3 ms·

Article did not breach a few points. First, why is there no law or clear punishment against grabbing your luggage in an emergency or otherwise obstructing the

by gist 7y ago

Article did not breach a few points. First, why is there no law or clear punishment against grabbing your luggage in an emergency or otherwise obstructing the safe exit from the plane? If someone were intentionally obstructing others in this or in another situation (burning building) that would clearly be most likely seen as some type of crime. Why not here? Why no announcement on the plane? (Back up by the 'federal crime' as they do with smoking in the lavatory). > Psychologists caution, though, against being too quick to judge. The fact that there should be no judgement or we should not think we would do different does not detract that people might have to get drilled into them not to follow some particular behavior. It's almost as if the psychologists and trying to give the behavior a pass. > That passenger reaching for the bag with his favorite sweater or maybe a present for his kid? He’s probably just acting human. Not really. What is human about prioritizing a 'present for your kid' or 'your favorite sweater'? That's irrational. Non adult. And actually child like. People should not get a pass for doing stupid things. > grabbing for possessions is more common than one might think Actually what is probably happening is people see other people grab things and then mimic that behavior. You see the same type of thing with traffic. One person does a u turn and then a bunch of people follow. > “We have in the past publicly commented on the need for passengers to leave carry-on items behind during an emergency,” said Christopher O’Neil' I wish there were no speeding laws and tickets and the state just gave that type of friendly reminder!

oarsinsync 7y ago
> The fact that there should be no judgement or we should not think we would do different does not detract that people might have to get drilled into them not to follow some particular behavior. > I wish there were no speeding laws and tickets I understand what you’re saying, and as a driver and frequent flier, appreciate both points. Unfortunately, the reality is in absolute numbers: There are large numbers of people speeding daily, and large numbers of people dying on the roads daily, globally. There are orders of magnitude fewer numbers of people flying on planes that perform emergency disembarking events, and more orders of magnitude fewer people dying in these instances. Given the frequency of reminders getting drilled into drivers that speed kills, who continue to speed frequently, how frequent would reminders to not grab possessions in an emergency situation actually have to be in order to be effective? The base premise of the point to not judge is that in an emergency situation, some people are acting on instinct. Meanwhile people who speed are more often making a conscious decision to do so based on their own view of road conditions.
- seymore_12 7y ago
  Indeed some people are acting on instinct. Airlines know this all too well, and yet, to unfasten a seat belt on the airplane you have to pull, while to unfasten car seat belt you have to push. In an emergency situation, fair amount of people will fallback to their instinct to push to unfasten and loose precious seconds.
- gist 7y ago
  The main idea is law and punishment not just reminders. And the punishment needs to be done in a way that people take notice not slap on the wrist (because in some cases that can and would backfire). If it's important (and it is) it's important to insure a big enough punishment (at the discretion of a judge) to make people completely not even think of doing it.
  - oarsinsync 7y ago
    > it's important to insure a big enough punishment (at the discretion of a judge) to make people completely not even think of doing it So what punishment would keep people from speeding? The best I can think of that would be effective on me would be to immediately suspend my license for some period of time, and potentially immediately impound my vehicle too. Maybe 1 week per % caught over the speed limit? The current system doesn't stop me speeding (as demonstrated earlier today) when there's a nice big gap between me and the car in front. Plus I'm gonna learn those repercussions faster than my car's going after that's impacted me, anyone I know, or even seen on the news that it's actually being enforced. It's in my interests to now learn this and stop misbehaving, as it's something that impacts my day to day life. Meanwhile, how do you now find a way to educate people about a punishment that has a tiny percentage chance of being relevant to them twice a year? And how do you hold it up in court, when the entire defence is then predicated on "they weren't thinking, it wasn't a conscious decision, they were in a state of fear?"
Mirioron 7y ago
If you're poor though, losing that stuff could mean very bad things in the future. Would you be okay with those people staying on board until everyone else has gone and then grabbing their stuff? I would probably be willing to be the last to leave if it meant I could take my stuff. Edit: even if it meant that I'd be taking considerable risk.
- gist 7y ago
  > If you're poor though, losing that stuff Poor? If you are flying on an airplane you aren't rich but you also probably aren't so poor that your worldly possessions lost are worth another person's life. > Would you be okay with those people staying on board until everyone else has gone and then grabbing their stuff? Makes no practical sense. For one thing you have people that are on inside seats and 2nd the idea is it's an emergency and everyone has to get out. > I would probably be willing to be the last to leave if it meant I could take my stuff. So you think you are in a position to evaluate the risk from some unknown in most if not all situations sitting on the inside of the airplane? And what about the risk to first responders? You think they should have to risk their life because you or someone needs to get out their personal belongings? Even if you have medication that can be replaced and if it's so critical carry it in a fanny pack.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    I wrote a different reply earlier, but I scaled it back a little. >Poor? If you are flying on an airplane you aren't rich but you also probably aren't so poor that your worldly possessions lost are worth another person's life. Of course worldly possessions aren't worth another person's life, but I have flown before when I had $10-20 to my name (somebody else paid for the plane ticket). Having nothing in a foreign country isn't simple nor are all the things replaceable even if you do have some money. Even then, if you have next to nothing then the contents of your baggage might be very important after "life goes back to normal". If you have very little money and most of your clothes burn then you can't really remedy that situation. Of course I don't think first responders should risk their life for someone life me, but it's not possible to opt out from that. Nor do I think that I would be able to tell the severity of the situation, but there have been times where I would consider it worth risking my own life for it. I'm not sure how these would add up. Perhaps the best idea for someone like me would be to not fly.

by gist 7y ago

oarsinsync 7y ago

> The fact that there should be no judgement or we should not think we would do different does not detract that people might have to get drilled into them not to follow some particular behavior. > I wish there were no speeding laws and tickets I understand what you’re saying, and as a driver and frequent flier, appreciate both points. Unfortunately, the reality is in absolute numbers: There are large numbers of people speeding daily, and large numbers of people dying on the roads daily, globally. There are orders of magnitude fewer numbers of people flying on planes that perform emergency disembarking events, and more orders of magnitude fewer people dying in these instances. Given the frequency of reminders getting drilled into drivers that speed kills, who continue to speed frequently, how frequent would reminders to not grab possessions in an emergency situation actually have to be in order to be effective? The base premise of the point to not judge is that in an emergency situation, some people are acting on instinct. Meanwhile people who speed are more often making a conscious decision to do so based on their own view of road conditions.

seymore_12 7y ago
Indeed some people are acting on instinct. Airlines know this all too well, and yet, to unfasten a seat belt on the airplane you have to pull, while to unfasten car seat belt you have to push. In an emergency situation, fair amount of people will fallback to their instinct to push to unfasten and loose precious seconds.
gist 7y ago
The main idea is law and punishment not just reminders. And the punishment needs to be done in a way that people take notice not slap on the wrist (because in some cases that can and would backfire). If it's important (and it is) it's important to insure a big enough punishment (at the discretion of a judge) to make people completely not even think of doing it.
- oarsinsync 7y ago
  > it's important to insure a big enough punishment (at the discretion of a judge) to make people completely not even think of doing it So what punishment would keep people from speeding? The best I can think of that would be effective on me would be to immediately suspend my license for some period of time, and potentially immediately impound my vehicle too. Maybe 1 week per % caught over the speed limit? The current system doesn't stop me speeding (as demonstrated earlier today) when there's a nice big gap between me and the car in front. Plus I'm gonna learn those repercussions faster than my car's going after that's impacted me, anyone I know, or even seen on the news that it's actually being enforced. It's in my interests to now learn this and stop misbehaving, as it's something that impacts my day to day life. Meanwhile, how do you now find a way to educate people about a punishment that has a tiny percentage chance of being relevant to them twice a year? And how do you hold it up in court, when the entire defence is then predicated on "they weren't thinking, it wasn't a conscious decision, they were in a state of fear?"

Mirioron 7y ago

If you're poor though, losing that stuff could mean very bad things in the future. Would you be okay with those people staying on board until everyone else has gone and then grabbing their stuff? I would probably be willing to be the last to leave if it meant I could take my stuff. Edit: even if it meant that I'd be taking considerable risk.

gist 7y ago
> If you're poor though, losing that stuff Poor? If you are flying on an airplane you aren't rich but you also probably aren't so poor that your worldly possessions lost are worth another person's life. > Would you be okay with those people staying on board until everyone else has gone and then grabbing their stuff? Makes no practical sense. For one thing you have people that are on inside seats and 2nd the idea is it's an emergency and everyone has to get out. > I would probably be willing to be the last to leave if it meant I could take my stuff. So you think you are in a position to evaluate the risk from some unknown in most if not all situations sitting on the inside of the airplane? And what about the risk to first responders? You think they should have to risk their life because you or someone needs to get out their personal belongings? Even if you have medication that can be replaced and if it's so critical carry it in a fanny pack.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- Mirioron 7y ago
  I wrote a different reply earlier, but I scaled it back a little. >Poor? If you are flying on an airplane you aren't rich but you also probably aren't so poor that your worldly possessions lost are worth another person's life. Of course worldly possessions aren't worth another person's life, but I have flown before when I had $10-20 to my name (somebody else paid for the plane ticket). Having nothing in a foreign country isn't simple nor are all the things replaceable even if you do have some money. Even then, if you have next to nothing then the contents of your baggage might be very important after "life goes back to normal". If you have very little money and most of your clothes burn then you can't really remedy that situation. Of course I don't think first responders should risk their life for someone life me, but it's not possible to opt out from that. Nor do I think that I would be able to tell the severity of the situation, but there have been times where I would consider it worth risking my own life for it. I'm not sure how these would add up. Perhaps the best idea for someone like me would be to not fly.