How is the post anti-American? That is just a stunning interpretation.

Welcome to FlyerTalk :)

I'm curious how often you fly to think that the flight attendant would have info about compensation for delays. Have you ran across this before? I can't recall a flight attendant ever providing information on compensation due to delays.

I flew into DCA two weeks ago and we had an hour delay on the ground, due to a combination of lightning and then no available gate. Asking about compensation would be rather low on my list of questions to ask.

Have you asked this question of flight attendants on previous delays?

I think the thread title is misleading. It makes it sound as though the OP was somehow prevented from flying. Once the aircraft arrives at the gate, it is no longer an active "flight". You were not prevented from traveling in any way.

Heh heh. 300 odd people onboard is a pretty good description of some of my recent flights. :p

I'm amazed at all these posts, really. Along with the degradation in manners, vocabulary in general has decreased among the general population. While vulgar, curse words are heard much more frequently in the past.

That said, no one but the OP, FA and folks sitting in the area are privvy to what actually transpired, the tone of voice, the decibel level, etc to denote whether this was just a generic comment or could be mistakenly taken as directed at the FA, etc. As such, I'll refrain from frying the OP with the rest of you.

I'd get the police report as someone mentioned above, ensure its accurate and attach it to a letter to the airline requesting an explanation for why a comment to an FA can be taken to such an extreme that would get you escorted off the flight, interrogated and placed in a humiliation position, etc.

He did indicate he "complained to a flight attendant on board", and was complaining to her when he was swearing.

I agree the FA overreacted, but let's at least keep things in their proper context.

Especially not people who themselves are powerless to repair the situation and powerless to discuss/provide the remedies for it.

The flight attendant probably wanted to reach the gate as much as the pax. If she misconnected to her next assignment, she might have enspent dead time in the airport (not at full pay rate, if paid at all). The gate agent he was inimating they should complain to would have been open & conducting business for the next flight, not for his inbound flight.

Before the thread gets totally derailed, here is my take...

1) the use of foul language never helps with anything - and trust me, I've lost it plenty of times myself, so I know of what I speak.

2) AA Flight Attendants are problematic - so are the UA crews. They are often unprofessional, mean and will use security nonsense to do anything they want. I actively avoid both carriers, and you learned a hard lesson why. Next time, find an airline whose staff have an interest in treating passengers like customers - you can choose from Continental and Delta, and I think that's pretty much it for the mainline carriers.

3) The cop was just being a bully - and no surprise there. You can file an official complaint against him and it will become part of his permanent record - do this remotely in case he decides to arrest you for the swearing/riot charges :)

4) If you have money to burn, hire a lawyer to send a nastygram to both AA and the MWAA cops - the lawyer should be able to push AA to either offer some compensation, or at least make them consider how their crew over-reactions are starting to annoy customers and cost them some business

5) if you don't want to spend anything on this, write AA yourself...while it is appropriate to point out the FA's gross overreaction and abuse of authority, it would help to apologize for your use of a cussword. A well placed mea culpa never hurts.

6) you can sue, but it will cost alot of money and I'm not sure you would get much more from either party than a well written complain letter and official complaint/reprimand for the cop would deliver for you

7) Cursing is free speech and you can curse all you want - any local/state ordinance to the contrary is probably un-Constitutional. However, exercising your 1st Amendment rights does not always resolve customer service disputes in your favor

I worked in legal services. I met a man who was being deposed (interviewed by the opposing side's witnesses under oath). The court reporter, who, like most, did not work for the firm and was simply an independent contractor tried to swear the guy in (you know, "raise your right hand and promise to tell the truth"). The guy asked her a ton of questions: "Are you qualified? Who do you work for? How do I know you can even swear me in? What gives you the right do this? Are you biased? Where were you trained? Who pays you?"

She broke out crying and wouldn't return to transcribe the interview.

The attorneys took it to the judge to require the deposition to be done in front of him. The guy swore up and down about how reasonable he was being, how nice he was, how he wasn't raising his voice and was just asking a couple questions.

The judge ruled against him. His girlfriend, hearing this, started to rush the bench, saying "the judge was just as corrupt as the rest of them."
She was stopped by security.

Since then, I've never allowed myself to believe one side of the story when someone tells me about how their actions led to what they say was an unreasonable consequence.

So you get to decide what speech is acceptable? Wow, when did Justice Wally Bird get elevated to the Supreme Court? Congratulations!

That being said, as long as the aviation industry is going to create a system where people are held in planes for hours at a time for poor reasons and not allowed to leave then what do you expect?

I plan to give a situation like that not much more than an hour and then I will call a local TV station to report that passengers are being held against their will...

Exactly how does one "abuse" a fundamental right? Of course, the airline can't violate 1st Amendment rights by definition since it is not the government. However, I'm really disturbed when someone talks in terms of "abusing" a 1st Amendment right.

No. I agree that the First Amendment is under enough attack that it's silly to argue over whether one swore at the FA or at the situation.

There are a few things that make us different from other countries. Some of the most fundamental principles are those contained in the Constitution (including the amendments thereto). For anyone to imply that First Amendment rights should be limited or dismissed or treated as trivial is, in my view, arguably anti-American. I don't know of any country in the world, with or without a First Amendment, where you can't say "Pardon me, but if it would not be too much of a bother, would you kindly let me know where the privy is located?" However, I know of only one country where the highest court in the country has taken the time to say that you can enter a courthouse wearing a shirt saying "F..k the Draft" because that is an expression of sentiment, not an obscene use of language.

It's about the abuse of the exercise of the right. Particularly when the abuse (here, swearing at or around the FA) serves no constructive purpose.

Roth vs. United States of America.Mr. Justice Brennan.

Badly OT, but...isn't argument central to the basic idea of that right? Stifling debate to "protect" a right is both madly comic and sadly indicative of the times in which we live. :td: