. passenger out of his seat and then lost their grip on him about half way to standing. The good Dr. passenger, having gone limp, thus fell face-first into the armrest of the seat across the aisle.

Blame United. Blame the Dr. ....Not so sure about the police. I would suggest the police used the force necessary to remove the good Dr. passenger - as they were asked to do by the aircraft owner's agents.

Play a game if you will: You offer a guy walking down the street a $5 ride to the big game, because you have a spare seat (your teenager is mad at you and won't go). He gives you $5 for gas. But then your teenager has that magical realization that you'll actually go without them, and comes running out of the house to get in the car seat now occupied by your newfound stranger/passenger. You try to give him his $5 back, even offer him $10, but he refuses to surrender the seat. As the vehicle owner, what will you do? Call him a cab? Call the police? What force will you deem appropriate to remove him? ...quickly, or you'll miss the game.

One other thing to perhaps keep in mind - much of the authority and power granted to the flight crew (and Captain) are based on centuries of maritime history. And it is intended to ensure the safety of ALL, even those not on board. (Call me a supporter of the thin-blue line.)

Malcolm, I appreciate your post and I think I see this a lot like you do.

As for your game, once an agreement was made I'd honor it.

PHM

[Pat Barry]

I agree about the chaos, but with all due respect, what would you do if faced with my little 'game'?

Squeeze the kid in somewhere. No big deal

[Malcolm McLeod]

Squeeze the kid in somewhere. No big deal

Again, fair enough. Thanks.

My teenagers must be bigger than yours, there ain't no 'squeeze' in them.

[Pat Barry]

Again, fair enough. Thanks.

My teenagers must be bigger than yours, there ain't no 'squeeze' in them.

We used to put a few teenagers into the trunk of a car to get into the drive-in movies. Teenagers are very flexible.

[Chris Padilla]

Teenagers are very flexible.

...and typically come with limited funds....

[David Dalzell]

We seem to be forgetting our constitutional rights. There is too much deference to "authorities". We have allowed, and continue to allow, the "authorities" to define our rights and privileges. We need to take back our country! The politicians and their law enforcement entities need to learn that "we the people" must determine our rights.

[Mike Henderson]

We seem to be forgetting our constitutional rights. There is too much deference to "authorities". We have allowed, and continue to allow, the "authorities" to define our rights and privileges. We need to take back our country! The politicians and their law enforcement entities need to learn that "we the people" must determine our rights.

With freedom comes responsibility. If everyone could decide what constituted their "rights" we'd have anarchy. We have laws that define what our rights are under the constitution.

Sometimes a person believes that a law is wrong and should be changed. They can advocate for its change and they can do "civil disobedience" to bring attention to the law. If enough people agree that the law is wrong, it may get changed. But the person (or persons) who engages in civil disobedience has to be prepared to suffer the consequences of their disobedience, especially if other people do not support their views.

We have laws and "authorities" in order to have a civil society.

Mike

[Frederick Skelly]

With freedom comes responsibility. If everyone could decide what constituted their "rights" we'd have anarchy. We have laws that define what our rights are under the constitution.

Sometimes a person believes that a law is wrong and should be changed. They can advocate for its change and they can do "civil disobedience" to bring attention to the law. If enough people agree that the law is wrong, it may get changed. But the person (or persons) who engages in civil disobedience has to be prepared to suffer the consequences of their disobedience, especially if other people do not support their views.

We have laws and "authorities" in order to have a civil society.

Mike

+1 Well said.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... "we the people" must determine our rights.

Please keep in mind this doesn't say "me the person". All freedoms have a cost.

[Frank Drew]

I don't believe passenger safety was an issue here at all.

I completely agree; this wasn't at all about safety or airline security, it was about convenience for the airline.

When most people make plans to fly somewhere, they're committing to a major allocation of their time; this isn't like driving to the movie theater or grocery store. What other retail businesses routinely sell the same object twice? Or take the bought and paid for object or service away from one customer in order to sell it to another (better?) customer?

[Jeff Straper]

A couple things to consider. It's my understanding it's a violation of regulations to defy airline employees directions. It violates the laws to ignore or defy police when they ask you to do something. It was airport authority police who drug the guy off not United Airlines employees.

You nailed it Ken. While it could have been handled better (and I think a higher compensation would make multiple people stand up), it's their right to do what they did. By buying the ticket you're instantly agreeing to it.

[Edwin Santos]

You nailed it Ken. While it could have been handled better (and I think a higher compensation would make multiple people stand up), it's their right to do what they did. By buying the ticket you're instantly agreeing to it.

Following that logic, the United States would still be a British colony. After all, the founding fathers violated the law when they defied the British monarchy.

Too broad an example? Okay, how about this -

On June 7th 1893 in South Africa, a young lawyer named Mohandas K. Gandhi boarded a train. Despite his first class ticket, the rules and regulations of the time did not permit a non-white person to be seated in the first class carriage. He politely refused to move holding up his ticket as justification, at which point he was physically thrown off the car onto the platform, his luggage thrown off behind him. This incident is cited as the catalyst that altered the path of his extraordinary life and brought about the eventual independence of India. Gandhi's influence in the cause of non-violent civil rights around the world, including the American Civil Rights movement, cannot be overstated. Interestingly, in 1997 Gandhi was posthumously bestowed an award at a ceremony held at the very train station where he was assaulted. The ceremony was presided over by none other than Nelson Mandela who himself spent 27 years in prison for defying the apartheid government.

My point is that just because it is a law or rule or regulation doesn't automatically make it just.

I share the story about Gandhi because someone in the thread mentioned how the UA incident reminded them of Rosa Parks and her refusal to give up her seat, and I thought there was some element of similarity in Gandhi's story also.

Sorry if this response is too political. I'm just trying to put forth an alternate point of view. I respect that others see it differently.

[Jim Koepke]

Sorry if this response is too political. I'm just trying to put forth an alternate point of view. I respect that others see it differently.

I hope the powers that be let it stand.

Sometimes people have to stay seated to make a stand.

jtk