Airlines Want to Ban Disruptive Passengers - Republicans Say No

[MinTrut]

Who would know more about Nazis than a Nazi himself... you must be right then

You're a Nazi?

I admire your candor if not your values.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So the only way to eliminate risk or COVID is require everyone to be vaccinated.

But the fact that you can’t see this in context outside of you is telling that we have lost our ability to think as part of a society. The me generation really has screwed us.

If every single American was vaxed, we would still have people getting and spreading covid. Are you denying that? The internet is full of proof of my claim.

Covid outbreak hits Mediterranean cruise ship MSC Grandiosa

MSC Cruises says 45 Covid positive passengers disembarked from its MSC Grandiosa vessel, the latest Covid-hit cruise ship as the Omicron strain spreads across the world.

www.cnn.com

The people that lost their ability to think are those the MSM have brainwashed like yourself.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You're a Nazi?

I admire your candor if not your values.

No, the person with the swastika as their avatar is the Nazi....hard for you to claim you are not one when you proudly display the swastika for all the world to see

 

[AZrailwhale]

I think that if you punch out a stewardess, you'll be taking the bus or a train from here on out. Airline staff are not hired to be bouncers for those with anger management issues.

You have to prove you're a grown up who can follow the rules to get on a plane. If your Free-Dumb is that important to you, try objecting to going through airline security. That's a much bigger infringement on your Constitution rights against unreasonable search or seizure than any pandemic protocols.

If you punch out a flight crew member you should go to jail for battery. You shouldn’t be banned from flying for life. If the individual airline wants to ban you, that’s fine, it’s their plane. But a universal ban? Hell no.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You mean you don't know that Democrats are power hungry vermin that uses their power to get even with the other side? After all, that's what this is really about. Defy Big Brother and you will be marked for the rest of your life.

No. I don't understand why the airlines are asking government to do this. If they want to ban passengers, why don't the just do it. What is the point of trying to get legislation passed for something they already have the power to do.

It doesn't make sense.

 

[ThisIsMe]

They don't.

That does not mean that government does not want to take the opportunity to increase its power and control. As for the airlines, I am sure they would prefer the government do it as then they do not have to answer to the customers. If they ban someone it will not mean they will go to their competition and enrich them. It means they will not be able to get online and complain about a specific company and their policy.

Cover. Companies always want this kind of cover - the kind of cover that only government can give.

As for the airlines, I am sure they would prefer the government do it as then they do not have to answer to the customers.

That may be it. I can understand if they were a true threat to air security, then yeah, put them on a no fly list. If they just had an argument or a disagreement with a flight attendant, then that person is not a threat and the airline can shoot to not allow them to fly on their equipment anymore.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No. I don't understand why the airlines are asking government to do this. If they want to ban passengers, why don't the just do it. What is the point of trying to get legislation passed for something they already have the power to do.

It doesn't make sense.

I think they could run into problems with discriminatory practices, such as why was the white guy allowed to argue about wearing a mask and the Arab person put on the list for doing the same? But again this is not about the safety of the passengers and crew, this is politics where one side gets even with the other side. Apparently this is a Democrat bill.

 

[toobfreak]

Yep, those convicted in a court of law of endangering the safety of their fellow passengers

Odd, I've seen a lot of people thrown off flights, but I've yet seen one who actually was a THREAT to the safety of others!

 

[ThisIsMe]

I think they could run into problems with discriminatory practices, such as why was the white guy allowed to argue about wearing a mask and the Arab person put on the list for doing the same? But again this is not about the safety of the passengers and crew, this is politics where one side gets even with the other side. Apparently this is a Democrat bill.

Right, so the airlines is wanting to avoid problems, so they are asking the government to do it for them. That is wrong. They need to settle their own affairs.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If an airline wants to ban someone from their planes, fine. But mandating that all airlines permanently ban someone,that's ridiculous.

If someone acts up in a bar and gets banned for life, they can still go to another joint, and so it should be with this.

Convicted felons aren’t allowed to vote, own guns, use drugs or associate with other felons.
Certainly someone convicted of a felony aboard an aircraft could be barred from flying.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Convicted felons aren’t allowed to vote, own guns, use drugs or associate with other felons.
Certainly someone convicted of a felony aboard an aircraft could be barred from flying.

We're not talking about felons here. The FAA reported that most of those people where removed or considered a threat for simply not wearing a mask.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

We're not talking about felons here. The FAA reported that most of those people where removed or considered a threat for simply not wearing a mask.

The proposed rule would only apply to those convicted of crimes committed aboard an aircraft.

 

[Mac-7]

No, the person with the swastika as their avatar is the Nazi....hard for you to claim you are not one when you proudly display the swastika for all the world to see

You are being dishonest

the swastika on the donkey is an attack on democrats

As I am sure you well know

 

[initforme]

If you throw a big fit on an airplane then yes the airline can and should ban you for life.

 

[MinTrut]

No, the person with the swastika as their avatar is the Nazi....hard for you to claim you are not one when you proudly display the swastika for all the world to see

LOL

We both know you're not this stupid; why not give it up?

 

[MinTrut]

You are being dishonest

the swastika on the donkey is an attack on democrats

As I am sure you well know

Thank you.

I really do hope - for the sake of our collective sanity - that he understands this.

 

[Lisa558]

Yep, those convicted in a court of law of endangering the safety of their fellow passengers should be banned from flying on future flights, but 8 conservative Republican Senators, the infamous Cancun Ted one of them, say NO!

Because……… Freedumb.

The senators argued that the Transportation Security Administration “was created in the wake of 9/11 to protect Americans from future horrific attacks, not to regulate human behavior onboard flights.”

The eight Republicans signing the letter are Sens. Cynthia M. Lummis (Wyo.), Mike Lee (Utah), James Lankford (Okla.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Kevin Cramer (N.D.), Ted Cruz (Tex.), John Hoeven (N.D.) and Rick Scott (Fla.).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/15/eight-republican-senators-say-they-oppose-no-fly-list-disruptive-passengers-because-it-would-equate-mask-opponents-terrorists/

I think all those BLM savages burning down buildings and assaulting people were endangering the safety of normal people. They should never be allowed to be on the street again.

 

[Lisa558]

If you throw a big fit on an airplane then yes the airline can and should ban you for life.

But it’s the airline’s decision, not the government’s.

 

[SweetSue92]

Yep, those convicted in a court of law of endangering the safety of their fellow passengers should be banned from flying on future flights, but 8 conservative Republican Senators, the infamous Cancun Ted one of them, say NO!

Because……… Freedumb.

The senators argued that the Transportation Security Administration “was created in the wake of 9/11 to protect Americans from future horrific attacks, not to regulate human behavior onboard flights.”

The eight Republicans signing the letter are Sens. Cynthia M. Lummis (Wyo.), Mike Lee (Utah), James Lankford (Okla.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Kevin Cramer (N.D.), Ted Cruz (Tex.), John Hoeven (N.D.) and Rick Scott (Fla.).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/15/eight-republican-senators-say-they-oppose-no-fly-list-disruptive-passengers-because-it-would-equate-mask-opponents-terrorists/

Yeah well, some of these "flight attendants" act like the Gestapo, and would ban people for wearing a "Let's Go Brandon" mask. So I suspect that's where the NO vote is coming from.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You are being dishonest

the swastika on the donkey is an attack on democrats

As I am sure you well know

Yes, I know that is the lame excuse they give, but really think about it.

Would a Christian use a pentagram as an avatar to attack atheist?

Would a Muslim use a cross as an avatar to attack Christians?

Nobody that did not want to be associated with Nazis would use the swastika