FAMed Again, but maybe a solution

Old Oct 16, 2007, 2:36 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Spiff
Yeah... So it's ok for the government to go to Fred's TVs and help themselves to a couple of 50" flat screens whenever they feel like it instead of taxing Fred fairly?

Sounds like organized crime, not good government.
If Fred's TV wants to play in a nation's airspace, or in any other national security arena, and if use of that product directly impacts said security, then yes.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 2:38 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by pantoot
Coach begins with the row behind the seat the security guard took. I think that would have been close enough.
Ah, so the real issue IS with the nice seats and is NOT based on principle. @:-)

Of course, the studies done by the FAMS, vetted through Congress and the airlines, show otherwise.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 2:40 pm
  #18  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
Originally Posted by law dawg
And they are thieves in many ways, I guess, with all the safety regs and requirements they have as well.
Yeah, but we've thrashed that one out elsewhere and neither of us is going to give an inch.
Spiff is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 2:41 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Spiff
Yeah, but we've thrashed that one out elsewhere and neither of us is going to give an inch.
Probably because the other would take a mile.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 2:42 pm
  #20  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
Originally Posted by law dawg
If Fred's TV wants to play in a nation's airspace, or in any other national security arena, and if use of that product directly impacts said security, then yes.
Blah blah blah "security" blah blah blah "safety".

Sure, everything's "security" these days. Wanna steal something? Just commandeer it "for security reasons".

"I need to watch CNN, er Fox for "security" reasons, gimme that TV."

"Hey, the po-lice need to eat too. Give us 2 pizzas to go. Free."

Ah "security". The ever-functioning credit card of the morally bankrupt.
Spiff is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:05 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
Originally Posted by law dawg
Hope that CSR and UA get written up and fined.




They're just doing their job. They're not trying to jack up your day. Just like you do what you're told in your job, so do they.
Why? It's bloody obvious what happened and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
SDF_Traveler is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:10 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Spiff
Blah blah blah "security" blah blah blah "safety".

Sure, everything's "security" these days. Wanna steal something? Just commandeer it "for security reasons".

"I need to watch CNN, er Fox for "security" reasons, gimme that TV."

"Hey, the po-lice need to eat too. Give us 2 pizzas to go. Free."

Ah "security". The ever-functioning credit card of the morally bankrupt.
Wow, that is impressive hyperbole even for you Spiff!
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:11 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by SDF_Traveler
Why? It's bloody obvious what happened and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
So why does it need to be said then?
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:19 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
Originally Posted by law dawg
So why does it need to be said then?
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:26 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"
The sky is blue.

Very insightful, neh?
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 3:30 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Arizona
Programs: *wood Gold, Marriott Gold, DL Silver, Hilton Silver, F9 Ascent
Posts: 2,419
Originally Posted by Spiff
Ah "security". The ever-functioning credit card of the morally bankrupt.


Whatever the outcome of this thread, I nominate this as quote of the week!


Playing Devil's Advocate: If the function of the FAM is to protect the flight deck as has often been stated, then does their job go away if pilots were to complete the Federal Flight Deck Officer program?

@:-) I mean, with FFDOs flying the plane then why have a FAM on board? Or move the FAMs to the jump seat? Win-win: F pax don't get seats poached and the flight decks are protected.
jonesing is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 4:10 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by jonesing


Whatever the outcome of this thread, I nominate this as quote of the week!


Playing Devil's Advocate: If the function of the FAM is to protect the flight deck as has often been stated, then does their job go away if pilots were to complete the Federal Flight Deck Officer program?

@:-) I mean, with FFDOs flying the plane then why have a FAM on board? Or move the FAMs to the jump seat? Win-win: F pax don't get seats poached and the flight decks are protected.
In the case of an FFDO, my vote would be to move the FAMs to another flight.

Or, if a FFDO, then the FAMs are not needed so close to the front. Maybe a few rows back in coach. Because with the flight deck covered, the pax are still up for grabs and on their own.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 5:11 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,531
Originally Posted by law dawg
In the case of an FFDO, my vote would be to move the FAMs to another flight.

Or, if a FFDO, then the FAMs are not needed so close to the front. Maybe a few rows back in coach. Because with the flight deck covered, the pax are still up for grabs and on their own.
Despite my continued belief that guns do not belong on planes, period, what you are proposing is quite logical.

Of course, the management of the Federal Air Marshal program has lacked any training in logic, and as such, such a reasonable approach will never see the light of day.

In the interim, back to your bulky shirt, khaki wearing guys walking through exit doors and boarding before others at your friendly local airport.
19103_aa is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 5:14 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by PHLbuddy
Despite my continued belief that guns do not belong on planes, period, what you are proposing is quite logical.

Of course, the management of the Federal Air Marshal program has lacked any training in logic, and as such, such a reasonable approach will never see the light of day.

In the interim, back to your bulky shirt, khaki wearing guys walking through exit doors and boarding before others at your friendly local airport.
And most of the FAMs I know would agree with you. Although they would also say this current administration is much better than the last, and more open to ideas.

Sometimes common sense is not so common. That's just life.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 16, 2007, 9:01 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by jonesing
Or move the FAMs to the jump seat?
This idea has actually been brought up to management.
mmartin4600 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.