Incompetent United Air Lines Physically Drags Passenger Off Plane For Their (Airline) Mistake

[Divine Wind]

Agreed, but IMHO, you're wasting your time trying to explain it to him. Faun has a peculiar posting style when people disagree with him:

Agreed, and you're correct, he's just hard to ignore...

Not that hard. I've dealt with spoiled children before.

 

[Divine Wind]

I sometimes buy two or three seats just cause I don't want to sit next to some stinky fuck... No way I'm trusting United to respect my money ever again...

Not that I think I'd have need to, Alaska Airlines merged with Virgin so luckily for me I shouldn't have to worry about any other airlines to get most anywhere

Everyone should be free to spend their money as they please. God Bless America!

 

[EverCurious]

On that we can agree

 

[airplanemechanic]

Expert suggests the law was broken on Flight 3411, but not by United Airlines

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member once on an airplane. Since he was not asked to do anything dangerous or illegal, he had no right to disobey. Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs. If you don't like this fact, drive.

It's no different than being asked to get up to accommodate a passenger with some kind of physical or mental disability.

The CEO said the guy did nothing wrong in that he paid for his ticket, got on the plane and was seated. He DID say that he behaved inappropriately.

 

[Pogo]

Once AGAIN --- what they broke was their own Contract of Carriage, which they entered into when they sold Dao (and everyone else) a ticket.

They didn't break it at all, they could have handled it better, Dao is an idiot and that you can't recognize it is no surprise...

Now Pogo stick off already...

Yuh huh --- "Dao is an idiot because United broke their own contract".

Must.... slob.... corporate..... knob.... at.... all.... times...... beep ...... blame ..... victim..... beep..... assault..... in.... the.... pursuit..... of .... profit.... is..... no.... vice.... beep....

Spineless zombie.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Must.....obey.....FAA.....regulations.

/thread

 

[Pogo]

Expert suggests the law was broken on Flight 3411, but not by United Airlines

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member once on an airplane. Since he was not asked to do anything dangerous or illegal, he had no right to disobey. Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs. If you don't like this fact, drive.

It's no different than being asked to get up to accommodate a passenger with some kind of physical or mental disability.

The CEO said the guy did nothing wrong in that he paid for his ticket, got on the plane and was seated. He DID say that he behaved inappropriately.

Presuming in "he broke the law" he refers to Dao, why don't you go ahead and show the class where he broke any law.

And then on the "not by United Airlines" part, show the class how committing assault and battery is NOT breaking a law. Did I sleep through some Constitutional Amendment?

May I suggest you preface by proving these:

• War is Peace
• Ignorance is Strength (I know you're working hard on this one) - and most relevant here:
• Slavery is Freedom

 

[Faun]

Expert suggests the law was broken on Flight 3411, but not by United Airlines

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member once on an airplane. Since he was not asked to do anything dangerous or illegal, he had no right to disobey. Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs. If you don't like this fact, drive.

It's no different than being asked to get up to accommodate a passenger with some kind of physical or mental disability.

The CEO said the guy did nothing wrong in that he paid for his ticket, got on the plane and was seated. He DID say that he behaved inappropriately.

That article is wrong. It claims, "he was denied boarding."

That's false. Dao was allowed to board. It was after he was boarded that the airline removed him for no fault of his own.

 

[Pogo]

Expert suggests the law was broken on Flight 3411, but not by United Airlines

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member once on an airplane. Since he was not asked to do anything dangerous or illegal, he had no right to disobey. Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs. If you don't like this fact, drive.

It's no different than being asked to get up to accommodate a passenger with some kind of physical or mental disability.

The CEO said the guy did nothing wrong in that he paid for his ticket, got on the plane and was seated. He DID say that he behaved inappropriately.

That article is wrong. It claims, "he was denied boarding."

That's false. Dao was allowed to board. It was after he was boarded that the airline removed him for no fault of his own.

Not the first time the corporate knobslobberers have tried this ploy. Indeed if he had been "denied boarding" --- then he couldn't have physically been sitting in the seat he was forcibly yanked from.

I can't believe these morons are so dense that they can't even figure that out.

The article also erroneously describes an "overbooked flight" --- which the airline itself since corrected ---- and is over a week old. I guess when a dishonest corproapologist's position is dishonest ---- dishonesty is all they have.

 

[Pogo]

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member

Go ahead --- show the class this "law he broke". This question has been laid out before and all you do is run away.

Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs.

Go ahead --- show the class this "FAA reg he broke". This question has been laid out before and all you do is run away.

 

[rightwinger]

Until a lawsuit is filed.....this is all moot.

The flight is considered overbooked if there are more people for the plane than it can hold. That can be determined before or after passengers are seated.

No Sparkles, that's determined BEFORE passengers board. As in, in the gate waiting area. Try actually READING the United Airlines Contract of Carriage I keep posting to see where it specifically spells out that procedure.

In other words they could have bumped Dao, and/or anybody else they wanted to, within the terms of their own Contract, IF they did it before they populated the plane. They didn't. They passed their own self-appointed window. They, say it with me, fucked up.

Moreover the plane was not 'overbooked'. Who says so? United Airlines says so. Go argue with them, I'm sure they'll be amused.

United knew they needed to board four employees an hour before the flight left....yet they allowed it to board without asking for volunteers



.

 

[danielpalos]

Expert suggests the law was broken on Flight 3411, but not by United Airlines

He broke the law, he disobeyed a legal order from a flight crew member once on an airplane. Since he was not asked to do anything dangerous or illegal, he had no right to disobey. Once on a plane, you are subject to FAA regs. If you don't like this fact, drive.

It's no different than being asked to get up to accommodate a passenger with some kind of physical or mental disability.

The CEO said the guy did nothing wrong in that he paid for his ticket, got on the plane and was seated. He DID say that he behaved inappropriately.

Where did the airline get the authority impair in the obligation of contracts; Only the federal government can do that. that passenger had a contract.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The FAA states that you must obey the orders of all flight crew members (unless told to do something dangerous or illegal) while on board an aircraft. When asked to get up, he refused. This is a direct disobey of a legal order by a flight crew member. At that point, the airline has a right to throw him off the plane.

Whether or not he should have been asked to get up is not to be determined at the time that he is asked to get up. If he feels it was wrong, he should file a grievance with the airline. But refusing an order on a federally protected aircraft will not end well. You are a passenger on this plane, not an owner.

Now the FAA won't do anything about this, but it was under the FAR's that the airline acted. The FAA isn't a law enforcement entity, it's a federal administration that makes laws regarding safety of flight. It doesn't enforce those laws, that's up to the FBI.

1411. Interference With Flight Crew Members Or Flight Attendants -- 49 U.S.C. 46504 | USAM | Department of Justice

1411. Interference With Flight Crew Members Or Flight Attendants -- 49 U.S.C. 46504
One who assaults, threatens, or intimidates a flight crew member or attendant while aboard an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, and thereby interferes with the performance of that crew member's duties or lessens the ability of that crew member to perform his/her duties is punishable under this subsection. See United States v. Meeker, 527 F.2d 12 (9th Cir. 1975). A violation of 49 U.S.C. § 46504 is a general intent crime; it does not require any specific intent to intimidate or to interfere with the flight crew member or attendant. See United States v. Grossman, 131 F.3d 1449, 1451-52 (11th Cir. 1997); United States v. Compton, 5 F.3d 358, 360 (9th Cir. 1993); United States v. Hicks, 980 F.2d 963 (5th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 941, 507 U.S. 998 (1993); United States v. Meeker, supra, 527 F.2d at 14. While attempted aircraft piracy and interference with flight crew can both be charged in the same indictment, if convicted on both charges, the defendant should be sentenced only under the attempted aircraft piracy conviction because, absent highly unusual circumstances, the interference with flight crew charge is the lesser included offense. See United States v. Compton, supra, 5 F.3d at 360; see also United States v. Calloway, 116 F.3d 1129 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 324 (1997); United States v. Figueroa, 666 F.2d 1375, 1380 (11th Cir. 1982).

 

[EverCurious]

I don't think the flight crew acted under shit frankly, I think they went on an ego trip (perhaps same as he did.) ~shrug~

 

[Pogo]

The FAA states that you must obey the orders of all flight crew members (unless told to do something dangerous or illegal) while on board an aircraft.

HOLD IT RIGHT THERE.

You just tried to use as a basis an old article that thinks Dao was "denied boarding".

-- Now you're admitting he wasn't denied?

Start there and get your story straight. Which is it? Can't have it both ways.

Liars always trip themselves up.....

 

[Pogo]

Until a lawsuit is filed.....this is all moot.

The flight is considered overbooked if there are more people for the plane than it can hold. That can be determined before or after passengers are seated.

No Sparkles, that's determined BEFORE passengers board. As in, in the gate waiting area. Try actually READING the United Airlines Contract of Carriage I keep posting to see where it specifically spells out that procedure.

In other words they could have bumped Dao, and/or anybody else they wanted to, within the terms of their own Contract, IF they did it before they populated the plane. They didn't. They passed their own self-appointed window. They, say it with me, fucked up.

Moreover the plane was not 'overbooked'. Who says so? United Airlines says so. Go argue with them, I'm sure they'll be amused.

United knew they needed to board four employees an hour before the flight left....yet they allowed it to board without asking for volunteers

Zackly. And that's where they fucked up and effected a departure from their own Contract of Carriage, which specifies that such bumping is to be done before boarding, and not as some "oh wait" afterthought.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The FAA states that you must obey the orders of all flight crew members (unless told to do something dangerous or illegal) while on board an aircraft.

HOLD IT RIGHT THERE.

You just tried to use as a basis an old article that thinks Dao was "denied boarding".

-- Now you're admitting he wasn't denied?

Start there and get your story straight. Which is it? Can't have it both ways.

Liars always trip themselves up.....

No trip up here.

He was psychically on the airplane. So he had to listen to the flight crew. However, since the door had not shut, and the jetway had not left the airplane, it was not in the "flight" phase so it was still considered boarding.

People with no answers try to twist words, unsuccessfully, I might add.

 

[Faun]

The FAA states that you must obey the orders of all flight crew members (unless told to do something dangerous or illegal) while on board an aircraft. When asked to get up, he refused. This is a direct disobey of a legal order by a flight crew member. At that point, the airline has a right to throw him off the plane.

Whether or not he should have been asked to get up is not to be determined at the time that he is asked to get up. If he feels it was wrong, he should file a grievance with the airline. But refusing an order on a federally protected aircraft will not end well. You are a passenger on this plane, not an owner.

Now the FAA won't do anything about this, but it was under the FAR's that the airline acted. The FAA isn't a law enforcement entity, it's a federal administration that makes laws regarding safety of flight. It doesn't enforce those laws, that's up to the FBI.

Cite the FAA statute. Your paraphrasing doesn't cut it.

 

[Pogo]

No trip up here.

He was psychically on the airplane. So he had to listen to the flight crew. However, since the door had not shut, and the jetway had not left the airplane, it was not in the "flight" phase so it was still considered boarding.

Bzzzt. Wrong again. He was physically in his assigned seat. The only people physically on the plane who are not fully boarded are those who haven't reached their seat yet. You hand in your ticket, you walk on, you take your seat, you buckle your seatbelt -- that's all the airline requires. Check, check, check and check. Dao was physically yanked OUT OF that seat, which proves he was *IN* it. There's not a damn thing you can do about the laws of physics.

So you're admitting you just quoted a bogus article that is wrong in its erroritude, having incorrect informational flaws that don't work and are provably false, and that's supposed to be your basis --- an article from a week and a half ago that also erroneously describes as "overbooked".

People with no answers try to twist words, unsuccessfully, I might add.

True, and you just got busted at it. Yet ---- can't admit to it.

 

[Pogo]

No trip up here.

He was psychically on the airplane. So he had to listen to the flight crew. However, since the door had not shut, and the jetway had not left the airplane, it was not in the "flight" phase so it was still considered boarding.

Bzzzt. Wrong again. He was physically in his assigned seat. The only people physically on the plane who are not fully boarded are those who haven't reached their seat yet. You hand in your ticket, you walk on, you take your seat, you buckle your seatbelt -- that's all the airline requires. Check, check, check and check. Dao was physically yanked OUT OF that seat, which proves he was *IN* it. There's not a damn thing you can do about the laws of physics.

So you're admitting you just quoted a bogus article that is wrong in its erroritude, having incorrect informational flaws that don't work and are provably false, and that's supposed to be your basis --- an article from a week and a half ago that also erroneously describes as "overbooked".

People with no answers try to twist words, unsuccessfully, I might add.

True, and you just got busted at it. Yet ---- can't admit to it.

Now that your double standard of 'boarded/not boarded' has been dealt with let's proceed to dismantle the rest of your bullshit post, shall we? Oh yes let's.

When asked to get up, he refused. This is a direct disobey of a legal order by a flight crew member. At that point, the airline has a right to throw him off the plane.

The key phrase being "legal order". The Contract of Carriage has been posted. It cites the conditions under which United may bump its passenger. NONE apply to Dao (or to the other passengers so ordered who didn't get up). And you've been invited, for days, to cite where it does. You can't, because it doesn't.

And you just can't admit that.

Next.....

Whether or not he should have been asked to get up is not to be determined at the time that he is asked to get up. If he feels it was wrong, he should file a grievance with the airline. But refusing an order on a federally protected aircraft will not end well. You are a passenger on this plane, not an owner.

Nobody claims he's an "owner" --- although after this he might be. Your threats of "will not end well" are irrelevant to rectitude. This whole "fuck the Contract, might makes right because there's three of us and we can beat you up" is the stuff of Bullshit.

And by the way you STILL haven't regaled us on how assault and battery --- of which United is co-culpable along with its servants the aviation security goons --- is "legal". You DID post a link that says "law was broken.... not by United Airlines". Go ahead -------------- defend that.

Now the FAA won't do anything about this, but it was under the FAR's that the airline acted. The FAA isn't a law enforcement entity, it's a federal administration that makes laws regarding safety of flight. It doesn't enforce those laws, that's up to the FBI.

Rotsa ruck with that. If you actually think FBI is going to go after the victim, even after the United CEO admitted they fucked up, perhaps you should contract one of those $10,000 bets that Special Ed is always reneging on. No reason Ed should have a monopoly.