MAMEWorld Forums - The Loony Bin - Re: Just took a few hours

> I couldn't agree more with that, private security is a problem everywhere and
> overbooking was totally at fault and the company deserves all the punishment for
> that. Yet it doesn't get any better for someone to stand still in the middle of a
> highway expecting not to be run over because everyone else must drive safe. I recall
> also many examples about official police forces using excessive force too. Do you
> want more taxes for police forces to take over airports?, fine... but that won't
> change anything because those who don't abide to the rules and don't respect any
> authority will defy any in front of them.
>
> The flight won't take off unless 4 persons get down. You are a customer who's destiny
> totally depends on airport personnel orders: when to arrive, when to get on board,
> when to sit, when to leave your seat, where to go, how to go, etc. You aren't in your
> own property and totally at disadvantage because you paid to be in their hands to
> arrive safe. Then we have the security reasons, there's no one who can help you at
> thousands of feet in the air. You're supposed to comply to their orders because that
> was what you paid for. If you didn't like the treatment you choose another airline,
> put a lawsuit or demand your money back. You don't behave like a spoiled brat in
> front of everyone expecting the result to be any different when it's obvious that
> will not be the case. Let's see if you say the same when a drunk or violent passenger
> won't leave the plane because he paid for the seat and they can't touch him because
> brute force is now forbidden.
>

A passenger being drunk is their own fault. If they're a threat or nuisance to other paying passengers - then it is within the airlines right to have that drunkard taken off the plane or restrained in some manner. Being told you need to leave the plane and not providing some other reasonable option is on the airline. Not a good comparison. Also, it's not paying the airline to be treated as nice or shitty as they want to treat you. As a customer/passenger, you have an amount of trust you're putting into the staff. They can say "You'll need to sit here", "fasten your seatbelt" or something like "No passengers allowed in the captains cabin." "Don't attempt to open the bay doors while in flight"... Well, some things are obvious and don't need to be said. All of those are WITHIN REASON. There was no reason to resort to violence towards a person that wasn't belligerent or making a scene... The only reason for the "scene" was the actions of the security personnel. He only gets a license to be an violent asshole because of his title, or some card in his wallet. That still doesn't make what happened right.

> And again the airline is totally guilty and at fault, yet that doesn't excuse a
> belligerent customer who threw a tantrum only to get an even worse result. He doesn't
> deserve all the millions or thousands of dollars he will get from the lawsuit. A
> customer doesn't do whatever he wants, he does whatever the service he paid for
> allows.

You speak of the passenger/customer acting like a "Spoiled Brat". Yes, he did first volunteer, but it wasn't made clear that he'd be late for something IMPORTANT. Had he known that he'd be late he wouldn't have volunteered to begin with. It's within his rights to change his mind. No exceptions. Why isn't the security person labeled as a "Spoiled Brat"? Or whoever it was that gave him the order to forcibly remove the passenger? Couldn't they find anyone else to get off the flight? Why aren't the staff members that had a priority over this passenger called "Spoiled Brats"?

LEVEL-4