So you punch someone in the street, should you be banned from walking on any street anywhere in the country?
Why are aircrafts so special that they need such special rules about banning people who commit a minor crime one time? Remember these crimes are minor crimes. Yet people are honestly thinking the correct level of response for an assualt is the inability to use an entire industry.
Of course Airlines want the power to banish people from the industry and give their hosts and hostesses power that people will be afraid of them and just comply with everything and anything. These people already have a lot of power in the fact not complying is a crime.
But to be fair, this is coming from a country where there freedoms are so limited it's a crime to cross the street in the wrong area.
Secondly, you're sealed into a tube with 100 other passengers, over the Atlantic ocean on a 14 hour flight. One passenger who cannot control themselves, decides they're going to punch a flight attendant. Now what? You can't just call the police (like you can on the street).
So now, people who are not the police, have to "detain" this individual to keep them from hurting others. The plane has to divert to land so that the person can be handled by law enforcement. The 14 hour flight is now potentially 24-48 hours total, people have missed connecting flights, holidays, work meetings, etc.
So how and why people continue to compare punching someone on the street with punching someone on an airplane, is beyond me. While they're both technically assault, that's where the comparison ends.
Standard assault such getting punched is a minor crime. That is why people don't get jailed for it. It may not be enjoyable but it is a minor crime. Stating otherwise is simple a falsehood.
> So now, people who are not the police, have to "detain" this individual to keep them from hurting others.
This is some overly dramatic bullshit. Just because I punched Johnny because he was being a dick doesn't mean I'm punching anyone else. Simply people very rarely go on assault rampages. The fact you think they would shows out of touch you are.
> The plane has to divert to land so that the person can be handled by law enforcement. The 14 hour flight is now potentially 24-48 hours total, people have missed connecting flights, holidays, work meetings, etc.
Yes, and that why air rage is a much more serious crime than punching someone. We have courts and punishments for these things. Banning someone forever from being able to travel is absurd. Banning companies from providing services for someone because they found out their wife was sleeping with their best mate while in a plane is absurd.
> This is some overly dramatic bullshit. Just because I punched Johnny because he was being a dick doesn't mean I'm punching anyone else. Simply people very rarely go on assault rampages. The fact you think they would shows out of touch you are.
And howd you know that? wait for them to punch others too? or wait for Johny's friend to return the deed?
Well doesnt matter to me. Anyone who resorted to violence while on a flight should be detained, even if the assaulter assault that_guy_iain for being a dick
So you're for tying people up incase they do something? Anyways, having seen people get slapped and punched quite a few times. It's an issue between them.
> or wait for Johny's friend to return the deed?
You tying the attacker up will not prevent Johnny's friend from attacking him, in fact you're making it easier. In fact, you're escalating the situation over all. In many cases, you can tell the attacker to sit down over there and victim to sit over there. If they're attacking flight crew, this has been a situation that has been esclating for a while so they're just gonna tape them up as is their job.
> Well doesnt matter to me. Anyone who resorted to violence while on a flight should be detained, even if the assaulter assault that_guy_iain for being a dick
That's fair enough, but that is not what the topic at hand is. The topic at hand is, whether or not as part of their punishment by the government that they should never be allowed on a flight ever again?
A private plane and a public street are indeed very different. Not that I agree with a shared no fly list between all airlines, but if a single airline wants to ban you after an incident it's not that different than Walgreens banning you because you punched an employee
True, but since this is about adding them to goverment no-fly list which would mean it was no longer the companies refusing service but the goverment punishing them kinda makes this moot.
Why are aircrafts so special that they need such special rules about banning people who commit a minor crime one time? Remember these crimes are minor crimes. Yet people are honestly thinking the correct level of response for an assualt is the inability to use an entire industry.
Of course Airlines want the power to banish people from the industry and give their hosts and hostesses power that people will be afraid of them and just comply with everything and anything. These people already have a lot of power in the fact not complying is a crime.
But to be fair, this is coming from a country where there freedoms are so limited it's a crime to cross the street in the wrong area.