Originally Posted by Superguy
It could just be a tacet admission that they don't trust their own screening. Surprise, surprise ... neither does the flying public.
I actually don't have anything against them running a bomb-sniffing dog through the cabin and the cargo hold after a threat like this. And I hope they through the book at the guy who caused it--I'm sick and tired of drunkeness and mental illness being used as excuses for completely unacceptable behavior in public.
But the real question is what did they do to the other pax? Were they treated with respect or herded around like criminals even though they had done nothing wrong. From
another article:
Uselding said the pilot decided to divert the plane to Denver after a passenger became unruly. After the A-320 Airbus landed, it taxied to a remote part of the airport, where the passengers got off and were taken to the terminal by bus. They were questioned and re-screened by authorities.
Were they questioned about the criminal incident or interrogated to fish for more suspects? Were they denied access to their carry-ons and their phones? Held at gunpoint? (not unreasonable considering what LEOs and the FAMs have done a few times) And why did they need to be rescreened when it was obvious that they were not part of the incident? Were they denied access to airport services? If I were on an ORD-SMF that was diverted to DEN, the first thing I'd want to do is get off the plane, get into the terminal, and get on standby for the next on-time flight to SMF. Somehow I doubt these folks were granted this courtesy.