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.
That would be OK if they don't go overboard with it. Having to take off your shoes, not have any liquids, can't use electronics to help pass the time even though it's been shown time and time again to NOT affect the electronics of the plane, well at some point I think maybe it gets to be too much. Not being belligerent is one thing, and if that is what was going on here then fine, but I do get the sense that there's too much going on in terms of it being as if you're in school in 3rd grade and the principal is around. If it's like that, it shouldn't be. "Sit down and shut up?" To heck with that, I can't imagine pitching a fit over the peanuts or such but at the same time I'm not a child and I shouldn't be treated like one. This isn't a courtroom.
You have the freedom to dislike something and complain about it, but your rights end where another person's begins. The other people on the flight, and the airline and its crew, ALL have the right to proceed on their way without disruption. If anyone interferes with that, you are violating others' rights. It's very simple.
If the attendant said "sit down and shut up," I'm guessing that was after the passenger started arguing or being belligerent. I'm also guessing the attendant could have been nicer when first asked about going to the bathroom or when s/he first told the passenger they could not walk around. But that's no excuse for disrupting the flight.
Whenever you go onto someone else's property, and you are doing something involving other people's rights, the rules change. You are not an individual, any longer. You are part of the whole..EVERYONE'S rights are considered, as well as liability issues. If you come into my house, MY rules rule. That's the name of the game.
According to the article the woman was told she couldn't go to the bathroom shortly after take-off. The rule is to stay in your seat until after the seat belt sign is turned off for safety's sake. It's a perfectly reasonable rule.
According to the article the woman was told she couldn't go to the bathroom shortly after take-off. The rule is to stay in your seat until after the seat belt sign is turned off for safety's sake. It's a perfectly reasonable rule.
Yup, and that would take maybe an additional 10 minutes??. But according to some people posting here, that's akin to being herded into a detention camp.
Actually, you can now use tablets and play games on your phone (set to airplane mode) throughout the flight. You still can't use your laptop till cruising altitude. I think that is more due to the size of the device.
Sometimes you can get lucky and fly through the security if you get the TSA precheck: https://www.tsa.gov/precheck
Now that we are finally in our house, we are going to sign up. No more taking off shoes, taking laptops out of the case and all those fun things. We've gotten that lucky draw and have had those magic words show up on our boarding ticket quite a few times. I love it when that happens. Yep, definitely signing up.
I've been flying for a very long time and remember how it was pre 9/11. I miss those days but it is what it is now.
You can also use an e-reader.
Also after a certain age, 75 I think, you don't have to remove your shoes. I think some other precheck allowances are given as well.
That's the thing, I don't know why they are still being so anal 15 years after 9/11 happened. I realize that 9/11 was a big thing, but that was 15 years ago and to me convenience matters. I want convenience AND safety, BOTH of it, and I reject the idea that it isn't possible. I just don't believe it. I believe that, like a lot of things, when you get the federal government involved in matters previously handled by private companies (TSA), you end up creating a bureaucracy machine that just makes life hell for people. They continue doing as they do because people believe that over-the-top measures are necessary to prevent another 9/11 and I just don't believe that's really the case. I'm not saying they should let everybody in without doing a thing, but at some point it gets kind of ridiculous.
One of the main things I hear about which upsets me is the prospect of being stuck in the Tamrac for several hours. To me that's legalized kidnapping, if I want to get off the plane I should be able to. "They can't verify you in terms of international concerns," OH WELL. That is on YOU for not making it possible to do without that sort of hardship being imposed on me. Eight HOURS on a plane, with no choice in the matter, and with no food? Anyone who would go "Chuck Norris" on the air marshals and get off anyway, I applaud them.
That's the thing, I hear of things like that happening all the time and it causes me to be somewhat sympathetic towards travelers who go off, even though in this specific case apparently the travelers were in fact way out of line. I think when someone flips out on the TSA for causing a person's colostomy bag to be burst and when 95 year olds are strip-searched etc, I say good for them for flipping out, they shouldn't be all diplomatic and "yes sir, yes ma'am" in those situations, they have every moral right to say "like hello you're going to do THAT."
They actually don't do that anymore, and haven't for several years. If your plane is on the tarmac, they can't hold you for more than 4 hours. If you are at the terminal, they have to allow you to get off and in fact, will do (I did it myself last summer even).
If a person cannot manage to abide by rules, they should find another way to travel. Nobody is entitled to fly. Surely go ahead and go all Chuck Norris on the Air Marshals. You are going to enjoy having 24/7 access to a lovely metal toilet right in your room for the next several years.
According to the article the woman was told she couldn't go to the bathroom shortly after take-off. The rule is to stay in your seat until after the seat belt sign is turned off for safety's sake. It's a perfectly reasonable rule.
If my potty training two your old managed that rule, this full adult woman could. Plus, they usually do let you if its an honest to god emergency. You ing your bell and explain it to the flight attendant. Plus, they actually cant force you to not go, from what I have been told. They need to stand aside and allow a person to use the restroom.
But I do see some really bad flight attendants form time to time that are under trained, not polite, have a chip on their shoulder, etc. I hear it isn't a good job anymore.
That's the thing, I don't know why they are still being so anal 15 years after 9/11 happened. I realize that 9/11 was a big thing, but that was 15 years ago and to me convenience matters. I want convenience AND safety, BOTH of it, and I reject the idea that it isn't possible. I just don't believe it. I believe that, like a lot of things, when you get the federal government involved in matters previously handled by private companies (TSA), you end up creating a bureaucracy machine that just makes life hell for people. They continue doing as they do because people believe that over-the-top measures are necessary to prevent another 9/11 and I just don't believe that's really the case. I'm not saying they should let everybody in without doing a thing, but at some point it gets kind of ridiculous.
One of the main things I hear about which upsets me is the prospect of being stuck in the Tamrac for several hours. To me that's legalized kidnapping, if I want to get off the plane I should be able to. "They can't verify you in terms of international concerns," OH WELL. That is on YOU for not making it possible to do without that sort of hardship being imposed on me. Eight HOURS on a plane, with no choice in the matter, and with no food? Anyone who would go "Chuck Norris" on the air marshals and get off anyway, I applaud them.
That's the thing, I hear of things like that happening all the time and it causes me to be somewhat sympathetic towards travelers who go off, even though in this specific case apparently the travelers were in fact way out of line. I think when someone flips out on the TSA for causing a person's colostomy bag to be burst and when 95 year olds are strip-searched etc, I say good for them for flipping out, they shouldn't be all diplomatic and "yes sir, yes ma'am" in those situations, they have every moral right to say "like hello you're going to do THAT."
That's not very likely. Anyone over 95 isn't likely to be strip searched and even if they were and had a colostomy bag, the TSA would have to take it under consideration.
Your information seems to be based upon hearsay. You may "hear" of things happening all the time but that doesn't make it so.
Much of what you are ranting about either did exist at one time but no longer does or it never did. Sure there have been times I would imagine that a TSA agent has overstepped but that goes with anyone's job. It's not the norm. I suggest you book a nice long flight and then come back here and post about your actual experience rather than speculation.
Business is required to make reasonable medical accommodations...
Some people do have bladder problems which is a medical condition...
I guess the Flight Crew deemed the risk to the passenger was greater not remaining being seated as to wetting herself.
Alcohol could very well be a factor.
I've known people that have been roughed up because of a medical condition was not apparent to authorities... one was deaf and didn't hear law enforcement and was taken down and was later totally exonerated and another had an epileptic seizure and was restrained with cuffs because law enforcement suspected drug use.
That's not very likely. Anyone over 95 isn't likely to be strip searched and even if they were and had a colostomy bag, the TSA would have to take it under consideration.
Your information seems to be based upon hearsay. You may "hear" of things happening all the time but that doesn't make it so.
Much of what you are ranting about either did exist at one time but no longer does or it never did. Sure there have been times I would imagine that a TSA agent has overstepped but that goes with anyone's job. It's not the norm. I suggest you book a nice long flight and then come back here and post about your actual experience rather than speculation.
^^^exactly. Also, it's important to remember that the cases that go viral, whether of overstepping gate agents/flight attendants or out of control/drunk passengers are those out Of the norm cases. There are thousands of flights that take off and land around the world with zero incident
What was the point of the video? It didn't show anyone doing anything. And why can't people hold their phone/cameras properly? LANDSCAPE, please!
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.
