Obese have right to 2 airline seats: Canada court, page 8
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9    10    11  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 12:49 AM by caterpillage
reply to post by deadline527



Yup, money. It always boils down to money. Costs a lot of it to fly a big plane, the airlines, in order to be competitive need to jam as many paying bodies on every plane they can. Now that they have to give up freebies, they will need to recoup that elsewhere to balance the budget.
So, the other passengers will have to absorb the extra cost. Thanks Mickey D, and fudge!


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 12:51 AM by heyo
reply to post by LostNemesis



Could I read one thread that doesn't contain a religious cheap shot? Anyways I'm with everyone, else. I wonder when a person's right to vindicate self-indulgence trumps the right to go somewhere else (getting your way when you don't deserve it or at the cost of others is self-indulgence, on top of the eating too much? If you can afford all that food you can afford 1st class. I'm not rich by any means, and i have to pay real close attention to the old food budget (as i'm sure most do actually) and man the amount those people spend at the grocery store makes me wanna invest in safeway if north americans are just gonna keep getting fatter.


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 06:56 AM by Flighty
It wouldn't be too much to expect an airline to put away say 6 seats for the vertically and horizontally challenged, disabled etc.

If those are taken, then these people could be put on a short list for the next available flight with special designated seats.

It's not like EVERY flight is loaded with morbidly obese people.

Another suggestion would also be to make public exactly the load/height/width limit of their seats. Put the actual figure on their tickets and websites so people would know before flying.

Example....maximum load limit 100kgs....maximum height limit 6'.....
(I have no idea what the actual figures would be , I'm just guessing here)

Rather than prove that a personal is disabled due to their weight to receive a free second seat, maybe the REASON why they have to fly should be accessed as to whether it is a NECESSARY flight....e.g to go to a funeral, for a family birth or wedding..etc

Anything else would be considered a LUXURY trip and therefore the person can either go on the list for a special seat, buy a second seat at their own expense or decide not to travel until they meet the weight restrictions.

I can see the 2 for 1 seat deal only encouraging more air travel by morbidly obese people.

So, I think it should only be extended to NECESSARY flights only with documented proof. That at least would discourage frivilous flights and would also help with morale. You would then know that the morbidly obese person with the free 2nd seat had an URGENT reason to fly and is not just going on some jaunt to Bahamas.


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 07:40 AM by chissler
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984



The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Can you provide statistics to support that less than 5% of obese people are true victims of their weight?

I do support additional costs to those requiring more room. They are utilizing the resources of a business with the airlines and if they require more resources from that business than it should come at an additional cost. It should be a conditional cost. If there is room on the plane where seats are vacant, than no additional resource was utilized thus no additional cost. But if the plane is sold out and there is no extra room, than resources have been used and additional costs should be incurred.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 11-22-2008 by chissler]


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 07:45 AM by Raustin
reply to post by chissler



Totally agree with you. If the airlines can supply an extra seat without incurring extra costs, then of course they should.


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 07:46 AM by masonwatcher
Originally posted by SuperSecretSquirrel
reply to
post by VelmaLu



I think that they should have a priority to the emergency exit aisles, aisle, and first row seats. You can't charge them more because you cannot fold down the seat in front of them to give them more room. You can, however, lift the armrest for fat/wide people.



Actually emergency exit seats cannot be occupied by the obese, infirm, disabled and young. It is an escape point were the rest of the passengers count on the person near the hatches to release and open the exit in the event of a crash landing.

During an emergency, wheel chair users and the obese are instructed to remain on their seats until the able bodied have exited in all modes of travel and in buildings. Either trained life savers remain with them or are sent in after the evacuations has been completed.


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 08:15 AM by chissler
reply to post by fmcanarney



The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Which is based on the assumption that all overweight people are addicted to food, which is clearly not the case. All of our bodies are different. If we took a sample of 100 people and all provided the exact same meal. Some people within that group could burn the whole meal off, others may only burn some, and others burn none at all. So the same meal being consumed by different people could result in some people gaining weight, while others not.

This is the problem with obesity, we simplify it as an addiction to food.

Obesity is still the one issue that is socially accepted to mock.

Give me another crowd of one hundred. I'll tell a "fat joke" and I bet that it would upset much fewer than if I told a race joke, "gay joke", or any other joke that uses a specific population as a door mat.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 08:29 AM by fmcanarney
reply to post by chissler



When "alcohol", "drugs", "money", "sex" or "food" becomes the center of a persons world around which they revolve then you have addiction.
The person uses the activity to "solve" all of their emotional problems and resentments, and the volitional component of those individuals becomes sick. Their will does not work correctly.

Irresponsibility in this condition allows themselves and others to blame the parents, genes, heredity, and thus relieve them of the responsibility and the restraint the remainder of us must exercize in life.

Extra seats for obesity.
Then do not feed them while they are in flight.



[edit on 22-11-2008 by fmcanarney]


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 09:02 AM by Raustin
reply to post by UmbraSumus



One where people are skinny. It's healthy, it feels better and it means that there is plenty of food to go around. Not to mention that obesity is very unattractive (except the 'chubby chasers').
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9    10    11  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 6 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 7 days ago with 72 member flags
Renowned Geophysicist Says Strange Sky Sounds Are Real
  Posted 1 days ago with 68 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 19 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 7 days ago with 49 member flags