Originally Posted by
dvlsadvc8
Last, what many believe to be their "passenger rights" is not the same as your Constitutional Rights. Air travel is NOT a right; it is a CONVENIENCE. However, you, as an individual, do have every right to buy or charter a private flight in order to meet your specific travel requirements and expectations. If you can't afford this mode of travel, other options are yet available. You may reach your destination by train, bus, or how about this... DRIVE yourself. The chances that you will be "bullied, beaten, concussed, humiliated, or booted" from your private vehicle are slim to none.
The unfortunate outcome for passenger Dao was the result of his defiance toward "law enforcement" on scene. With the representation of an attorney, this individual wants to take a stand for passenger rights; had he taken a stand on flight 3411, and deplaned without incident, handling the situation with UA personnel (as did the prior three passengers), no altercation or injury would have taken place. This entire incident has only set a negative precedence for ALL parties involved.
I guess you need a brush up in contracts. The CofC does indeed create certain
rights between parties, very much in contrast to your opinion, the biggest one is that according to case law once Dr. Dao set foot on the plane and off the jetway he was fully boarded and in possession of his paid for and granted by UA through contract seat. There was nothing in the contract UA could have done short of removal with cause that UA could have done to take the seat from him at that point per their contract.
The fact that UA used a non-police security force to physically regain possession of that seat and assault Dr. Dao in the process really smacks horribly in the face of resolving contract disputes. [
Moderator edit; see note below.]