Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LOL.That link is old, the reason I linked to it was to show that I had said if you are told to do something safe and legal, not just "anything" like the other moron said.
It's all irrelevant. I showed that simply disobeying a legal order is a violation with a fine up to 25000 dollars by the feds.
So when you get on an airline and a male flight attendant instructs you to "suck my dick", you'll drop to your knees huh.
You just can't get that thought out of your mind can you?
That link is old, the reason I linked to it was to show that I had said if you are told to do something safe and legal, not just "anything" like the other moron said.
It's all irrelevant. I showed that simply disobeying a legal order is a violation with a fine up to 25000 dollars by the feds.
So when you get on an airline and a male flight attendant instructs you to "suck my dick", you'll drop to your knees huh.
You just can't get that thought out of your mind can you?
WelcherFAR 121.580 has withstood court cases.
Internet Trolls and the Many Ways They Try to Ruin Your Day
02 of 10
The persistent debate troll
This type of troll loves a good argument. They can take a great, thoroughly researched and fact-based piece of content, and come at it from all opposing discussion angles to challenge its message. They believe they're right, and everyone else is wrong. You'll often also find them leaving long threads or arguments with other commenters in community comment sections, and they're always determined to have the last word -- continuing to comment until that other user gives up.
08 of 10
The exaggeration troll
Exaggeration trolls can sometimes be a combination of know-it-alls, the offended and even debate trolls. They know how to take any topic or problem and completely blow it out of proportion. Some of them actually try to do it to be funny, and sometimes they succeed, while others do it just to be annoying. They rarely ever contribute any real value to a discussion and often bring up problems and issues that may arguably be unrelated to what's being discussed.
Where are they claiming their authority to do what they did? What legal concept was invoked?Yes, on an airplane, the entire flight crew is like a police force. Just like police, as long as they give you a legal order, you must do it. Otherwise you are in violation of disobeying a flight crew member. Which is punishable with a fine up to 25 grand. And if you cause too much commotion, they can detain you to have you arrested upon landing. Most airliners have plastic handcuffs (basically fancy tie wraps) on board for just this reason.
I'm a pilot, I fly private airplanes. If I, as PIC (pilot in command) tell my passenger that they must fasten their seatbelt and they do not, I can have them arrested when I land. They violated the law. As a passenger in an airplane in US airspace, you agree to all laws for being a passenger in an airplane. This would be an extreme thing that I would never personally do, but I'd be within my right if I did so.
If I tell them not to touch any buttons and they do, the same thing can result. Thats interference with a flight crew member, that's a crime.
Of course if I tell a girl I'm on a date with and taking up in a small airplane for her first flight that he has to give me head while we're flying, she doesn't have to comply and I can be arrested for a sex crime. That's not a legal request. But if I say you have to put on your seatbelt and you don't, bye bye birdie (if I choose to do so).
No games are played when you're talking about airplanes carrying hundreds of people at 500mph. But the same set of rules applies to small airplanes carrying a handful of people.
If anyone here has more experience with the FAA, flying aircraft, working on aircraft and working AROUND aircraft, than I do and they don't agree with what I say, by all means, speak up. But if your only experience with flying is buying a ticket, I'd say you really don't have the experience to make your opinion worth a plug nickle.
Where are they claiming their authority to do what they did? What legal concept was invoked?
Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.Where are they claiming their authority to do what they did? What legal concept was invoked?
The legal concept of having to obey legal orders by a flight crew member. They needed the room, they own the plane, they deboard passengers. Other passengers got up and left no problem, as did thousands and thousands of other passengers last year. But this guy thought he was above the law.
The latest report said that he was violent as well.
United Airlines passenger David Dao was violent before removal, aviation police say
Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Even airlines have to be legal to our own laws.Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Its not up to them to decide that. And it seems there was no violation of the contract like you are assuming. Nobody of any substance has been able to prove a violation of the COC. Sorry. Flight crew members know that passengers have to listen to what they say and if they don't they can be removed. So in fact they knew they were NOT in violation.
LEO who were told that a passenger refuses to deboard an aircraft do what they are told. It's not their job to ask the airline to get out the COC and see if what they are doing is in accordance with their contract.
Even airlines have to be legal to our own laws.Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Its not up to them to decide that. And it seems there was no violation of the contract like you are assuming. Nobody of any substance has been able to prove a violation of the COC. Sorry. Flight crew members know that passengers have to listen to what they say and if they don't they can be removed. So in fact they knew they were NOT in violation.
LEO who were told that a passenger refuses to deboard an aircraft do what they are told. It's not their job to ask the airline to get out the COC and see if what they are doing is in accordance with their contract.
A passenger refused the offer the airline made; no, means, no.
Not stupid enough to have only fallacy for rebuttal. Are you ceding the point and the argument?Even airlines have to be legal to our own laws.Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Its not up to them to decide that. And it seems there was no violation of the contract like you are assuming. Nobody of any substance has been able to prove a violation of the COC. Sorry. Flight crew members know that passengers have to listen to what they say and if they don't they can be removed. So in fact they knew they were NOT in violation.
LEO who were told that a passenger refuses to deboard an aircraft do what they are told. It's not their job to ask the airline to get out the COC and see if what they are doing is in accordance with their contract.
A passenger refused the offer the airline made; no, means, no.
Could you be more dense? No means no, how stupid can you be?
Not stupid enough to have only fallacy for rebuttal. Are you ceding the point and the argument?Even airlines have to be legal to our own laws.Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Its not up to them to decide that. And it seems there was no violation of the contract like you are assuming. Nobody of any substance has been able to prove a violation of the COC. Sorry. Flight crew members know that passengers have to listen to what they say and if they don't they can be removed. So in fact they knew they were NOT in violation.
LEO who were told that a passenger refuses to deboard an aircraft do what they are told. It's not their job to ask the airline to get out the COC and see if what they are doing is in accordance with their contract.
A passenger refused the offer the airline made; no, means, no.
Could you be more dense? No means no, how stupid can you be?
It you were right, Dao would not be in a position to gain millions.Not stupid enough to have only fallacy for rebuttal. Are you ceding the point and the argument?Even airlines have to be legal to our own laws.Why did the flight crew believe they had legal orders to violate a contract? Even States are proscribed that authority.
Its not up to them to decide that. And it seems there was no violation of the contract like you are assuming. Nobody of any substance has been able to prove a violation of the COC. Sorry. Flight crew members know that passengers have to listen to what they say and if they don't they can be removed. So in fact they knew they were NOT in violation.
LEO who were told that a passenger refuses to deboard an aircraft do what they are told. It's not their job to ask the airline to get out the COC and see if what they are doing is in accordance with their contract.
A passenger refused the offer the airline made; no, means, no.
Could you be more dense? No means no, how stupid can you be?
You're in too deep now, just go ahead and admit it, it's their plane and they don't have to carry you...
Oh, look -- the security officers lied on their reports, saying Dao was swinging violently with fists. How fortunate is Dao that there's video evidence that doesn't show that he did that?
United Airlines incident: David Dao swung fists violently, officers' reports say - CNN.com
