I'm thinking they arrested the wrong person!!!!!!!!!

[Dell_dude]

This is very far removed from "beating up". He gave him a backhanded smack to say -Hey idiot.......pay attention, you were told to turn it off. Now do it!-

Just a generation ago this would be expected. It is a shame that people now a days are so ULTRA sensitive to being corrected or reprimanded when they miss-behave.

So you'd be OK with it, if someone came up and backhanded you while you were pumping gas talking on the phone?

 

[Barefoot343]

I don't know where you're getting that I'm defending the kid.

I am not.

That still does NOT entitle people to go around assaulting people.

Something that has multiple repeated instances of occurring is spontaneous fire due to static electricity caused by cell phones in use at gas stations.

Since we already know that's a possibility, and we know that there are signs posted at the gas station stating NO using cell phones while pumping, should I go and start beating up anyone I see on the phone while pumping gas? After all, they're putting my life at risk.

Seems reasonable to me based on the assertions of so many in this thread.

back up and re-read my post. I gave you the point of him hitting the kid, I don't feel it was right either, nor is beating people up at gas stations something I endorse, something we both can agree on.

as for the gas stations I am not sure how that got injected into our conversation. I am refering to the use of a cell phone on a plane, I provided evidence on why the rule is a good one and should be followed by EVERYONE. If you still feel the kid should be allowed to ignore that rule or whatever laws or rules he deems best than I guess we go down different roads from here, I think I have proven why that particular rule or law is a good and justified one.

Anyway, happy New Year to you.

 

[Sawdust]

<broken link removed> This comes from the FCC.

Don't change the topic. Gas stations are not the issue. The kid was told to put the phone away and didn't. Someone gave him a reminder to "listen up". There is no crime here.

Good night everybody!

 

[Dell_dude]

back up and re-read my post. I gave you the point of him hitting the kid, I don't feel it was right either, nor is beating people up at gas stations something I endorse, something we both can agree on.

as for the gas stations I am not sure how that got injected into our conversation. I am refering to the use of a cell phone on a plane, I provided evidence on why the rule is a good one and should be followed by EVERYONE. If you still feel the kid should be allowed to ignore that rule or whatever laws or rules he deems best than I guess we go down different roads from here, I think I have proven why that particular rule or law is a good and justified one.

Anyway, happy New Year to you.

No. You mentioned an article that apparently stated that a laptop had caused a problem.

Personally I disagree with the assertion that routine civilian electronics can interfere with aircraft.

If cell phones were truly a danger to aircraft, they wouldn't be allowed in the passenger compartment, or planes would be dropping from the sky daily.

 

[Barefoot343]

No. You mentioned an article that apparently stated that a laptop had caused a problem.

Personally I disagree with the assertion that routine civilian electronics can interfere with aircraft.

If cell phones were truly a danger to aircraft, they wouldn't be allowed in the passenger compartment, or planes would be dropping from the sky daily.

No... the lap top was only one instance, the article was talking about all electronics during takeoff and landing, the danger is in signals crossing, interfering with communications when you need them most... not that they make a plane explode. If you are in another planes pathway and both planes are going close to 150 mph, you need to be able to communicate quickly and without interference, that is the jest of the article.

 

[Barefoot343]

hahahahaha, could you see old Clint in the plane sitting by that kid?

 

[addiction]

I am pretty sure that the phone and electronics thing is more about having peoples attention during the most dangerous parts of the flight. In the book Survivors Club, the author gives out the statistic (from memory so could be off) there are 11 minutes in a plane that are most dangerous, 3 minutes during take off and 8 minutes during landing.

Since I am an isle person, I really don't care what the people next to me are doing, I can get out and moving if needed despite what they are doing, if however I am in the middle or by the window, I want to know the people between me and the exit are paying attention, well actually I don't care about that either, I will climb over them if needed.....

 

[MA Duce]

What the kid was doing, right or wrong, wasn't putting anyone in danger.

I would sure like to know what you base that opinion on. There have been documented instances of of cell phones causing CDI (Course Deviation Indicator)deflections on navigational instruments of as much as eight to ten degrees. Assume you are in a regional type aircraft on an instrument approach at an airport that has no radar coverage or local approach facility, of which there are several in the Northwest, being eight to ten degrees off course will completely ruin your day. They also have caused uncommanded auto-pilot disconnects. I pay attention to these little things because I am a Commercial Pilot

 

[Dell_dude]

I would sure like to know what you base that opinion on. There have been documented instances of of cell phones causing CDI (Course Deviation Indicator)deflections on navigational instruments of as much as eight to ten degrees. Assume you are in a regional type aircraft on an instrument approach at an airport that has no radar coverage or local approach facility, of which there are several in the Northwest, being eight to ten degrees off course will completely ruin your day. They also have caused uncommanded auto-pilot disconnects. I pay attention to these little things because I am a Commercial Pilot

I've not heard of a single case of a phone taking a plane down. Maybe it has and it doesn't make the news.

If that's true, then either the electronics should be changed to something that isn't subject to interference, or people shouldn't be allowed to carry them on flights.

I've seen too many people who can't be bothered turn off their phones in flight. I'm sure that there is at least one on every flight due to either the passenger not caring, or being forgetful.

 

[Binder]

Judging by some of the posts in this thread this board must have lots of youg kids......

 

[MA Duce]

I've not heard of a single case of a phone taking a plane down. Maybe it has and it doesn't make the news.

If that's true, then either the electronics should be changed to something that isn't subject to interference, or people shouldn't be allowed to carry them on flights.

I've seen too many people who can't be bothered turn off their phones in flight. I'm sure that there is at least one on every flight due to either the passenger not caring, or being forgetful.

Seems to me the standard you set is a little loose. Just because no plane has crashed??? Why would you tolerate anything that may interfere with flight safety??? As with anything...the bottom line is money. Hardened avionics are more expensive......and the carriers don't even want to pay a living wage..let alone upgrade equipment if they don't have to. If you can prove it's not a threat the airlines will pay you big dollars to testify in front of the NTSB and the FAA to get the rules changed. I await the news of your success.

 

[Dell_dude]

Seems to me the standard you set is a little loose. Just because no plane has crashed??? Why would you tolerate anything that may interfere with flight safety??? As with anything...the bottom line is money. Hardened avionics are more expensive......and the carriers don't even want to pay a living wage..let alone upgrade equipment if they don't have to. If you can prove it's not a threat the airlines will pay you big dollars to testify in front of the NTSB and the FAA to get the rules changed. I await the news of your success.

I also said or don't allow them in the cabin at all.

That one costs nothing.

 

[JohnWayne]

Serious?

This seems pretty logical to me, taken from an article in Sky Mag.

"It may only cause an annoyance to pilots, or worse... interfering with signals and communication, all the way up to a proven instance of turning off an auto pilot during flight (was actually a laptop).All can threaten safe operation of the plane during takeoff or landing when the airplane is close to the ground flying at high speeds with VERY little room for error. For this airlines take every precaution to ensure that no interference occurs."

Not sure why it seems it is so important to you to defend the kid? I give you the point on the guy hitting him, definitely was wrong. The kid not wanting to follow a simple rule for a few minutes until they are in the clear makes no sense though. Care to elaborate?

Wait! Where do we get subscriptions to Sky mag???

 

[JohnWayne]

I've not heard of a single case of a phone taking a plane down. Maybe it has and it doesn't make the news.

If that's true, then either the electronics should be changed to something that isn't subject to interference, or people shouldn't be allowed to carry them on flights.

I've seen too many people who can't be bothered turn off their phones in flight. I'm sure that there is at least one on every flight due to either the passenger not caring, or being forgetful.

They are tightening down. Cell phones must now be less than 2 oz and be in a see through plastic bag

 

[1bigfoot]

I also said or don't allow them in the cabin at all.

That one costs nothing.

Dell dude, Your defending an arrogant, unruly kid like you was related to him. He should have had his arse thrown off the plane, lucky this "old man intervened and drew the attention off his impetuous, ignorant, disrespectful, Stupid, arrogant dumb butt.

 

[HahnsXD]

So let me get this straight. I can't take fingernail clippers on a plane but they'll let me take a cell phone on the plane?

Something doesn't add up here.

 

[Mutoman]

I think this world would be a better place if this happened more often. Props to the old man!

 

[Dell_dude]

Dell dude, Your defending an arrogant, unruly kid like you was related to him.

One more time, so there's no mistaking this.

I am NOT defending the kid.

In this case, both the kid AND the old man were wrong.

The kid broke a policy. If it were a flight crew person, or an Air Marshall, I'd say taze the kid if he won't comply and if it makes you happy.

 

[1bigfoot]

One more time, so there's no mistaking this.

I am NOT defending the kid.

In this case, both the kid AND the old man were wrong.

The kid broke a policy. If it were a flight crew person, or an Air Marshall, I'd say taze the kid if he won't comply and if it makes you happy.

Now your talking,, possibly the only thing that could make me happier is a couple of warm steaming gut piles on opening day of elk season

 

[Benny503]

As a new parent... I am allowing anyone like LEs, teachers, priest, monks, steward...ect hit my son on the hand and explain what my kid did was wrong...I am not allowing any stranger put a hand on my kid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!