On 4/12/2017 8:40 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 4/12/2017 10:02 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 4:30:56 PM UTC-4, Meanie wrote:
On 4/11/2017 11:17 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 10:14:55 AM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...


[snip]

Because it's the airline's plane, the airline controls it and the law
is that you have to obey the flight crew? What do you think would
happen at a hardware store if the management told you that you had
to leave and you refused? They would call the police and if you also
refused their commands to leave, they would drag you out.

I don't want an asshole like this on my plane. What's next? A hissy
fit at 40,000 ft over a pillow that results in the plane being diverted?

BTW, just heard on the radio this morning that to get his medical license
back following his felony drug peddling/sex charges, he was required to
take anger management classes, so that suggests there were plenty of
problems, disregard for authority in his past.


Okay, let's assume that he has/had anger management issues. In this
instance, what is the relevance?

because if he wasn't a nut job, this situation would not have arisen.

It seems that the folks here and the
public in general feel he was abused by the airlines and that their
method of enforcing the bumping of passengers was wrong.

Who cares that a supposed majority thinks? What is the LAW?



Excuse the hyperbole, but if this was a matter of the flight crew
telling the doctor to please fasten his seat belt prior to take off, and
his response was to yell and scream at the flight attendant or take a
swing at him/her, there would be some relevance. Such is not the case.

The request by the airline is viewed as unreasonable under the
circumstances and the majority agrees.

majority? who cares. What is the LAW?

Further, the airline is the
aggressor in this situation, he merely said he wasn't willing to give up
his seat.

so if some drunk walks into your house and refuses to leave . . .