Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't care about the statutes. When duly authorized agents of a private airline ask you to leave the plane, you do not throw a hissy fit, act like a savage, and endanger those around you by causing the need for armed personnel to have to remove you.
Now that we see what kind of person this is, it becomes clearer that his bad actor status was cemented long before this latest insanity. He seems like a time bomb waiting to explode, and he chose an airline flight on which to self-detonate.
Again untrue. You are required to obey the lawful directions of a peace officer. And you are required to follow the lawful directions of a flight crew member when in flight.
The on the ground unlawful directives of a ground crew member? Where is that written down? Some of them might love it if they could direct nice looking clients to perform various sex acts but it would be hardly legal.
Your posts are filled with misinformation, exaggeration, and outright lies.
He did not "act like a savage" or endanger anyone around him. He was sitting in his seat. When they grabbed him, he shouted. He was no "time bomb" waiting to "explode. Where do you come up with such nonsense?
It makes no difference if he was Satan in the flesh, he paid for the seat and the flight on an airline governed by laws. They can't just rob him, and assault him in the process, and think people are going to be okay with that.
As strongly as you support individual rights and freedom, I'm surprised to see you come down on the side of a corporation robbing people for their convenience.
Individual rights do not include acting insanely in a tight public space when armed officials are obviously determined to see you removed. You shut up, get up, and get off the plane. If you were wronged, you sue, and collect later. But he didn't do that. He acted like an insane banshee, screaming at the top of his lungs and challenging those with the guns to a physical altercation inside a commercial airliner. Any retard knows that is not the place to make such a stand. He got what he deserved. He violated the rights of everyone around him to enjoy a safe trip in a sensitive space - the interior of a commercial airliner.
And then played the race card. Something tells me this lowlife smelled an opportunity. And grabbed the brass ring when it presented itself.
Again untrue. You are required to obey the lawful directions of a peace officer. And you are required to follow the lawful directions of a flight crew member when in flight.
The on the ground unlawful directives of a ground crew member? Where is that written down? Some of them might love it if they could direct nice looking clients to perform various sex acts but it would be hardly legal.
No, wrong. You don't determine what is "lawful" on the ground, in a plane, when armed personnel tell you to get up and get off. You shut up, comply, and deal with it in court at a later date. It's common sense. Same principle as those who confront police officers because they think they are "right". They're wrong too. You follow orders and if you are wronged you retain counsel and deal with it later in the appropriate venue.
Individual rights do not include acting insanely in a tight public space when armed officials are obviously determined to see you removed. You shut up, get up, and get off the plane. If you were wronged, you sue, and collect later. But he didn't do that. He acted like an insane banshee, screaming at the top of his lungs and challenging those with the guns to a physical altercation inside a commercial airliner. Any retard knows that is not the place to make such a stand. He got what he deserved. He violated the rights of everyone around him to enjoy a safe trip in a sensitive space - the interior of a commercial airliner.
And then played the race card. Something tells me this lowlife smelled an opportunity. And grabbed the brass ring when it presented itself.
Choice #1+ - take one of the first several choices he was given to take a vouchers
Choice #2 - rent a car and drive it
They might not be ideal choices, but they are still choices. In my scenario I was pointing out that with the Federal government, you obey their laws because they make them, you don't have alternatives in that scenario unless you consider moving out of the country a "choice"
That is your idea of choice in this situation? That is like saying when a hotel is overbooked:
choice#1+- to get a coupon for a future booking when a hotel is overbooked.
This lowlife endangered everyone around him, and while the collectivists and the SJWs are ganging up on United, I am here to say that they handled him correctly, and he got exactly what he deserved, given his obstructive and belligerent and non-compliant behavior.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
