Man Violently Dragged Off Plane After United Airlines Overbooks Flight

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
The worst part about this thread are the number of people who are willing (or at least vicariously demonstrating through this gentleman that got dragged away) to place their own principles above logic, reason and truth. If the doctor had made a statement clearly stating he was being taken against his will to at least one other witness (there were many more than one), all he had to do was NOT resist arrest after dong that. ALL he had to do, was NOT resist arrest.

The only reason to resist arrest is if your life is in immediate danger as a result of not resisting. It does not matter how unjust or controversial your purpose for being arrested is, it will ALWAYS work out better for you if you DON'T resist. It's not like this happened in some third world country where an arrest is a guaranteed jail term or death warrant. THINK people. You have brains, use your brain!

Wrong. For starts, given how well American Law Enforcement are gaining a reputation of shooting first and asking questions later, it can be a pretty logical assumption to resist arrest in terms of protecting one's self. It does NOT always work out better for you if you just let the cops drag you away.

However, you are missing the point. The cops had zero justification for even dragging this guy off the plane, or even "arresting" him in the first place. The fact that they just attacked him and used excessive force alone that was not justified by the situation itself.

Principles and logic are not always inseparable. If your principles are based on logic and reason, as well as backed by the law, resiting arrest only makes sense.

This is not the UK. Our cops are not British, nor is our system, and the playing field is very different.

I hope the passenger sues the heck out of them! They fill up the plane to maximize profits then want to turn around and do some crap like this. Why couldn't they just stuff their employees in the back or something. There are jump seats on planes from what I understand if it is that dire to get them on. Or just re arrange and get other employees on a different flight from a different city heading to the same place. Very unprofessional on UA's part. Now unless I had some serious thing to get to I would volunteer but like mentioned, just offer to pay more until you get a taker. Not like UA is hurting for money.

originally posted by: EdumakatedOn another note, anyone who flies from Chicago to Louisville is an idiot imho. It is much easier to just drive. I do it a couple of times a year. 4.5 hours. It takes about that long to fly between check in, potential delays, picking up rental cars, etc.

My aunt has to make a flight that would take about that same time to drive but she is disabled and cannot drive a car. Sometimes this is just an easier option for people. Keep it classy man. An idiot takes a taxi ride that far.

This is nothing less than Corporate Fascism. And watch how everyone will still keep flying UA, regardless, not to mention schlepping their asses to the airport so the CorpGov can legally assault them.

a reply to: sputniksteve

I have no problem with the displacement, but UA escalated the situation WAY too quickly. If they would have spent a bit more time haggling with the passenger instead of quickly calling the cops maybe it could have been resolved more peacefully. Maybe if they had offered more than just a measly $800 to leave the flight someone else would have volunteered to take the doctor's place. There was just SO much more that UA could have done here and to deflect their negligence away just because the police acted like thugs isn't right. The blame gets shared equally with UA and the police.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
This is nothing less than Corporate Fascism. And watch how everyone will still keep flying UA, regardless, not to mention schlepping their asses to the airport so the CorpGov can legally assault them.

Not me. As I stated earlier in the thread, I'm flying SW this summer. But I never really liked UA anyways...

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Wrong. For starts, given how well American Law Enforcement are gaining a reputation of shooting first and asking questions later, it can be a pretty logical assumption to resist arrest in terms of protecting one's self. It does NOT always work out better for you if you just let the cops drag you away.

Do you realise just how much you have been conditioned to believe police in the US are its citizens most inherent enemy?

If you don't resist arrest and are shot, that is murder. Resisting or not, you will be murdered and nothing can change that. If you resist and are then shot, you at least would have had the option of not getting murdered by not resisting. Notice how you said "dragged away" as though they would have a reason to drag you if you were not resisting after being informed not to resist.

However, you are missing the point. The cops had zero justification for even dragging this guy off the plane, or even "arresting" him in the first place. The fact that they just attacked him and used excessive force alone that was not justified by the situation itself.

So the police, who are not employed by the airline, had zero justification for arresting the man who was, after being asked more than once by staff of the airline to exit the plane, was asked by police when they arrived to exit the plane, who would not move despite being informed that he would be physically removed by them if he did not comply, who then resists harder after being told that he was going to be removed from the plane, gets knocked unconscious and is dragged off the plane (because hey, leaving an unconscious person lying unrestrained on a plane is not only good for their health, certain to improve the safety of every other person on the flight, be a pleasant experience for others to see and be in the best interests of the airline's own policies and their obligation to laws of the country in which they are currently in, a real win-win-win situation), because all of that happened, surely the lesson of the story is that cops shoot first and ask questions later, the airline may now be personified as Stalin and standing up for your principles is the most important aspect in every conceivable situation, especially THIS one.

Yes, that is a very convincing. That is ironclad. How can I argue with that? He indeed had no opportunity in that entire series of events to think, for 10 seconds, "perhaps I should not put my principles above everything else? Doing so might end rather badly for me."

Principles and logic are not always inseparable. If your principles are based on logic and reason, as well as backed by the law, resiting arrest only makes sense.

You are falling for the "appeal to the law" argument - ultimately determining that if something is legal to do, there is no reason it should not be done. I have seen this type of thinking so many times across so many demographics. It actually is fascinating how widespread this behaviour happens to be.

Logic and reason cannot be determined unless a context has first been established. You cannot use logic and reason void of any context to determine if something is based on logic and reason, that's not how it works. Without context, logic and reason are just words that have no practical applications and only serve to define what they mean to those who were previously unaware of their meaning.

And the trouble is his actions were not based on logic and reason, his actions were in line with standing up for his principles which happened to be backed by the law as a bonus, but when it comes to the court case against the airline, you can be assured his principles will take a back seat and he will be consumed by a desire to demonstrate just how severely the law was broken to harm him, and how he needs the most money he can get as compensation to prove his point that he will stop at nothing to be denied the right to uphold his principles.

This is not the UK. Our cops are not British, nor is our system, and the playing field is very different.

I'm not from the Uk...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: sputniksteve

I have no problem with the displacement, but UA escalated the situation WAY too quickly. If they would have spent a bit more time haggling with the passenger instead of quickly calling the cops maybe it could have been resolved more peacefully. Maybe if they had offered more than just a measly $800 to leave the flight someone else would have volunteered to take the doctor's place. There was just SO much more that UA could have done here and to deflect their negligence away just because the police acted like thugs isn't right. The blame gets shared equally with UA and the police.

Time wasted equals take off slot lost, which leads to a fine which means they need to purchase a new slot (if they are lucky).

We only have that video, so we have not seen how he acted before he ran back onto the plane and held onto the chair screaming "I must go home", not saying they acted perfectly, but a small confined area trying to remove a disturbance, I'm sorry if you want to lump this on corporate america but I like to remind people that these big nasty corps made the hardware you are using to read this, to reply etc.

a reply to: thekaboose

I'm not blaming HP computers for dragging a paying customer off of a plane against his will. I'm blaming UA for doing it.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: thekaboose

I'm not blaming HP computers for dragging a paying customer off of a plane against his will. I'm blaming UA for doing it.

The man was refusing to leave private property after being told he was not allowed on board and was being removed. The man then runs back into the plane and hangs onto a chair. He is now trespassing.

If someone was in my house who I didn't want there who had to be forcibly removed, in your world I should leave him be causing hold up to my plans and life?

If someone is in a restaurant after closing and refuses to leave, and has to be forcibly removed because he is holding onto a rail screaming, should the staff be forced to stay until he leaves himself or until opening the next day?

a reply to: thekaboose

I think it's a bit different when we are talking about the reason he is on the plane in the first place. It's not like being kicked out of a restaurant will ruin your whole schedule or anything. You can just go to another one. Flying on an airplane is different. Being removed from a plane screws everything up.

This man is a doctor. His schedule is probably booked solid with patients. Bumping him to a later flight will wreck that schedule. I can easily see how inconveniencing someone like this with just a compensation of $800 isn't worth it. After all, he already paid for his spot on the plane.

originally posted by: destination now
To be fair though, the equivalent would be that you weren't actually getting the cash to go and buy another burger elsewhere, you'd be getting a voucher for McD's and being told you'll have to come back tomorrow...

That is not accurate, when you get IDB'd the DOT mandates that you receive cash or the 'equivalent' which is most always a check. Vouchers are not the compensation instrument mandated by the DOT in these scenarios.

Not to say you cannot accept one if you want, and I would if it were more than the legally required compensation indicated by the DOT.

a reply to: ParasuvO

Badge means what in this case?

They have authority to do whatever the hell they want?

Be a dummy, test them and find out. When your 'number is up', after it goes that far (three cops are standing over you with badges and guns), best give up your seat.

I have argued and won with just about ANYONE and i can tell you some of these badges are now my friends.

You weren't there, if you had been you would have 'lost' too. Now pretend you won this argument.

By the by I agree what else you said; they were in the wrong, they used excessive force and they should (will) apologize, big time. This one will co$t them (the airlines, not the cops).

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: thekaboose

I think it's a bit different when we are talking about the reason he is on the plane in the first place. It's not like being kicked out of a restaurant will ruin your whole schedule or anything. You can just go to another one. Flying on an airplane is different. Being removed from a plane screws everything up.

This man is a doctor. His schedule is probably booked solid with patients. Bumping him to a later flight will wreck that schedule. I can easily see how inconveniencing someone like this with just a compensation of $800 isn't worth it. After all, he already paid for his spot on the plane.

Ok, let me put this another way.

Say we have two people:

A Doctor who needs to get to work for nondescript meetings
A father who hasnt seen his child in weeks as hes pulling a lot of work to save for his kids future trying to get back in time to see the kid for their birthday.

Neither wish to leave but the doctor is chosen randomly

Both paid for their ticket, by holding up the plane the father stands the chance of missing the birthday. By volunteering he will miss it.

UA makes the call, that ALL THE OTHER PASSENGERS get there almost on time so their lives are not impacted too much. The doctor ran the risk of messing up everyone else schedule, if cancelled because of 1 man, they get their money back but all are put out as UA can say "hey not our fault, blame this guy".

Sorry to sound like a a** here but, people see this from ONE persons perspective, not the rest of the passengers (some whom may have been terrified at first when he ran back onto the plane chanting). How do we know the "doctor" was telling the truth anyway? He hasn't come forward as far as I've seen, but if it was a lie, its a good lie "hey hes a doctor? he can save lives, I better give up my seat" didnt work though.

a reply to: thekaboose
Feds Investigating Forcible Ejection of Passenger On Overbooked United Flight

The U.S. Department of Transportation has opened an investigation into the treatment of a United Airlines passenger who was forcibly dragged from a plane because the company had overbooked the flight.

DOT said in a statement Monday evening that it was reviewing whether United complied with rules on overbooking flights that require airlines to establish a reasonable procedure on how to deal with passengers if they don’t volunteer to give up their seats:

What would you say if UA broke federal regulations on overbooking flights?

Then all companies who use this should be fined for every overbooked flight they have had since they started to implement this rule.

DOT said in a statement Monday evening that it was reviewing whether United complied with rules on overbooking flights that require airlines to establish a reasonable procedure on how to deal with passengers if they don’t volunteer to give up their seats:

So, just say this "doctor" became aggressive once told he was being removed, struggled with staff as he tried to board the plane and then caused himself harm by refusing? What do you think they would have done once he kicked off like a 2 year old? Said "Ok, we will pick a new person" they would do the same, and the cycle continues. Im sorry for being a d1ck but this is beyond stupid, HE refused to leave, HE ran back on, HE resisted being removed by holding onto anything HE could find.

THE UA AND COPS DID NOT WALK ONTO THE PLANE, POINT AT HIM AND THEN DRAG HIM OUT FROM WHERE HE WAS SITTING WITH NO WARNING. He was TOLD he would have to leave, EVERYONE on that plane had the choice but NO ONE took the hit, all expecting it to be someone else and it was this man who acted like a child.

Can somebody please explain to me how the doctor's decision to place his principles above everything else in this particular situation could have ended well for him? He really does seem like the kind of person who would rather take a bullet to the groin just to prove himself correct, rather than lying and saying "I was wrong" and not getting shot in the groin as a result.

a reply to: thekaboose

So your conclusion is that UA and the police did nothing wrong here?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: thekaboose

So your conclusion is that UA and the police did nothing wrong here?

I believe that it shouldnt have been overbooked, I feel that he should have been given more time to be taken off but not too much.

But if you want to push me so you can start a holy crusade against me, I dont believe they did anything wrong, I believe that due to the actions of one man, a lot of people almost missed their flights due to a practice that has been going on for years and has always seemed to work (must like the electoral system which people are saying shouldnt be allowed as the popular vote should decide but hey, its worked up until trump right!). People question, b1tch and moan when things dont go their way (see all of human nature).

This should never have happened, it should never have got that far, and he should have been a hell of a lot more mature than he was.

a reply to: thekaboose

I'm not trying to start any holy crusades. I'm not insulting you for your opinion or anything. You don't have to be so defensive. It doesn't bother me that we don't agree.

Plus at the end of the day I feel like this incident highlighted a practice performed by the airlines that may not be on the up-and-up. If UA is abusing regulations on it, then we may need some airline reform to clamp down on these practices. Customers shouldn't have to put up with a practice just because that is the way its always been.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Conditioned to believe they are our biggest enemy? Nope. I have learned they are but one of many potential enemies of people.

Appealing to the law? Once again, I think not. The law is the tool of the offenders, who, in this case, likely broke it.

There WAS logic and reason for not getting off the flight. He is a doctor. He had patients and appointments he needed to keep. He had no reason to believe UA would get him on a flight that would allow him to keep his schedule. They simply went in and dragged him off. He was not unreasonable, at that point, to see the officers as a threat to his personal safety.

Ok, so you are not from the UK, my bad. You are not from the U.S., and speak like someone living in a country where people have higher levels of trust and accountability in their law enforcement than the U.S.