• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Did United Airlines have any other choice than to eject that passenger?

Loren Pechtel said:
Shadowy Man said:
Can you tell us what law was broken in this case? This was the airline using physical force to resolve a contract dispute, not a criminal issue.
Click to expand...

The airline said "leave". He didn't. That makes him guilty of trespassing.
Click to expand...
Wrong.

The factual rebuttal has already been posted. I suggest you read it.
 
Shadowy Man said:
zorq said:
Why not?

If I sell you a comic book for $5 then I realize later that I need that comic book to complete a set that I can sell for $5,000, does that mean that it's okay for me to try to yank the comicbook out of your hand insisting that I need it back and that it's still my property even though the transaction is complete? Do you then hand over the comic book because I am a comicbook authority and I ordered you to? Or do you realize that you have a right to your comic book and say screw off?

What the heck is a contract for if the more powerful party in the contract always gets to screw over the lesser party at their whim?
Click to expand...

He's saying that if you call the cops and convince them you are entitled to get your comic book back, the guy you sold it to is in the wrong if he refuses to give the comic book to the police and deserves whatever beat down he gets. He should have given the comic back to the authorities and then sued you in civil court.
Click to expand...
Also, if it turns out the police didn't have the right, he should be sued and his momma openly beat on public tv. Nobody of low character gets to be play cop without their loved ones willingness to take the pain for when they do wrong.
 
laughing dog said:
A number of people have found likely alternatives in this thread. And you have hand-waved them away.

Loren Pechtel said:
There have been a large number of people on here who are infected with liberalitis. This was a situation lacking a good solution....
Click to expand...
No, you even admit there was a good solution - offer more compensation.
Loren Pechtel said:
Most liberals are unable to make a sane choice in such a situation and go with the path of inaction, no matter how much worse that makes the final outcome.
Click to expand...
Most kneejerk authoritarians would agree that using involuntary methods and violence did not make this outcome worse.
Loren Pechtel said:
How about the following scenario:

The airline backs down. Scumbag is allowed to fly. However, every passenger who doesn't get to fly tomorrow due to the lack of crew gets a letter identifying Dr. Dao's refusal to comply with an IDB as the reason and suggests a class action lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Now we get to the crux of the matter - it was all about not backing down. UA could have asked another passenger or even announced that the flight would be delayed until someone volunteered to leave. But they did not. Neither they nor you could fathom "not backing down".

BTW, your scenario shows you are infected with the worse case of liberalitis in the world.
Click to expand...

Note how he also defames Dr. Dao - the paying customer - by calling him a "scumbag".
 
I believe use is different than ownership and so treated in the law. If I let you use piece of property for said amount of time for a certain amount of money, does that mean that if the part not rented of the property in which I live s changed by an event during that time, destroyed by fire, that I must leave or find another place to buy property because you have a right to the part not burned for that time? I'm thinking no. I actually have the right to reclaim what you rent for my use, or if it is my brother's house that burned his use. He may be entitle to whatever rent not used and some penalty.

Oh, shit, I guess we just said the same thing.
 
RavenSky said:
Note how he also defames Dr. Dao - the paying customer - by calling him a "scumbag".
Click to expand...

Well, the man didn't bow and scrape before governmental authority but instead tried to assert his individual rights in the face of what he felt was unjust abuse of power. That's how libertarians describe Satan.
 
ZiprHead said:
United CEO Oscar Munoz Blames David Dao Incident on ‘System Failure’
Click to expand...

You mean he didn't blame that "scumbag" Dr. Dao for "trespassing"? :eek:

- - - Updated - - -

Loren Pechtel said:
Juma said:
Why do you keep bringing up trespassing? Nobody was trespassing on the plane.
Click to expand...

Keeping saying that nobody was trespassing doesn't make it so. He just showed a court case in the right place that shows that the requirements for trespassing were met.
Click to expand...

No he didn't.

Eugene Reuter, operating superintendent of the store, told the defendants who he was, informed them that the company did not permit soliciting on its property without its permission and asked them to leave the premises. They refused and he again asked them to leave. They told him they had a legal right to solicit on the property. He asked them to leave a third time and warned them that he would call the police. They still insisted that they had the right to be on the property. Reuter thereupon called the police and defendants were arrested.
Click to expand...

Not even remotely similar to the situation at United
 
fromderinside said:
I believe use is different than ownership and so treated in the law. If I let you use piece of property for said amount of time for a certain amount of money, does that mean that if the part not rented of the property in which I live s changed by an event during that time, destroyed by fire, that I must leave or find another place to buy property because you have a right to the part not burned for that time? I'm thinking no. I actually have the right to reclaim what you rent for my use, or if it is my brother's house that burned his use. He may be entitle to whatever rent not used and some penalty.

Oh, shit, I guess we just said the same thing.
Click to expand...

Well ... no. Not at all. If a guy is renting part of your property and you want to use it for that or any other reason, you're shit out of luck. That's his place for the length of the rental contract. You can't just break the contract without his consent even if you want to pay a penalty for doing so.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
fromderinside said:
I believe use is different than ownership and so treated in the law. If I let you use piece of property for said amount of time for a certain amount of money, does that mean that if the part not rented of the property in which I live s changed by an event during that time, destroyed by fire, that I must leave or find another place to buy property because you have a right to the part not burned for that time? I'm thinking no. I actually have the right to reclaim what you rent for my use, or if it is my brother's house that burned his use. He may be entitle to whatever rent not used and some penalty.

Oh, shit, I guess we just said the same thing.
Click to expand...

Well ... no. Not at all. If a guy is renting part of your property and you want to use it for that or any other reason, you're shit out of luck. That's his place for the length of the rental contract. You can't just break the contract without his consent even if you want to pay a penalty for doing so.
Click to expand...
Oh no. According to the many "libertarians" and free market evangelists in this thread, all you have to do in that situation is state that he is trespassing, call the police and they can beat the living daylights out of him if he does not immediately leave your property. And, if he looks at you cross-eyed, you can shoot him in self-defense.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
fromderinside said:
I believe use is different than ownership and so treated in the law. If I let you use piece of property for said amount of time for a certain amount of money, does that mean that if the part not rented of the property in which I live s changed by an event during that time, destroyed by fire, that I must leave or find another place to buy property because you have a right to the part not burned for that time? I'm thinking no. I actually have the right to reclaim what you rent for my use, or if it is my brother's house that burned his use. He may be entitle to whatever rent not used and some penalty.

Oh, shit, I guess we just said the same thing.
Click to expand...

Well ... no. Not at all. If a guy is renting part of your property and you want to use it for that or any other reason, you're shit out of luck. That's his place for the length of the rental contract. You can't just break the contract without his consent even if you want to pay a penalty for doing so.
Click to expand...
yet as you say, it's a penalty, not a fee. If we couldn't, there'd be no notion of penalty.
 
Just curious, if I'm on the wrong side here and he had the right to protect his life and property, then what would be the reprercussions of someone (other than the passenger) dying in the stand off? I know lethal force isn't allowed to protect just property, but he (himself) was under attack (it being an assault and all).
 
fast said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Well ... no. Not at all. If a guy is renting part of your property and you want to use it for that or any other reason, you're shit out of luck. That's his place for the length of the rental contract. You can't just break the contract without his consent even if you want to pay a penalty for doing so.
Click to expand...
yet as you say, it's a penalty, not a fee. If we couldn't, there'd be no notion of penalty.
Click to expand...

But unless you have that penalty clause in the contract, you can't arbitrarily end the contract. In the case of someone renting part of your property as fromderinsinde posted, there is not that type of clause. You can ask them whether or not they'd be willing to leave the property in exchange for a payment, but if they say no, then they stay there. If you ask the police to remove them, the police have to say no and if you don't leave the part of the property they're renting when they ask then you are the one who is trespassing.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
fast said:
yet as you say, it's a penalty, not a fee. If we couldn't, there'd be no notion of penalty.
Click to expand...

But unless you have that penalty clause in the contract, you can't arbitrarily end the contract. In the case of someone renting part of your property as fromderinsinde posted, there is not that type of clause. You can ask them whether or not they'd be willing to leave the property in exchange for a payment, but if they say no, then they stay there. If you ask the police to remove them, the police have to say no and if you don't leave the part of the property they're renting when they ask then you are the one who is trespassing.
Click to expand...
Got it.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
What in the heck airline are you flying, STFU Airways. I admit, I don't fly often, but I've never seen a person booted after boarding, forget though the use of force.
Click to expand...

I've never seen it at departure, I have seen someone escorted off by the cops at arrival.

I'm aware it's not exactly an uncommon situation for airlines to remove drunks.
 
Artemus said:
They settled out of court. The terms of the settlement were not announced.
Click to expand...

I guess according to Loren that means that poor UA, who were only trying to operate their business according to federal regulations, succumbed to the forces of political correctness, despite having done nothing wrong. Stupid scumbag passengers. If only the business could just do away with needing passengers, everything would be great.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
What in the heck airline are you flying, STFU Airways. I admit, I don't fly often, but I've never seen a person booted after boarding, forget though the use of force.
Click to expand...

I've never seen it at departure, I have seen someone escorted off by the cops at arrival.

I'm aware it's not exactly an uncommon situation for airlines to remove drunks.
Click to expand...
Before taking off?
 
Loren Pechtel said:
When he attacks a cop he becomes a scumbag.
Click to expand...
Okay... So when did DAO become a scumbag?

Loren Pechtel said:
I've never seen it at departure, I have seen someone escorted off by the cops at arrival.
Click to expand...
On Arrival? I'm sure Dao would have been deliriously happy to have been escorted off the plane at arrival. Man. Head of the line when deplaning? 'Please remain seated while we kick the malcontent off at his destination!' yeah, that... That's nothing at all like what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom