Y'all have done so well at pointing out the basic absurdity I won't
repeat. I will complain about something that's related-- The media
never gives us the end of these stories! At first it sounded like the
captain decided to land because of the child's tantrum. Then we learned
that it was the father's behavior. I'm betting that that's all we'll
hear on the subject.


We'll never hear if the man was charged or tried or sentenced. We'll
never hear what a judge and jury thinks about what happened. We'll
never hear what sort of compensation, if any, the other passengers got.
We'll never know how the other passengers felt about the man's
tantrum, if they thought it was truly threatening and worth turning
around for. It seems to me that there are 2 possibilities, either the
man was so truly out-of-control that the captain was justified in making
the emergency landing or the captain was the one making the dramatic
gesture. I wasn't there so I don't know, and while I do have an
opinion, I sure wish the media would tell me what the passengers who
were there thought.


We sure never hear what the future relationship between father and son
is like. We don't know if alcohol was involved. (I suspect the problem
beverage was not apple juice.) We don't know if the man had a record of
this sort of behavior. We don't know if the parents had tried to bring
apple juice and got it tossed out by airport security. We don't know if
he was assured that apple juice would be available on the flight and
later learned that it wasn't. The list goes on. These oddity news
items never tell us enough to make informed opinions.


(Thought: Would it be cost effective for a bus company to offer comfort
transportation? I'm thinking of a nice bus with leg room, big enough
seats and amenities like they used to offer on airplanes, without all
the hassle of checking luggage, getting there 2 hours ahead, going
through security, etc. As it is, I mostly fly, not because it is
faster, but because it is cheaper.)


--Lia


--Lia

In article >,
Julia Altshuler > wrote:

> Y'all have done so well at pointing out the basic absurdity I won't
> repeat. I will complain about something that's related-- The media
> never gives us the end of these stories! At first it sounded like the
> captain decided to land because of the child's tantrum. Then we learned
> that it was the father's behavior. I'm betting that that's all we'll
> hear on the subject.

I'll bet you're right. It isn't "news" anymore. And in the rush to get
the news, sometimes we get an incomplete story, especially if that makes
it more outrageous



> later learned that it wasn't. The list goes on. These oddity news
> items never tell us enough to make informed opinions.

That's because it isn't our job to make informed decisions about
individuals.

That's why I don't watch tv news, it is more entertainment than news.


> through security, etc. As it is, I mostly fly, not because it is
> faster, but because it is cheaper.)


I made a trip last month. It would have been cheaper to fly.

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Y'all have done so well at pointing out the basic absurdity I won't
> repeat. I will complain about something that's related-- The media
> never gives us the end of these stories! At first it sounded like the
> captain decided to land because of the child's tantrum. Then we learned
> that it was the father's behavior. I'm betting that that's all we'll
> hear on the subject.

One thing we already know for certain is for every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction. Accompanying every child's tantrum is a
commensurate adult behavior of one form or another, no matter who
started it. Children can be abominable without provocation. That's the
way they are. They can also be abominable in a monkey-do kinda way. We
weren't on the plane and we don't know how it started or what
interventions had already been tried. However, I've never been driven to
such extremity by a child that I would resort to violence toward another
adult. The man is responsible for his own behavior, and he should answer
for it.



> We'll never hear if the man was charged or tried or sentenced. We'll
> never hear what a judge and jury thinks about what happened.

We wouldn't hear from a jury unless criminal charges were brought by the
flight attendant.



> We'll
> never hear what sort of compensation, if any, the other passengers got.
> We'll never know how the other passengers felt about the man's tantrum,
> if they thought it was truly threatening and worth turning around for.

He threw the drink at the flight attendant, according to one story,
which besides being counterproductive was also assault.



> It seems to me that there are 2 possibilities, either the man was so
> truly out-of-control that the captain was justified in making the
> emergency landing or the captain was the one making the dramatic
> gesture. I wasn't there so I don't know, and while I do have an
> opinion, I sure wish the media would tell me what the passengers who
> were there thought.

I wish they would, too. I'm guessing that the emergency landing stemmed
from years and years of abusive passenger behavior directed at flight
attendants that was tolerated by airlines in the past. This got a lot of
press in the last few years and shed light on the outright battery that
would be doled out. It was astonishing what drunken or just plain
belligerent passengers used to get away with.



> We sure never hear what the future relationship between father and son
> is like. We don't know if alcohol was involved. (I suspect the problem
> beverage was not apple juice.) We don't know if the man had a record of
> this sort of behavior. We don't know if the parents had tried to bring
> apple juice and got it tossed out by airport security. We don't know if
> he was assured that apple juice would be available on the flight and
> later learned that it wasn't. The list goes on. These oddity news
> items never tell us enough to make informed opinions.

I believe that man and child should have been put out on the tarmac at
the first opportunity and made to watch as the plane took off again and
flew away without them. They could also have left a container of apple
juice behind for little Tabula Rasa. But, think about it. From La
Guardia to Philadelphia isn't far at all. It didn't take very long into
that flight for the mayhem to begin. Maybe little TR is simply an
unconscionable brat, or maybe hours of waiting for his flight, from the
trip to the airport to finally boarding and then until take off,
ultimately took its toll on everyone concerned.



> (Thought: Would it be cost effective for a bus company to offer comfort
> transportation? I'm thinking of a nice bus with leg room, big enough
> seats and amenities like they used to offer on airplanes, without all
> the hassle of checking luggage, getting there 2 hours ahead, going
> through security, etc. As it is, I mostly fly, not because it is
> faster, but because it is cheaper.)

"Nice" buses aren't very nice. They are dirty. They're crowded. They're
loud. Get up to use the facilities take everything you carried on with
you, and then come back to find that someone has arbitrarily switched
seats with you. If you have a disability and need assistance, they are
not patient. They're comparatively slow. And if you are not a good rider
and have trouble sitting through a long trip, they won't let you drive
for a while!

>> We'll
>> never hear what sort of compensation, if any, the other passengers got.
>> We'll never know how the other passengers felt about the man's tantrum,
>> if they thought it was truly threatening and worth turning around for.
>
>He threw the drink at the flight attendant, according to one story,
>which besides being counterproductive was also assault.
The article said he threw a drink. It didn't say it was at the flight
attendant. It could have been he threw it on the ground.

Abe wrote:
>>> We'll
>>> never hear what sort of compensation, if any, the other passengers got.
>>> We'll never know how the other passengers felt about the man's tantrum,
>>> if they thought it was truly threatening and worth turning around for.
>> He threw the drink at the flight attendant, according to one story,
>> which besides being counterproductive was also assault.
> The article said he threw a drink. It didn't say it was at the flight
> attendant. It could have been he threw it on the ground.

It could still be interpreted as threatening behavior (referencing back
to the bad passenger behavior on airlines from the prior post), and
therefore enough to get the plane landed.


That said, if it WAS interpreted as a threat, why were the man and child
not barred from the plane instead of making it an impromptu layover?