Passenger restrained and killed on flight

A passenger was restrained and killed on board AA flight 4 from LAX to JFK on Friday, March 18. The passenger became violent and belligerent after flight attendants refused to serve him another alcholic beverage. After appearing to be headed for the cockpit, seven players from a rugby team tackled the passenger and held him down. The passnger was pronounced dead at Jamaica Hospital a short time after the plane landed at Kennedy.

The above is a brief synopsis of what happened. Of course, an investigation is under way. Click on the link above to read the full article from the New York Post. There are some interesting things written in the article... like this one: The passenger's wife called him a church going man who rarely drank. The passenger himself told the crew he was despondant over a break-up with his girlfriend. Hmm... a real church goer. Yes, it is sad this incident occurred, but I'm not sad the passenger died. It's horrible, but I have no sympathy.

In this post 9/11 environment you can't expect anything different from passengers who fear someone is about to breach the cockpit. They will react, sometimes violently. It's called self-preservation. It's too bad the passengers on that faitful day in 2001 didn't know what could have happened. It's a good thing the passengers on this flight did.

The one thing that has erked me over this story is the aviation forum I read, which clued me into the incident in the first place. Click here for to read the thread associated with this story. More then talking about the incident itself, people on the forum are getting in a pissing match over two things: 1) whether or not airlines should serve alcohol and 2) the flight attendant should have served him the drink. We know the latter is assanine. It is not the flight attendant's fault this situation occurred. Serving him another drink may have only been delaying this passenger's blow-up, and another drink would have impaired him further and could have potentially made the situation worse. Yes, it's hard to imagine a more serious outcome, the passenger died, afterall, but more harm could have been done.

It amazes me the sympathy on the forum seems to be for the passenger. Interestingly, those with that opinion live in other countries, not the US. A couple of them have even referred to American's as paranoid. Well, it might be that, but can you honestly blame the passengers for reacting the way they did? You don't have time to react in a situation like that, you just react. You can't afford to wait and see what will happen. And besides, how were those passengers to know the unruly one would die by their actions? I may be on my own here, but the passenger should have realized what could have happened to him with his behaviour the way it was, especially in this post 9/11 environment.

One person on the forum is for certain AA will be held liable, but I think different. A few years ago a passenger on a Southwest flight from Las Vegas to Salt Lake was restrained after becoming unruly and subsequently died of suffocation. The airline and the passengers who restrained him were not held accountable. And think of this... do you think the DA of New York would press charges? Come on, this is the city that was most affected by the terrorist attacks. It would almost be unthinkable.

A win for gay rights

A San Francisco judge ruled today a state ban on same sex marriage is unconstitutional. It is likely the ruling will be appealed to the State's Supreme Court. Read more by clicking on the link above, A win for gay rights. This is good news for the gay community. If this ruling is upheld, it will pave the way for California to become the second state to legalize same sex marriage.

The judge likened the ban to racial segregation and said, "there appears to be no rational purpose for denying marriage to gay couples." Precisely. I couldn't have said it better.

On commenting...

Ok... I've ranted about this before, but it's time for another rant. I replaced the Blogger commenting system a few months back with the same commenting system that was in use on the old site. The Blogger comment system sucked, and supposedly it has been re-worked and improved, but it still is not as simple as the one I currently have in use.

With that said, those who may not have commented previously due to Blogger's system, it's gone and the old, easy one is in use. Which means you no longer have reason to not comment. Half the reason I blog is I love the feedback of others, especially on issues that involve politics. I know we're not always moved to comment, but a thought here and there is really appreciated. There has not been one single comment since I started blogging regularly again and I know you're reading! I love to spur conversation and get other's opinions -- I thrive on it. And yes, I'm whining. You can provide the cheese by commenting. THANK YOU! Rant = done.

Ban upheld on solicitation

I've written about this topic before and since it has has come up in the news again, it's time to bring it up. The city of Las Vegas has long been trying to ban solicitors from passing out material to passersby on The Strip and at The Fremont Street Experience. It has been through several courts and has now arrived at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The argument of the city is that the First Ammendment does not provide for protection of solicitors, who are out trying to advertise and make a buck, by walking city streets and passing out information. According the ACLU, the First Ammendment does provide such protections and they've been fighting the ban for several years.

The Courts recently ruled the city was with-in the law and the ban did not violate the First Ammendment. I tend to agree with the city. I am one of the first of people who would stand up to protect First Ammendment rights, but I don't expect that I, as a business owner, have the right to stand on street corners and pass out advertising. Advertising costs money, and the only alternative to the ban, I feel, would be to license these solicitors and have them pay a fee to the city for using that space to advertise their business. Sounds fair to me.

I personally hate walking down The Strip and constantly having little business card sized pieces of paper shoved in my face advertising escort services and other "adult" material. I'm certainly not a prude, but when you practically run into these people because they will not get out of the way is annoying, and I don't believe they should be there. To me, it's not an issue of free speech, it's an issue of a business using publicly paid for property to advertise their business, with no compensation to the public. Billboards, signs, bus stops, newspapers, radio and television all offer ample advertising possibilities. Limiting the public's right-of-way is not one of them.

Plagiarizing Republican

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., recently spoke at a gathering in Elko, NV. Not only did he resort to childish name calling, he had to plagiarize someone else's speech to do it. He can't even come up with his own name calling. 15 paragraphs of his speech were stolen from a 21 paragraph speech written by Republican Beth Chapman back in 2003. He has since apologized for not giving her credit and asking her permission to read the copyrighted speech.

Some of the more informative things he said during the speech are:

"I say we tell those liberal, tree-hugging, Birkenstock stocking wearing, hippie, tie-dyed liberals to go make their movies and their music and whine somewhere else," and

"I want to know how these very people who are against war because of loss of life can possibly be the same people who are for abortion? They are the same people who are for animal rights, but they are not for the rights of the unborn."

Brilliant. Let me resort to name calling, "Ass munch!" I'm not satisfied... one more, "Stupid ass Republican hack!" There, I feel mildly better.

In much more important news, Martha was released from prison early this morning and is now home in Bedford, NY. I don't pretend to know of her guilt, but I think she was unfairly singled out by witch hunter Elliot Spitzer, better known as the D.A. in New York. There's another ass munch for ya. Gee, maybe Gibbons (and Chapman) were on to something... name calling is fun!

PiYo

In an effort to get in better shape, lose weight and ultimately "look hot" as Beth says, I (and Beth) joined 24 Hour Fitness last week. I am proud to say I've been to the gym every day this week, doing simple things like swimming so as not to flare up my current sinus infection. Tonight, I decided to take another step and attend a PiYo class, which mixes pilates and yoga. I enjoyed the class very much as it is low impact, relaxing and yet quite the work out. Who knew you could get breathing hard while sitting! I am anxious to attend this class again and other pilates and yoga classes, all the while working on cardio on my own time.

I look forward to being 100% again so I can tackle the cardio thing... I'd like to start running and get up to several miles a day, then attend these classes to help shape and tone. That's the plan for now. Certainly a step in the right direction. And a fringe benefit: maybe I'll lose 30 pounds by the time my 1o year reunion comes around this summer.