Passenger Dragged Off Of U.S. Airlines Flight!!

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Lol ok

1) difference between deny boarding and deboarding - with different rules - you are referring to deny boarding which does not apply

2) when overboarding was stated as a reason the federal laws surrounding involuntary denial of boarding due to overboarding came into play - these do not include kicking ur ass off a plane when seated - only safety or security rules apply then

Lol,
1, any point, any passenger.
2. Marshals DO have the right to kick your ass off the plane, at the request of the airline. CONTRACT of carriage, gave the airline the right to do so. It's the small print nobody reads.
 
when they're boarded they rightly have to have a valid reason for deboarding someone as set out in the federal rules ..they broke those rules and felt they could abuse the us Marshall support to enforce removing a wholly innocent passenger ... come on guys there is a distinction here ... when u kick someone off a plane you rightly need a valid reason


Hello; As tomt37 has quit the thread this response is for the rest of us.

Tomt seems stuck on the "did the airline have a right to bump the passenger?" Maybe they did or maybe not. That is a question for courts and judges at some point. I do not expect that the police officers who were called to the plane to litigate the points of law right there on the plane. Do any of you?

Even if the airline is wholly in the wrong by first asking the doctor and his wife to leave the plane, the doctor is very much wrong by first not complying when first asked and later by not leaving when the officers showed up. What choice did the officers have at that point. My guess is that passengers have to be removed from planes often enough and sometimes by force. At least it makes the news from time to time.
 
finish the ..any point any passenger.. sentence - you have included no context therefore it is totally meaningless

Marshalls are subject to the law like every other branch of the police .. the airline needs to have a reason for removing someone from the plane as set out in federal law - overbooking is not one of these .. repeating your point with no further arguments doesn't really further your point
 
Police have a very detailed understanding of the laws under which they perform their tasks by the way ...if you get pulled over and a police officer says get out of the car I'm gong to search the vehicle.. for future reference ...the officer needs a premise for the search ... all law enforcement offices act within laws that apply to their tasks ... you have rights which must be protected while designed to allow the officer to do the job fairly ... and no the answer to everything isn't wait for your day in court .. it is reasonable to point out your rights - I'm glad you lot weren't involved in writing aviation law ..
 
The airline have since stated they will never again use marshalls to remove passengers from planes due to overbooking .. recognising it was an inappropriate use of the us air marshalls
 
Semantics. You guys have fun. The guy agreed to United's contract of carriage when he purchased his ticket. He could've went somewhere else.
 
So next time your wife, mother or grandparent is sitting on a plane they won't risk being kicked off for no fault of their own ..thanks to the guy who stood up for his rights ..the airlines will be paying more attention to proper procedure and dealing with this issue prior to boarding as per federal laws
 
repeating your point with no further arguments doesn't really further your point
hello; Is this not exactly the same thing you are doing?

Marshalls are subject to the law like every other branch of the police
Hello; Police and marshals are indeed subject to the law ( at least in theory) , but they do not have to interpret the law at the scene of an incident. By that I mean they, the police, do not have to figure all the ramifications of the 30 page contract we enter into with a ticket purchase. If the police officers in some way used excessive force in removing the doctor, then I can see how they are on the hook for that. They are not on the hook for the airline calling them for help in removing a passenger.

Again at the risk of offending by repeating a point you do not appear to acknowledge. The doctor essentially made the whole thing worse by his actions. Yes Virginia, passive resistance is indeed a type of action. To the point the later couple removed more recently complied with the officer. Were not injured nor dragged away. Do they have rights that the airline violated? Maybe, but that is not for the officers to figure out.

I guess I misunderstood what you meant when stating you had quit the thread. My bad.
 
I'm dragged back in by the shocking interpretation of the law .. I wish you guys lectured at my law school
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com