3 ms·

Good for you. I'd rather not have to try and climb over your dead body when I'm evacuating.

• 4ad 10y ago
  Then chose a different (more expensive) airline that doesn't take extra people. Market dynamics at work. Personally I would always chose the more expensive option, not because of safety (level of safety is plenty), but because of comfort. Thing is, I afford this comfort, there was a time (not even that long ago) where I could not afford to fly at all, and I would have definitely accepted to stay in the aisle (or a plane without seats). Many, many people are in this scenario. Why shouldn't they be allowed to fly if they are satisfied with the conditions?
  • alexvoda 10y ago
    Market dynamics should not be allowed to jeopardize people by not respecting standard safety procedures. Stupid people would do a lot of stupid things to themselves or others willingly. Some would gladly sell their children into slavery. That doesn't mean this market dynamic should be allowed. Point is, there is some lower limit that should not be crossed and crossing it should be universally considered bad. Also I don't think you will always the more expensive option for an undetermined amount of more comfort. I am sure someone out there will willingly design your own custom one of a kind record size airplane. I doubt you will be willing to pay for it.
    • 4ad 10y ago
      I would bet that people not respecting standard safety procedures in airplanes cause less damage to people around them than the same people driving cars. By your argument we should ban people from driving cars, because they jeopardize people around them.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]