3 ms·

A 13yo kid? Because that's who was trying to kick out a window. That incident was a case of a kid throwing a tantrum. A choke hold is not the proper response

A 13yo kid? Because that's who was trying to kick out a window. That incident was a case of a kid throwing a tantrum. A choke hold is not the proper response to that. IMO, duck taping the little shit to the seat is a very appropriate response if the child is truly uncontrollable.

okprod 5y ago
I'm in favor of the duct tape as well (as a step after requiring a minor's parents to manage them), but in these types of situations there isn't much time to assess and respond appropriately. For all anyone knows the 13 year old could have been attempting the next 9/11 in a coordinated effort.
- lamontcg 5y ago
  I'm fairly certain that the next coordinated 9/11 attack won't involve unarmed 13 year olds.
  - okprod 5y ago
    Yea me too, I meant in a quick, tense situation sometimes it's hard to tell how old someone is
moate 5y ago
Are you saying a 13 year old is incapable of kicking out a window or incapable of understand that kicking out a window is going to cause catastrophic consequences and therefore should be treated differently? What about this being a 13 year old is mitigating in your mind vs a middle-aged person?
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  The kid is arguably too stupid to know better so taping him to a seat and making him look like an idiot is more appropriate (especially considering the parent asked for help in this case) and physical violence is less appropriate relative to an equivalent situation with someone old enough to know better.
  - moate 5y ago
    Quick question: was the comment I responded to edited to include the 3rd part, or did I just speed read it and only see the first 2 lines? If the latter, sorry I misunderstood what you were addressing.
- dmix 5y ago
  Age plays a role up to the point it is practical, kids/teens should be treated more carefully no doubt and in most cases are easier to deal with. But otherwise this isn’t a punitive thing where we’re measuring how wrong they are and their mental ability / level of guilt before acting. It’s a temporary and immediate solution when the parent can’t handle it on their own and the staff talking to them isn’t mitigating the risk. The idea is to choose the safest and least violent viable option until law enforcement can handle it (choking someone… eh not so much). Absent ‘alternative means’ provided by the airline, duct tape is one of the quickest, most widely accessible, and probably most practical if non-violent options all fail. Not everyone carries rope or other restraints. These are civilian airline workers too. Restraining someone can have a legitimate mental impact and bad PR but so does the rest of the passengers who are all naturally scared of plane crashes.
ikerdanzel 5y ago
Now that duct tape is not allowed, choking is a valid option. Blame it on the airline for exposing the unruly kids to worse off option of restraining. We are post 9-11. There are children in some conflict-torn regions that kill and rape more than the worse serial killers in America.

okprod 5y ago

I'm in favor of the duct tape as well (as a step after requiring a minor's parents to manage them), but in these types of situations there isn't much time to assess and respond appropriately. For all anyone knows the 13 year old could have been attempting the next 9/11 in a coordinated effort.

lamontcg 5y ago
I'm fairly certain that the next coordinated 9/11 attack won't involve unarmed 13 year olds.
- okprod 5y ago
  Yea me too, I meant in a quick, tense situation sometimes it's hard to tell how old someone is

moate 5y ago

Are you saying a 13 year old is incapable of kicking out a window or incapable of understand that kicking out a window is going to cause catastrophic consequences and therefore should be treated differently? What about this being a 13 year old is mitigating in your mind vs a middle-aged person?

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
The kid is arguably too stupid to know better so taping him to a seat and making him look like an idiot is more appropriate (especially considering the parent asked for help in this case) and physical violence is less appropriate relative to an equivalent situation with someone old enough to know better.
- moate 5y ago
  Quick question: was the comment I responded to edited to include the 3rd part, or did I just speed read it and only see the first 2 lines? If the latter, sorry I misunderstood what you were addressing.
dmix 5y ago
Age plays a role up to the point it is practical, kids/teens should be treated more carefully no doubt and in most cases are easier to deal with. But otherwise this isn’t a punitive thing where we’re measuring how wrong they are and their mental ability / level of guilt before acting. It’s a temporary and immediate solution when the parent can’t handle it on their own and the staff talking to them isn’t mitigating the risk. The idea is to choose the safest and least violent viable option until law enforcement can handle it (choking someone… eh not so much). Absent ‘alternative means’ provided by the airline, duct tape is one of the quickest, most widely accessible, and probably most practical if non-violent options all fail. Not everyone carries rope or other restraints. These are civilian airline workers too. Restraining someone can have a legitimate mental impact and bad PR but so does the rest of the passengers who are all naturally scared of plane crashes.

ikerdanzel 5y ago

Now that duct tape is not allowed, choking is a valid option. Blame it on the airline for exposing the unruly kids to worse off option of restraining. We are post 9-11. There are children in some conflict-torn regions that kill and rape more than the worse serial killers in America.