Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures • Hacker News Board

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#101

Post by huhtenberg » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:42 AM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #44

jemfinch wrote: post #27

Captain: I don't have any, but United will have no trouble finding me. My name is...[removed]. Why do victims protect their aggressors in this way? The captain made a wrongheaded decision, and he should at the very least have his name attached to it.

> Why do victims protect their aggressors in this way? Legal liability. The author could be sued for defamation of character if any of the details are wrong, or in the case that a truthful account emphasizes negatives over positives, something called "false light". Some readers may find this hard to believe, but it's true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light

> Legal liability.

Basic human decency rather.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#102

Post by mootothemax » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:43 AM UTC

pudquick wrote: post #62

Yes, it's unfortunate that the flight attendant lied in this situation. However, it would have been impossible for the pilot to verify this - even if the author showed him the camera. Since the author was willing to 'prove' it, it had to be a digital camera - which the author could have very easily used the built-in delete function to remove all photos but one (or be a sneaky terrorist and swap SD cards). In addition…

You were not kicked off for taking pictures. You were kicked off for acting odd.

Exactly. It's a long-haul flight, you might have a grudge against the flight attendant, you've already behaved slightly oddly - thinking it appropriate to say "I hope you didn't think I was a terrorist" is odd - and there are so many ways the flight could become a nightmare for all concerned, all thanks to you remaining on the plane.

Maybe the captain could have handled things better. At the same time, the author went off the plane calmly and without making a scene. The author's disappointment aside, it sounds like a success to me.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#103

Post by chc » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:43 AM UTC

PavlovsCat wrote: post #54

sdoering wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why, if this means, you stay on the plane, you win. But nobody looses his/her face. So wining, without anyone losing, what is so wrong? Everything else (and I sadly, really often react that way) is the little child in a sand-pit: "But he started it" kind of argument. Not mature, not civilized, just childish - the way or societies more and more seem to become imho.

There is nothing civilized about failing to point out that the claim "he took more pictures" is a lie. There is nothing civilized about abuse of power. There is nothing civilized in accepting it. But the real WTF is: how would agreeing to be led off the plane have resulted in him staying on it? His fate was sealed when he explained his picture to the FA and she had a 'nam flashback, or whatever the fuck caused this;…

> There is nothing civilized about failing to point out that the claim "he took more pictures" is a lie.

Was it? Or did she misunderstand his need to justify himself as a way of indicating that he did not intend to stop? You assume she lied -- probably because that's what you are most comfortable believing -- but it's not necessarily true. People make false claims all the time that they really, genuinely believe to be the truth. Based on the scant evidence as we have, your accusation toward the flight attendant could even be an example of the same thing she did -- automatically assuming the worst of someone.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#104

Post by ghostDancer » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:44 AM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #21

It seems likely that, in the not-too-distant future, we will all be eagerly recording everything around us to prevent these kinds of injustices from happening. Imagine if you'd had a mic running, then played it back to the captain. Problem solved - and the FA would have gotten into trouble for creating a liability risk for the airline.

The problem is that recordings can be modified or erased and soon will be forbidden, the first problem they have they'll make a new law or rule, so you can not put the authorities against the wall, for your protection of course. I think is now forbidden to record policemen, not sure non US citizen here, in US while they're working.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#105

Post by guruz » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:46 AM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #24

guruz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or live in Paranoidistan, aka USA.

There are 30,000 flights a day in the US with an average of 100 passengers each. This happening to one blogger is not exactly a pattern of paranoia. It was simply two people making a bad customer service decision.

I would agree with you, it could have been that.

It's just that for me as an European seemingly all crazy stories like "X tazed by cop for doing nothing at all" or "Y put into jail for having her small children play naked in the garden" come from the US.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#106

Post by taligent » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:47 AM UTC

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #83

jemfinch wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one's taking the airline's side here, but he shouldn't have brought up terrorism. That was a mistake in judgment on his part, as I explained elsewhere. The irony here is that you're demonstrating the same sort of knee-jerk misinterpretation that arises when people say "terrorism" on an airplane.

I still don't understand why using the word "terrorist" is a no-no. It is a word. Context matters. Context in this case would suggest there was nothing to worry about. I swear sometimes it is like the whole world is a slightly mentally handicapped child who, upon hearing a bad word, starts repeating it getting more and more upset. I guess being adults and thinking things through is too much to ask from your average f…

> It is a word. Context matters. Context in this case would suggest there was nothing to worry about.

Wait. A plane is an appropriate context for the word "terrorist" ?

Interesting.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#107

Post by oellegaard » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:47 AM UTC

adorable wrote: post #51

oellegaard wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, what is the "B" word?

I'm not on a plane and i'm not waiting in a TSA line so I can say it: BOMB

I see. Freedom of Speech - not so much. I anyway had my encounters with immigration in Singapore once. They asked me "Are you leaving the country through this airport as well?" and I replied "Well, we thought about visiting Malaysia as well" whereafter she raised her hand and the police brought me into this weird room where I could not use phones/computers etc. What a treatment for a European citizen. I had plenty of money and proper travel plans. They also released me after 30 minutes, but I felt really bad after his experience, basically treated like a criminal. Now I learned just to stfu while talking to officials at airports.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#108

Post by PavlovsCat » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:47 AM UTC

taligent wrote: post #87

PavlovsCat wrote: post #3

The weaker people in positions of authority are, the less you're allowed to laugh in their faces, and the more you should.

This sort of attitude is childish and pathetic. And it will get you absolutely nowhere in life. Nowhere.

There is nothing childish about it. It's dead serious, and failure to do so costs lives. And regarding that second part: Don't use words too big for the subject. Don't say infinitely when you mean very; otherwise you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. -― C.S. Lewis

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#109

Post by lutusp » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:48 AM UTC

huhtenberg wrote: post #101

lutusp wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do victims protect their aggressors in this way? Legal liability. The author could be sued for defamation of character if any of the details are wrong, or in the case that a truthful account emphasizes negatives over positives, something called "false light". Some readers may find this hard to believe, but it's true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light

> Legal liability. Basic human decency rather.

Well, yes, that's also true -- many people don't want to cause unintended hurt by way of poorly considered words. But (in the U.S. at least, and certainly Great Britain) a diplomatic expression that includes an unfair characterization can result in legal action.

"Bob isn't so bad -- after all, it's said that he's stopped beating his wife."

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#110

Post by regularfry » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 9:48 AM UTC

frinxor wrote: post #80

batgaijin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, saying "I'm not a terrorist" is kind of a line I'd expect to hear to in a tv show or something. Do you tell the cop "Don't worry, I'm not a kidnapper"?

When a flight attendant tells you to not take pictures, its obviously for security/terrorism concerns. I find it truly ridiculous if we can no longer make true statements in an attempt to alleviate such fear ("I am not a terrorist"). When a cop pulls you over because there was a kidnapping a year ago, you do not end up in jail for making the claim "Don't worry, I'm not a kidnapper"

Except that it's not obviously for security concerns. hey might want to make it difficult for passengers to record broken equipment that makes them look bad. They might just be unhappy about the out-of-fashion decor. Or they might want to make it harder for competitors to build a complete record of their fittings. It might be as simple as not being able to tolerate a flash going off and making a blanket ban that covers all cameras is the simplest way to do that.

There is any number of reasons why they might want to ban photos of plane equipment that just boil down to airline self-interest without playing the "security" card. Not that this invalidates them, but it does put the flight attendant's request in a less all-trumping context.