6 ms·

I agree. I will point out that it is not United that "chose" violence. They asked the police to intervene. The state is supposed to have a monopoly on physical

I agree. I will point out that it is not United that "chose" violence. They asked the police to intervene. The state is supposed to have a monopoly on physical force, so they did. Now, for the police, violence has always been normal, or normalized. Consider the appropriate responses: 1. An airline should not call in the police when dealing with customers because they can reasonably expect violence. 2. The police should be retrained not to use violence. (Is this reasonable? You can imagine other instances where this where this would endanger them.) 3. As a society, we should not let police deal with "civil" situations where violence might occur. Perhaps we need another "force"? And so on. edit: clarity of last point

mcv 9y ago
> The police should be retrained not to use violence. (Is this reasonable? You can imagine other instances where this where this would endanger them.) That is absolutely reasonable. In many countries, police are trained to de-escalate potentially hostile situations. Only in the US and probably a couple of police states are police officers required to escalate to violence. And it's that tendency to escalate to violence that makes police a threat to society.
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > In many countries, police are trained to de-escalate potentially hostile situations. Only in the US and probably a couple of police states are police officers required to escalate to violence. It's not that simple. The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. That doesn't stop police violence from occurring either in the US or elsewhere (there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example).
  - MaxfordAndSons 9y ago
    >The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. Sure, but practically speaking if you have a realistic understanding of how most US police forces operate, you know that involving them in any kind of dispute greatly increases the chance of violence and harm for all involved. YMMV per locality and situation, but it's a pretty sensible rule of thumb that police involvement equals increased risk of violence, even in previously nonviolent conflicts. Which is sad and unnecessary. I think it directly results from the prevalence of "warrior mentality" in US police training and operations. They are trained to view all citizens as potential enemy combatants to be dominated, rather than innocents to be protected; they are trained to put the safety of themselves and other officers above the safety of the citizenry; and they are trained to, if not always escalate, certainly to err on the side of escalation if there is any hint of violent action or ill intent from the citizens they interact with.
    - blawson 9y ago
      That's probably because there is a not-unreasonable expectation that the situations the police are called out for will involve deadly weapons. Obviously not the case here, but in general, when anyone could realistically be carrying a gun, I don't think the current situation is a big surprise.
      - roninb 9y ago
        Right... because a doctor on a plane in the US has some semblance of a chance of carrying a deadly weapon... This is kinda the point of OP, police violence has become so common-place that we take it as normal happenstance when it's used. There's an air of expected guilt for anyone on the receiving side of the violence but no doubt whatsoever on whether the violence was necessary in the first place.
  - WalterSear 9y ago
    They aren't penalized for escalating it inappropriately. Even being fired for cause just means getting the same job in the next town over.
  - mcv 9y ago
    > The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. Are you sure? I've never heard of it. I have heard of a police officer who was fired for de-escalating a situation through his training as a marine. Maybe some police department do train their officers to de-escalate, but it's very clear that many don't. In fact, many US police officers are overly eager to de-escalate. > That doesn't stop police violence from occurring either in the US or elsewhere (there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example). Compared to the US, there is absolutely a shortage of stories about police abuse in western/central Europe. Yes, it happens, but not on that scale, and the kind of police violence that Americans have come to accept as normal is not considered acceptable in most of Europe.
    - vsl 9y ago
      > I've never heard of it. Wonder why. Because it's not newsworthy.
    - xupybd 9y ago
      Here in New Zealand, the police absolutely are trained to de-escalate situations. There are times when it's not possible, but every interaction I've had with the police here they've been amazing. Polite but they're still in control and authoritative. I can't speak more highly of the New Zealand police. That said we have strict gun control and most of the time they don't have to deal with offenders with firearms. If they do, they call out the Armed offenders Squad, at that point the gloves are off.
  - syshum 9y ago
    >there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example The biggest difference is most of the time when an officer abuses the public in the EU they are fired and criminally charged In the US they are given a 3-5 day paid vacation while the police union and the dept find away to cover up the event, and the insurance company for the dept strong arms the victim into taking a no fault settlement that rarely even covers the medical costs for the victim
  - ajmurmann 9y ago
    Police in the US on general received much less training than in Europe. “In the US, police training lasts on average 19 weeks,” she writes, while “in much of Europe that would be unthinkable. In Germany, for example, police train for at least 130 weeks - http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7709638 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7709638
threatofrain 9y ago
Violence will always underlie government, law, courts, and police. Nations can do research on de-escalation or non-violent interventions, but what happens when a nice method doesn't work? Violence comes next. The objection here is that violence wasn't sufficiently gated, and nor was violence minimally applied -- the airline could've just paid people to get off with a real offer, and not a dishonest offer where people suspect they're going to get tricked by funny coupons and vouchers.
- londons_explore 9y ago
  There seem to be no evidence in this case that non-violent methods weren't used first. Surely the flight attendants politely asked the man to leave, and when he refused they called their manager who did the same, and only at that stage did they call the police, who also probably asked the man to leave first, before finally resorting to dragging him out. At the end of the day, the plane is owned by United, and they have every right to uninvite him from their property, at which point he is trespassing, and it becomes a police matter. Sure, they might violate their own ToS on their tickets at that point, but that's a purely civil matter.
  - falcolas 9y ago
    > that's a purely civil matter. Maybe, maybe not. Airlines are heavily subsidized by the US government in exchange for regulation so they will offer service to rural areas which might not otherwise be viable to run an airline into our out of. There are also laws and regulations which turn disobedience of airline personnel into a federal offense in particular situations. Whether these, combined with this passenger's situation, turns this from a civil to a federal matter is something I'd leave for the lawyers.
  - nostrademons 9y ago
    But there's a really obvious non-violent option that they apparently didn't take: pay people more. If nobody gets off the plane at $800, raise the offer to $1K. Or $5K. Or $10K. Most other overbooking situations are resolved once the offer gets above $1k + hotel, but even if it was, I really doubt that they couldn't have found 4 volunteers at $10K/each. $40K is a lot less than this incident is going to cost them in brand damage, legal fees, and plane delays.
ryandrake 9y ago
The airline had plenty of options. When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution.
- grzm 9y ago
  When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution. You're asking the police, a third-party representing the state and its acknowledged monopoly on legitimate use of force, to become involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that the resolution will or must be violent.
  - ryandrake 9y ago
    What thing can the police do that United employees cannot? By requesting them, you are expecting them to do that thing.
    - grzm 9y ago
      There are a number of things the police can do besides resort to violence (which they are authorized to do if necessary). While news reports highlight violence, the vast majority of police interactions in the USA are non-violent. Just having the police present as representatives of law enforcement will change the tone of the interaction. The police can also act as mediators. Yes, there is the possibility that the police may have to resort to force, but that's not the only possible—or likely desired—result.
  - Mithaldu 9y ago
    Application of force is violence, by default. Even if it's just a tiny bit of force. Much more useful would be deescalation and mediation, but that is not the training given to US police.
    - grzm 9y ago
      Yes, application of force is a type of violence. As you point out (as did I), that's not the only option available to police, and is not necessarily the expected result of asking for police assistance. And deescalation and mediation are part of the training given to US police. That said, law enforcement training is not consistent across jurisdictions in the US. Some likely have more training in mediation and deescalation than others.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> The police should be retrained not to use violence. (Is this reasonable? You can imagine other instances where this where this would endanger them.) Yes, there's a fairly wide belief in this, including by many leaders in law enforcement; that is, that American police have been trained in a means which over-encourages use of force, and that this should be changed (in some places, the work has begun an implementing such a change.) A key write-up of this is: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/248654.pdf https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/248654.pdf EDIT: also: > I will point out that it is not United that "chose" violence. They asked the police to intervene. Asking the police to intervene because the state has a monopoly on violence, so they are free to use it in ways you are not, is choosing violence, even if the police might also veto that choice. So the issue is exactly that United chose violence.
kyleblarson 9y ago
I'd also add that the police should have denied the request to get involved because this situation was a contractual issue between the airline and the passenger. No laws were being broken.
- roninb 9y ago
  IANAL, but in the US, he'd be Trespassing if someone from the company asked him to leave and he didn't (which seems to be the case here). In some jurisdictions, DA/SAs will bump it up to Breaking and Entering so long as that statute allows to charge based on "remaining" in a conveyance rather than "entering" one. It definitely should not have been requested of them, but it's possible laws were broken.
panarky 9y ago
The bigger issue is that police forces now think it's their job to protect corporations from people, instead of protecting the people. This passenger violated no laws but the CPD willingly intervened as an agent of the corporation. Guys with guns weren't required. United could have offered more compensation to volunteers or accommodated their crew on competing airlines. In related news, we learn that Barclay's "received assistance from a US law enforcement agency" to unmask a whistleblower. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/10/whistleblowing-scandal-barclays-unfolded/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/10/whistleblowin... Law enforcement have become lackeys of corporations, when their job should be to protect ordinary people from these abuses.
- talmand 9y ago
  >> This passenger violated no laws I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be too difficult to place charges of some sort on him. Not complying with police orders might be one, trespass might be another.
  - tyingq 9y ago
    The law typically invoked here is "interfering with a flight crew": https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1411-interference-flight-crew-members-or-flight-attendants-49-usc https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1411-i... I've never heard of trespass being used in this situation. Since he appeared to be reasonably passive, I suspect it would be difficult to charge him with anything. An aviation attorney commented about this and seemed to suggest it's very gray: http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-removed-flight/ http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-remove...
- dogma1138 9y ago
  As far as I know not complying with orders from the aircrew on board of an aircraft is against the law.
- heynowletsgo 9y ago
  The police, and common culture, protect capital above all else. This is a capitalist society first and foremost. The status quo, the police state, and the corporation are all protected before the innocent individual. It's policy.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ori_b 9y ago
4) The police should say 'no' when being asked to intervene in these sorts of logistical issues.

mcv 9y ago

> The police should be retrained not to use violence. (Is this reasonable? You can imagine other instances where this where this would endanger them.) That is absolutely reasonable. In many countries, police are trained to de-escalate potentially hostile situations. Only in the US and probably a couple of police states are police officers required to escalate to violence. And it's that tendency to escalate to violence that makes police a threat to society.

chimeracoder 9y ago
> In many countries, police are trained to de-escalate potentially hostile situations. Only in the US and probably a couple of police states are police officers required to escalate to violence. It's not that simple. The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. That doesn't stop police violence from occurring either in the US or elsewhere (there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example).
- MaxfordAndSons 9y ago
  >The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. Sure, but practically speaking if you have a realistic understanding of how most US police forces operate, you know that involving them in any kind of dispute greatly increases the chance of violence and harm for all involved. YMMV per locality and situation, but it's a pretty sensible rule of thumb that police involvement equals increased risk of violence, even in previously nonviolent conflicts. Which is sad and unnecessary. I think it directly results from the prevalence of "warrior mentality" in US police training and operations. They are trained to view all citizens as potential enemy combatants to be dominated, rather than innocents to be protected; they are trained to put the safety of themselves and other officers above the safety of the citizenry; and they are trained to, if not always escalate, certainly to err on the side of escalation if there is any hint of violent action or ill intent from the citizens they interact with.
  - blawson 9y ago
    That's probably because there is a not-unreasonable expectation that the situations the police are called out for will involve deadly weapons. Obviously not the case here, but in general, when anyone could realistically be carrying a gun, I don't think the current situation is a big surprise.
    - roninb 9y ago
      Right... because a doctor on a plane in the US has some semblance of a chance of carrying a deadly weapon... This is kinda the point of OP, police violence has become so common-place that we take it as normal happenstance when it's used. There's an air of expected guilt for anyone on the receiving side of the violence but no doubt whatsoever on whether the violence was necessary in the first place.
- WalterSear 9y ago
  They aren't penalized for escalating it inappropriately. Even being fired for cause just means getting the same job in the next town over.
- mcv 9y ago
  > The police in the US are trained to de-escalate situations too. Are you sure? I've never heard of it. I have heard of a police officer who was fired for de-escalating a situation through his training as a marine. Maybe some police department do train their officers to de-escalate, but it's very clear that many don't. In fact, many US police officers are overly eager to de-escalate. > That doesn't stop police violence from occurring either in the US or elsewhere (there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example). Compared to the US, there is absolutely a shortage of stories about police abuse in western/central Europe. Yes, it happens, but not on that scale, and the kind of police violence that Americans have come to accept as normal is not considered acceptable in most of Europe.
  - vsl 9y ago
    > I've never heard of it. Wonder why. Because it's not newsworthy.
  - xupybd 9y ago
    Here in New Zealand, the police absolutely are trained to de-escalate situations. There are times when it's not possible, but every interaction I've had with the police here they've been amazing. Polite but they're still in control and authoritative. I can't speak more highly of the New Zealand police. That said we have strict gun control and most of the time they don't have to deal with offenders with firearms. If they do, they call out the Armed offenders Squad, at that point the gloves are off.
- syshum 9y ago
  >there is no shortage of horrific stories of police abuse from western/central Europe as well, for example The biggest difference is most of the time when an officer abuses the public in the EU they are fired and criminally charged In the US they are given a 3-5 day paid vacation while the police union and the dept find away to cover up the event, and the insurance company for the dept strong arms the victim into taking a no fault settlement that rarely even covers the medical costs for the victim
- ajmurmann 9y ago
  Police in the US on general received much less training than in Europe. “In the US, police training lasts on average 19 weeks,” she writes, while “in much of Europe that would be unthinkable. In Germany, for example, police train for at least 130 weeks - http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7709638 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7709638

threatofrain 9y ago

Violence will always underlie government, law, courts, and police. Nations can do research on de-escalation or non-violent interventions, but what happens when a nice method doesn't work? Violence comes next. The objection here is that violence wasn't sufficiently gated, and nor was violence minimally applied -- the airline could've just paid people to get off with a real offer, and not a dishonest offer where people suspect they're going to get tricked by funny coupons and vouchers.

londons_explore 9y ago
There seem to be no evidence in this case that non-violent methods weren't used first. Surely the flight attendants politely asked the man to leave, and when he refused they called their manager who did the same, and only at that stage did they call the police, who also probably asked the man to leave first, before finally resorting to dragging him out. At the end of the day, the plane is owned by United, and they have every right to uninvite him from their property, at which point he is trespassing, and it becomes a police matter. Sure, they might violate their own ToS on their tickets at that point, but that's a purely civil matter.
- falcolas 9y ago
  > that's a purely civil matter. Maybe, maybe not. Airlines are heavily subsidized by the US government in exchange for regulation so they will offer service to rural areas which might not otherwise be viable to run an airline into our out of. There are also laws and regulations which turn disobedience of airline personnel into a federal offense in particular situations. Whether these, combined with this passenger's situation, turns this from a civil to a federal matter is something I'd leave for the lawyers.
- nostrademons 9y ago
  But there's a really obvious non-violent option that they apparently didn't take: pay people more. If nobody gets off the plane at $800, raise the offer to $1K. Or $5K. Or $10K. Most other overbooking situations are resolved once the offer gets above $1k + hotel, but even if it was, I really doubt that they couldn't have found 4 volunteers at $10K/each. $40K is a lot less than this incident is going to cost them in brand damage, legal fees, and plane delays.

ryandrake 9y ago

The airline had plenty of options. When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution.

grzm 9y ago
When you ask the police to intervene, you are explicitly requesting a violent resolution. You're asking the police, a third-party representing the state and its acknowledged monopoly on legitimate use of force, to become involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that the resolution will or must be violent.
- ryandrake 9y ago
  What thing can the police do that United employees cannot? By requesting them, you are expecting them to do that thing.
  - grzm 9y ago
    There are a number of things the police can do besides resort to violence (which they are authorized to do if necessary). While news reports highlight violence, the vast majority of police interactions in the USA are non-violent. Just having the police present as representatives of law enforcement will change the tone of the interaction. The police can also act as mediators. Yes, there is the possibility that the police may have to resort to force, but that's not the only possible—or likely desired—result.
- Mithaldu 9y ago
  Application of force is violence, by default. Even if it's just a tiny bit of force. Much more useful would be deescalation and mediation, but that is not the training given to US police.
  - grzm 9y ago
    Yes, application of force is a type of violence. As you point out (as did I), that's not the only option available to police, and is not necessarily the expected result of asking for police assistance. And deescalation and mediation are part of the training given to US police. That said, law enforcement training is not consistent across jurisdictions in the US. Some likely have more training in mediation and deescalation than others.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> The police should be retrained not to use violence. (Is this reasonable? You can imagine other instances where this where this would endanger them.) Yes, there's a fairly wide belief in this, including by many leaders in law enforcement; that is, that American police have been trained in a means which over-encourages use of force, and that this should be changed (in some places, the work has begun an implementing such a change.) A key write-up of this is: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/248654.pdf https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/248654.pdf EDIT: also: > I will point out that it is not United that "chose" violence. They asked the police to intervene. Asking the police to intervene because the state has a monopoly on violence, so they are free to use it in ways you are not, is choosing violence, even if the police might also veto that choice. So the issue is exactly that United chose violence.

kyleblarson 9y ago

I'd also add that the police should have denied the request to get involved because this situation was a contractual issue between the airline and the passenger. No laws were being broken.

roninb 9y ago
IANAL, but in the US, he'd be Trespassing if someone from the company asked him to leave and he didn't (which seems to be the case here). In some jurisdictions, DA/SAs will bump it up to Breaking and Entering so long as that statute allows to charge based on "remaining" in a conveyance rather than "entering" one. It definitely should not have been requested of them, but it's possible laws were broken.

panarky 9y ago

The bigger issue is that police forces now think it's their job to protect corporations from people, instead of protecting the people. This passenger violated no laws but the CPD willingly intervened as an agent of the corporation. Guys with guns weren't required. United could have offered more compensation to volunteers or accommodated their crew on competing airlines. In related news, we learn that Barclay's "received assistance from a US law enforcement agency" to unmask a whistleblower. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/10/whistleblowing-scandal-barclays-unfolded/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/04/10/whistleblowin... Law enforcement have become lackeys of corporations, when their job should be to protect ordinary people from these abuses.

talmand 9y ago
>> This passenger violated no laws I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be too difficult to place charges of some sort on him. Not complying with police orders might be one, trespass might be another.
- tyingq 9y ago
  The law typically invoked here is "interfering with a flight crew": https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1411-interference-flight-crew-members-or-flight-attendants-49-usc https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1411-i... I've never heard of trespass being used in this situation. Since he appeared to be reasonably passive, I suspect it would be difficult to charge him with anything. An aviation attorney commented about this and seemed to suggest it's very gray: http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-removed-flight/ http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-remove...
dogma1138 9y ago
As far as I know not complying with orders from the aircrew on board of an aircraft is against the law.
heynowletsgo 9y ago
The police, and common culture, protect capital above all else. This is a capitalist society first and foremost. The status quo, the police state, and the corporation are all protected before the innocent individual. It's policy.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ori_b 9y ago

4) The police should say 'no' when being asked to intervene in these sorts of logistical issues.