3 ms·

> A person was legally required to do something he didn't want to do That is your claim but it does not appear to be true. Read this comment on reddit from a

> A person was legally required to do something he didn't want to do That is your claim but it does not appear to be true. Read this comment on reddit from a lawyer (unless someone shows that to be wrong I'll assume it to be true): https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/64nluh/united_ceo_doubles_down_in_email_to_employees/dg3xvsy/ https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/64nluh/united_ceo_dou... (EDIT: The comment is actually just a quote of another comment here: https://thepointsguy.com/2017/04/your-rights-on-involuntary-bumps/ https://thepointsguy.com/2017/04/your-rights-on-involuntary-...) According to that guy's reasoning they violated the law and that's all. > and escalated the situation I don't understand the mental gymnastics unfortunately performed numerously by people like you which can be found all over the comments to somehow let United be in the right here. Apparently in your eyes customers have no rights, and anything the corporation demands must be done, period. Especially when I look at how you phrase it: It seems more than obvious that if anyone escalated the situation is was United. The other people on board apparently saw it that way too! Nor did they do what they were required by law to do, to the end the compensation they offered was below what they were legally required to offer. Who escalated, tell me again?

benji-york 10y ago
Let's set aside the legality issue for the moment and assume that United was not legally allowed to have the man removed from the flight. What then is the appropriate response of the passenger? Is non-cooperation (i.e., require people to physically remove you from your seat) the right thing to do? Is physically resisting (hitting, pushing, grappling with, etc.) those sent to remove you permissible?
- IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago
  You reverse the questions. Why? The man didn't do anything, he just sat there. Those who did do something where those who injured him. Who was bleeding, the police, a United airlines person - or the passenger? But it is interesting that you still try to reframe the problem, anything to twist the issue. Do you work for United? I'm not accusing you, just asking, there certainly are more than enough people who are even more obedient to authority than at any time in the Kaiserreich (19th century Germany) whose only way to read any such story is "how can I possibly read this situation so that the big guys are right". Your idea of law and order seems to be top => down, and one-way only, the top guys command, the bottom guys obey - immediately, no questions (again: the passenger did not do anything, reacting to aggression is not aggression!).
  - benji-york 10y ago
    > You reverse the questions. Why? I didn't intend on reversing a question. The only questions I see in this thread are ones I asked. I initially approached the situation from the perspective of the passenger, his decisions, and what would be right or wrong actions for him to take. Thinking about the same questions for the other actors in this situation — as you suggest — is also a good idea. > Do you work for United? Nope. > Your idea of law and order is top down - and one-way. If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation.
    - IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago
      > I didn't intend on reversing a question. I didn't talk about "intent" but about what you did. > Nope. Ahh, somebody likes selective quoting. Care to read the entire section next time? > If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation. I know what you wrote and that's what I responded to. I don't care what you do with the rest of your life, I don't see it so there is nothing to comment. I commented on the visible part.

benji-york 10y ago

Let's set aside the legality issue for the moment and assume that United was not legally allowed to have the man removed from the flight. What then is the appropriate response of the passenger? Is non-cooperation (i.e., require people to physically remove you from your seat) the right thing to do? Is physically resisting (hitting, pushing, grappling with, etc.) those sent to remove you permissible?

IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago
You reverse the questions. Why? The man didn't do anything, he just sat there. Those who did do something where those who injured him. Who was bleeding, the police, a United airlines person - or the passenger? But it is interesting that you still try to reframe the problem, anything to twist the issue. Do you work for United? I'm not accusing you, just asking, there certainly are more than enough people who are even more obedient to authority than at any time in the Kaiserreich (19th century Germany) whose only way to read any such story is "how can I possibly read this situation so that the big guys are right". Your idea of law and order seems to be top => down, and one-way only, the top guys command, the bottom guys obey - immediately, no questions (again: the passenger did not do anything, reacting to aggression is not aggression!).
- benji-york 10y ago
  > You reverse the questions. Why? I didn't intend on reversing a question. The only questions I see in this thread are ones I asked. I initially approached the situation from the perspective of the passenger, his decisions, and what would be right or wrong actions for him to take. Thinking about the same questions for the other actors in this situation — as you suggest — is also a good idea. > Do you work for United? Nope. > Your idea of law and order is top down - and one-way. If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation.
  - IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago
    > I didn't intend on reversing a question. I didn't talk about "intent" but about what you did. > Nope. Ahh, somebody likes selective quoting. Care to read the entire section next time? > If you knew me, you might reconsider that evaluation. I know what you wrote and that's what I responded to. I don't care what you do with the rest of your life, I don't see it so there is nothing to comment. I commented on the visible part.