5 ms·

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

by panarky 10y 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 10y 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 10y 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 10y ago
As far as I know not complying with orders from the aircrew on board of an aircraft is against the law.
heynowletsgo 10y 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.

by panarky 10y ago

talmand 10y 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 10y 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 10y ago

As far as I know not complying with orders from the aircrew on board of an aircraft is against the law.

heynowletsgo 10y 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.