3 ms·

> 2) He's going to be forcefully removed. Yet why does the forceful removal of that passenger justify knocking him down and dragging him off the plane? There's

by daenney 10y ago

> 2) He's going to be forcefully removed. Yet why does the forceful removal of that passenger justify knocking him down and dragging him off the plane? There's plenty of ways to forcefully remove someone from something without doing what they did. Police is allowed to apply force, but that doesn't immediately give them the right to go loco.

dionidium 10y ago
This, like the notion that police should aim for the knees when shooting at suspects, is one of those perennial concerns that doesn't survive contact with reality. Once force is applied, you shouldn't be surprised when things go wrong. Force is messy. Which is why, yes, it should be viewed as a last resort. Maybe there are better ways to resolve this situation wrt to the police and the airline. But I think basic common sense says that there are much better ways this passenger could have handled it, too. At some point it must have been obvious to any reasonable person that 1) the cops weren't going to change their minds; and that 2) force would eventually and inevitably be applied to resolve the situation in their favor.
- LeoNatan25 10y ago
  Once the police were there, he resolved it the best possible way for him; he stood his ground, got a little banged up, and will not be quite rich for the idiocy of everyone involved.
  - grasshopperpurp 10y ago
    Exactly this. It's not hard to understand. If you know you're right, and you're not afraid of being assaulted, stand up for yourself; or in his case, stay seated (for the wise guys). If someone told you that you'd be entitled to millions for going through what this guy did, you'd take it 100 times out of 100. That's not to downplay how horrendously the situation was handled. The airline deserves to pay damages, and he deserves the money. But, to suggest that he didn't help by not cooperating is one of the silliest ideas swirling around.

by daenney 10y ago

dionidium 10y ago

This, like the notion that police should aim for the knees when shooting at suspects, is one of those perennial concerns that doesn't survive contact with reality. Once force is applied, you shouldn't be surprised when things go wrong. Force is messy. Which is why, yes, it should be viewed as a last resort. Maybe there are better ways to resolve this situation wrt to the police and the airline. But I think basic common sense says that there are much better ways this passenger could have handled it, too. At some point it must have been obvious to any reasonable person that 1) the cops weren't going to change their minds; and that 2) force would eventually and inevitably be applied to resolve the situation in their favor.

LeoNatan25 10y ago
Once the police were there, he resolved it the best possible way for him; he stood his ground, got a little banged up, and will not be quite rich for the idiocy of everyone involved.
- grasshopperpurp 10y ago
  Exactly this. It's not hard to understand. If you know you're right, and you're not afraid of being assaulted, stand up for yourself; or in his case, stay seated (for the wise guys). If someone told you that you'd be entitled to millions for going through what this guy did, you'd take it 100 times out of 100. That's not to downplay how horrendously the situation was handled. The airline deserves to pay damages, and he deserves the money. But, to suggest that he didn't help by not cooperating is one of the silliest ideas swirling around.