Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

upgrd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 243 posts

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#151

Post by lutusp »

lusr wrote: post #145
chc wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 b…

Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied.

> Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied.

No, this is not correct. If the speaker doesn't know that a statement is false, the statement is not a lie. Lying requires knowledge that the remark is false and must include an intent to deceive.

----------------------------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

Quote: "To lie is to deliver a false statement to another person which the speaking person knows is not the whole truth, intentionally."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Lie

Quote: "1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.

2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression."

----------------------------------------

See the role of knowledge and intent?

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#152

Post by acro »

nwh wrote: post #42

Not in the same league, but I've been escorted out of a train station of taking a photo of a piece of signage too. The electronic sign in question had condensed a station name to something mildly profane, which I considered amusing enough to take a photo of. The justification given that I could have been planning a terrorist attack, so it was regarded as suspicious behaviour.

Isn't taking photos in public place like a train station completely legal?

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#153

Post by [deleted] »

icambron wrote: post #133
andrewfelix wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree. The guy acted arrogant and entitled and attempted to argue with the Captain. There was a very simple solution to this situation; Suck it up, swallow your pride and apologise, whether you were in the wrong or not. If he had been humble about it, he very likely would have been able to stay on the flight.

This is a really terrible attitude. Apparently, airplanes are this magical place where you're not supposed to be treated like a human being. By "acting entitled", you seem to mean "acting like he's entitled to fly on the plane he bought a ticket for". And of course he argued with the captain; he was being kicked off the plane for taking a picture! It's not arrogant to expect to be treated well. This thing where every…

[deleted]

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#154

Post by raverbashing »

andrewfelix wrote: post #135
tankenmate wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the bit about being humble means they might let you stay on the plane. The decision process is a one way process, once you cross the line there is no going back; or in the words of De Niro "If there's doubt then there is no doubt".

I can only speak from experience. In the past when I've been caught doing something illegal or improper, I've been let off by being respectful and apologetic. Courtesy, respect and humility goes a long way.

He was respectful when he stopped taking photos

But apparently the FA decided to lie and blow this out of proportion

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#155

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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…

Much dissonance in this discussion originates from equating the blogger's situation with the general traveller's. Making a scene increases his blog's visibility and has a decent chance of resulting in corrective action. For him, this may outweigh being late for Baku.

As Francis Fukuyama notes, "unlike money, which can simply be divided, dignity is something inherently uncompromisable: either you recognize my dignity, or the dignity of that which I hold sacred, or you do not" [1]. Trading immaterial dignity for getting to one's destination on time makes sense for most travellers.

That is, unless you are trying to make a statement. Fukuyama continues: "for democracy to work, however, citizens of democratic states must...develop a certain irrational thymotic pride in their political system and a way of life." If everyone optimised for their personal utility the aggregate situation would degrade.

There is a fine line between a prima donna and an activist. It is largely a function of the popular support for one's statement and the probability of it resulting in corrective behaviour.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/End-History-Last-Man-ebook/dp/B003DYGO...

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#156

Post by xyzzy123 »

lusr wrote: post #145
chc wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 b…

Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied.

So by this definition, the OP is a liar because he accused the FA of being intentionally deceptive? I assume he can't read her mind.

Anyway, this is all a bit too meta. It sounds like a huge misunderstanding and an awkward and somewhat confrontational social situation to me.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#157

Post by raverbashing »

libria wrote: post #97
oellegaard wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, what is the "B" word?

Bomb. Also, if your lips are dry and your friend has a moistener, favor the word "chapstick" over "baum".

Also, if English is not your first language, the word is pump, not bomb.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#158

Post by prawn »

trustfundbaby wrote: post #22
DoubleCluster wrote: post #17

Never ever directly accuse someone of lying. Mostly because it's usually a communication problem where they said it unclear and your heard it wrong. Also because you should always give someone a way out without losing too much face. I would have said something like: Sorry if I gave the impression of not cooperating, but I can assure you I did not and will not take any more pictures this flight. It would mean a lot to…

Sorry if I gave the impression of not cooperating, but I can assure you I did not and will not take any more pictures this flight. It would mean a lot to me if I could stay on the plane ----- feels a bit too servile for me, especially if I felt I didn't do anything wrong in the first place.

Plus paying for the service. In this case, the customer was wrong, shamed, inconvenienced, etc.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#159

Post by belorn »

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…

The only reason people are talking about terroist and airplanes is because the airport continue to remind people of it each and every minute on the speakers.

If someone say "don't think of the red elephant", its not odd for people to say "what red elephant?". That's normal behavior. In same way, if you stop someone at the airport, the first thought people will think is "I am not a terrorist!".

You right however that saying "I am not a terrorist" is a bad strategic thing in a discussion. It anchoring you to something bad in people mind. It would be better to say "I am not the president of the air line, but I am a VIP priority customer for united", thus anchoring "the president of the air line" and "VIP priority customer" to peoples mind.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#160

Post by eplanit »

taligent wrote: post #122
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, so people seriously thing that saying "I am not a terrorist" is reason enough to kick someone out of a plane? I honestly will never understand how a one-time attack carried out a decade ago could throw the American society off its rocker so much. In my country (Spain) apart from an Islamic terrorism attack we have had local terrorists (ETA) killing people almost every year from the 60's to 2011, and there just a…

This has nothing to do with 9/11. It has done with a passenger exhibiting odd behaviour leading to the flight attendant believing that he might cause a disturbance during the flight. People causing problems on planes are a nightmare for airline carriers as it can result in early landings, increased risk of life threatening incidents and subsequent scheduling problems. When it comes to planes better to be safe than so…

It has everything to do with 9/11, and the subsequent 'promotion' of flight attendants to security guards. If you doubt that, then just try to imagine the same scenario happening in year 2000...it would not have happened. This is also related to human psychology, as shown in the now classic Stanford Prison Experiment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

Post reply on HN