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

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#221

Post by vidarh » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 4:36 PM UTC

lucian1900 wrote: post #124

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.

It's more likely that you would not be allowed on the plane with anything that appears to be recording.

Good luck to them with that. The only people it stops even today are people who don't mind being observed taking pictures. There are plenty of cameras that are easy to hide for anyone who cares to.

I can buy simple digital video recorders embedded in pens, watches, bluetooth earphones, baseball caps, ties, crucifixes and more from just a casual search of Amazon, for example, and that's hardly the state of the art in covert recording.

The more obnoxious anti-photographing policies people experience, the more attractive it will be to make recording devices less obtrusive.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#222

Post by lutusp » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 4:46 PM UTC

jules wrote: post #188

lutusp wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Quot…

While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. If I say "lutusp killed JFK" then that is a lie, even though I do not know that it is false. It is a lie exactly because I do not know it to be true. Something can be a lie if it is true! Suppose the FA said "he took more pictures" without having seen him taking more pictures, with the intent to deceive the captain to get this guy…

> While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false.

Yes, it requires both -- both knowledge that the statement is false, and an intent to deceive.

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie

Quote: "Lie : noun : 1 : a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive"

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/lie[noun]

Quote: "Lie : noun : a statement known by its maker to be untrue and made in order to deceive "

Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie

Quote: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood."

Here's how this works. If you have an idea about how a word is defined that conflicts with another's claim, before objecting, look up the word.

EDIT: also, think for a minute about your claim:

> While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false.

How can a person be said to have an intent to deceive if he isn't aware that his remark is false? How does he form an intent to deceive using a statement he believes to be true?

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#223

Post by waterlesscloud » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 4:49 PM UTC

biot wrote: post #163

My take on this: "Naturally, the FA's warning bothered me and I felt the need to explain myself." Why? The only appropriate response to being informed that you are not permitted to take pictures in a non-public space is "I understand" or simply "Okay". No explanation is necessary as it won't change the rule that the flight attendant is likely obligated to enforce. However, the author feels compelled to justify himsel…

I'm having trouble imagining a thought process that decides that if someone may write a bad review about you, the best course of action is to kick them out.

Under every scenario I can imagine, you have now moved from "may" write bad things to "sure as hell" will write bad things.

If that was her motivation, she came up with the dumbest solution possible.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#224

Post by headShrinker » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:19 PM UTC

I take pictures all the time. While the Flight attendant in this situation seemed a little over zealous, it is not a huge deal and it's not why you got thrown off.

There are a few words you can not say on a plane. Never say "bomb", and NEVER say "terrorist" in any context. When you said, "I'm not a terrorist", you were doomed. Sorry. It had nothing to do with you taking pictures, just your naivety about language, perceived threats, and the illusion of security.

Also don't mess with business class. That is their cash crop.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#225

Post by Terretta » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:24 PM UTC

Anechoic wrote: post #184

DanBC wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say anything to indicate that he would stop taking photos. He then went on to say that he always took photos on United flights and never had a problem.

Again, how is that willfully breaking the rules? Am I will breaking the rules here becaus I don't explicitly state that I am following HN guidelines in all my posts?

Because arguing. If, after being shown the rule, he'd STFU, this article wouldn't be here. He was shown the rule, thought about it, and then objected, implying future rule breaking was in store.

There are now (wrongly, in my opinion, but that's another story) homeland security guidelines about passengers exhibiting behavior that suggests they don't or won't accept the flight attendant's authority. Flowcharting those rules leads to the captain deciding whether he wants the passenger on the flight. It's clear this guy got himself classified into that flowchart.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#226

Post by nwh » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:25 PM UTC

acro wrote: post #152

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?

I've no idea. This was in Australia, but I don't think we have any specific laws against it either.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#227

Post by PavlovsCat » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:36 PM UTC

mootothemax wrote: post #204

jimzvz wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If flight attendants got everybody that they didn't like kicked off flights, it would seem[1] that there would be barely anyone flying. If I pay for a service and it isn't delivered there better be a damn good reason. A lie about me doing something that I wasn't or me stating that I am not a terrorist are not good reasons. [1] http://longhaulflightattendants.tumblr.com/

If flight attendants got everybody that they didn't like kicked off flights, it would seem[1] that there would be barely anyone flying. Speak for yourself. But this is neither here nor there, as you well know. The issue is: have you announced your likelihood to become a problem later in the flight? If so, why should you remain? I think in this case it was a harsh call, but ultimately an understandable one. Heck, who'…

While my assumptions and biases make me see this differently -- that is, having a bad day is human, but so is being abusive with authority -- I disagree even more with the fact that you got modded down for this, so have an upvote to offset that. None of us know for sure what was going on in that plane and in the heads of the involved people, that's a fact.

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#228

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:47 PM UTC

mootothemax wrote: post #204

jimzvz wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If flight attendants got everybody that they didn't like kicked off flights, it would seem[1] that there would be barely anyone flying. If I pay for a service and it isn't delivered there better be a damn good reason. A lie about me doing something that I wasn't or me stating that I am not a terrorist are not good reasons. [1] http://longhaulflightattendants.tumblr.com/

If flight attendants got everybody that they didn't like kicked off flights, it would seem[1] that there would be barely anyone flying. Speak for yourself. But this is neither here nor there, as you well know. The issue is: have you announced your likelihood to become a problem later in the flight? If so, why should you remain? I think in this case it was a harsh call, but ultimately an understandable one. Heck, who'…

[deleted]

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#229

Post by Coincoin » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:52 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #211

easytiger wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well when you enter the USA under the visa waiver scheme you sign a document that asks you many stupid questions, one of which is are you a terrorist.

I love that form. No, I've not committed genocide lately, nor am I entering with the intent of setting myself up as a drug lord... Maybe some light murder and mayhem, though, if I feel bored or the hotel isn't up to scratch. (for the curious who haven't travelled on the visa waiver program: http://www.usvisalawyers.co.uk/article6add1.htm )

A visa that says you don't need a visa. Nice!

Re: Thrown Off a United Airlines Flight for Taking Pictures

#230

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 5:55 PM UTC

Terretta wrote: post #164

No other comments in this thread make this point, so I'll bring it up. While the passenger should not have been booted off, he was absolutely in the wrong but only based on what he told the crew . Here is the photo policy: http://cdn-img1.upgrd.com/featured/united-photo-limits.png It says photography is strictly prohibited of aircraft equipment, and if not of aircraft equipment, prohibited unless of "personal events"…

How could someone who had flown 950,000 miles on United, blogging about it the whole time, be totally unaware of this rule? There are two explanations.

1) He knew about the rule and decided to flaunt it anyway.

2) He did not know about the rule because it is so rarely enforced as to be invisible.

Personally speaking, #2 sounds more likely to me. I take photos onboard most times I fly, and not once have I been asked to stop, even on United flights. I've never heard of any friends or family being asked to stop. I've never even read about this on a blog before, and lots of people blog about flying and travelling.

In short, whether or not he was in technical violation of the rule, it's ridiculous to hold someone strictly to a standard that is never enforced with any regularity.