Airline Crews Battle Surge in Drunken Passenger Assaults

Houston

Well-Known Member
Can the flight attendants here give an actual relative and factual amount of times passengers get out of hand, but also tell if it is usually minor and how often it is serious enough to lead to diversion?

I know that a drunk or idiot on airplane can get out of hand easily but to me this story is problematic and a means, whether intended, to get a sensational rise out of people and push them more and more into this idea that they must be protected from taking away the ability to enjoy things like free drinks and so forth. Sure some people will get drunk and out of hand, but I don't know. Talks of taking away free drinks on plane just seems the result of the people in the corporate office being sensational because a plane landing a year costs them their company stay in the Bahamas for a week. Sorry to be so cynical or sarcastic about this. I just am not sure this should be a call for airlines to do things like take away free drinks because a very relatively small amount of events like this. Even if there is a rise, the ratio of flights that go off well to those that have problems is minor. It's sensationalism. You're always going to have people who don't know how to behave in a proper manner in public. At times it becomes dangerous, but flying becomes dangerous sometimes, too, but its usually safe. Flying should be enjoyable to most people who know how to behave. The headline proves the sensational mind of the editors and people writing this.
 
You mention "taking away free drinks" 3 times. The only free drinks on an airplane are in first/business class. Coach pax have to pay for alcoholic drinks.

I don't have a problem with alcohol on planes, but there needs to be serious and publicly-known consequences for acting stupid on a plane (drunk or not).
 
You mention "taking away free drinks" 3 times. The only free drinks on an airplane are in first/business class. Coach pax have to pay for alcoholic drinks.

I don't have a problem with alcohol on planes, but there needs to be serious and publicly-known consequences for acting stupid on a plane (drunk or not).

This.

Luckily my employer has a low tolerance for alcohol-induced bad behavior. The person will be cut off and if the conduct continues, we'll land short, kick your butt off and the legal team will send you a bill.

And they pay! :)
 
This.

Luckily my employer has a low tolerance for alcohol-induced bad behavior. The person will be cut off and if the conduct continues, we'll land short, kick your butt off and the legal team will send you a bill.

And they pay! :)

Yes, the arm of the law is there for people who do stupid things on airplanes. I don't want to get into a rant here or sound too much like Alex Jones but there is a certain desire to push stories of dangerous events to scare people into thinking the need all sorts of protection which intrudes on basic liberties.

@MQAAord: Yeah, I mention the free drinks thing three times because that is the most obvious thing they are going to take away. Yes, it's for first class passengers but they pay for a certain luxury, among which has historically been free drinks.

I am just tired of the media pointing out isolated stories, taking legitimate statistics out of context and proportion by sensation, etc. Like with the relatively few shootings and so forth. Note how when you point these people with statistics to show the context in proportion to other issues of a similar nature of whatever is had hand they respond not with an attempt at logic but emotion. For example I admit Alex Jones looked a bit crazy when he talked with Piers Morgan on gun control but he was trying to have a serious conversation and when Jones started bring out FBI statistics to argue his case, Piers, in an unmanly manner, started throwing out questions. And when Jones would try to give a response he could not finish because another question was thrown. Jones could not be blamed for responding with passion because although Piers made himself appear the calm and rational one, he was actually being less rational by not allowing a serious discussion, using fast questions to keep hold of the conversation. It's unmanly and the only way to respond to a smug prick like that is to either punch him in the face or respond with passion. He will not listen to logic so you have to respond with anger.

Way off topic, but though this issue of out of hand people on planes is very small in proportion to the gun control issue, the way in which the story is given to us is sensational and does not inspire critical thinking. I am not a conspiracy theorist or a libertarian even. But this story just seemed to be to make the issue look bigger than it is. I am not saying people out of hands on planes are not serious--the certainly are! But even with the increase in incidents there needs to be a serious critical way of looking at this which I will now offer.

There is an increase in people getting out of hand on airplanes to to various causes, whether drunkeness or getting angry over small things like being asked to buckle up. The problem is that on a plane you cannot just kick the person out without causing problems. You have to land if it is serious enough which causes problems for the airline and passengers. Then there is the serious danger in the air. With this increase how is this problem to be addressed? Are we to take away free drinks and be more careful of who we let on the plane at the gate? Are we too add a couple law enforcement to restrain these people for the safety of those on board and keep them restrained until the plane can land without having to divert? Maybe having law enforcement that are not undercover but in uniform might help even because people are less likely to misbehave. And with obvious law enforcement there is no need to make the sky marshal undercover on board to decide whether acting or keeping silent is more prudent. Say two uniformed law enforcement could be enough in most cases. But that takes away two seats, costs money, raises ticket prices, etc. Is the problem serious enough to justify that?
 
I had one the other morning where, on our United flights, we have a printout that says there aren't any security threats on this flight. I made a comment and the gate agent said they actually had to pull a woman from boarding because she was too drunk. At 7am. Of course it was Cleveland so you have to give the lady some slack on that but wow, that's pretty early(late?) to be/still drunk.
 
I had one the other morning where, on our United flights, we have a printout that says there aren't any security threats on this flight. I made a comment and the gate agent said they actually had to pull a woman from boarding because she was too drunk. At 7am. Of course it was Cleveland so you have to give the lady some slack on that but wow, that's pretty early(late?) to be/still drunk.

Not for an alcoholic.

Plus, far too many people mix muscle relaxers and booze because they're "nervous" (read: Great! I have an excuse to get high) and all sorts of interesting things happen once the cabin altitude rises.
 
Yes, the arm of the law is there for people who do stupid things on airplanes. I don't want to get into a rant here or sound too much like Alex Jones but there is a certain desire to push stories of dangerous events to scare people into thinking the need all sorts of protection which intrudes on basic liberties.

@MQAAord: Yeah, I mention the free drinks thing three times because that is the most obvious thing they are going to take away. Yes, it's for first class passengers but they pay for a certain luxury, among which has historically been free drinks.

I am just tired of the media pointing out isolated stories, taking legitimate statistics out of context and proportion by sensation, etc. Like with the relatively few shootings and so forth. Note how when you point these people with statistics to show the context in proportion to other issues of a similar nature of whatever is had hand they respond not with an attempt at logic but emotion. For example I admit Alex Jones looked a bit crazy when he talked with Piers Morgan on gun control but he was trying to have a serious conversation and when Jones started bring out FBI statistics to argue his case, Piers, in an unmanly manner, started throwing out questions. And when Jones would try to give a response he could not finish because another question was thrown. Jones could not be blamed for responding with passion because although Piers made himself appear the calm and rational one, he was actually being less rational by not allowing a serious discussion, using fast questions to keep hold of the conversation. It's unmanly and the only way to respond to a smug prick like that is to either punch him in the face or respond with passion. He will not listen to logic so you have to respond with anger.

Way off topic, but though this issue of out of hand people on planes is very small in proportion to the gun control issue, the way in which the story is given to us is sensational and does not inspire critical thinking. I am not a conspiracy theorist or a libertarian even. But this story just seemed to be to make the issue look bigger than it is. I am not saying people out of hands on planes are not serious--the certainly are! But even with the increase in incidents there needs to be a serious critical way of looking at this which I will now offer.

There is an increase in people getting out of hand on airplanes to to various causes, whether drunkeness or getting angry over small things like being asked to buckle up. The problem is that on a plane you cannot just kick the person out without causing problems. You have to land if it is serious enough which causes problems for the airline and passengers. Then there is the serious danger in the air. With this increase how is this problem to be addressed? Are we to take away free drinks and be more careful of who we let on the plane at the gate? Are we too add a couple law enforcement to restrain these people for the safety of those on board and keep them restrained until the plane can land without having to divert? Maybe having law enforcement that are not undercover but in uniform might help even because people are less likely to misbehave. And with obvious law enforcement there is no need to make the sky marshal undercover on board to decide whether acting or keeping silent is more prudent. Say two uniformed law enforcement could be enough in most cases. But that takes away two seats, costs money, raises ticket prices, etc. Is the problem serious enough to justify that?

There's no "push" and certainly no conspiracy.

People do stupid crap on airplanes more often for a variety of reasons.

In my opinion:

a. The "Reality TV"-ization of whats deemed acceptable civilized behavior. Start your camera phone and provoke.

b. Some people not making the psychological "jump" from the world of "only child"/"Scoreless soccer" and not understanding that "No, I'm sorry, it's not all about you, there are 300 other people onboard who are behaving just fine". Exactly like being a webmaster of a forum.

c. There are no free drinks, for the most part, I think we need to step past this assumption and building an argument based upon that.

d. If you act a fool on an airplane with FAM's, 99.999% of the time, you'll probably end up landing short of your intended destination and you will never know they're onboard.

FAM's aren't onboard security. They're there to "eliminate the threat" well, they're onboard to shoot your ass well before you get to the cockpit.
 
Well I think the problem is usually dealt with well enough in most cases. Land the plane if you have to, have the cops greet them and they realize post-9/11 being an idiot on a plane is more serious is my guess.
 
Actually, most of my passenger problems were before 9/11. People actually behave somewhat better knowing that their tiff about Biscotti cookies and "OMG XANAX MAKES ME WANNA DAAAAAAANCE WITH MY PANTS OFF!" as they swig the last drops from the bottle of vodka they brought on is going to certainly result in a diverted aircraft, an arrest and drunk-shaming on TMZ.
 
You mention "taking away free drinks" 3 times. The only free drinks on an airplane are in first/business class. Coach pax have to pay for alcoholic drinks.

I don't have a problem with alcohol on planes, but there needs to be serious and publicly-known consequences for acting stupid on a plane (drunk or not).
Free beer and wine on the bowtie brigade.
alaska horizon plane flying to and from pangborn airport in east wenatchee.jpg
 
Actually, most of my passenger problems were before 9/11. People actually behave somewhat better knowing that their tiff about Biscotti cookies and "OMG XANAX MAKES ME WANNA DAAAAAAANCE WITH MY PANTS OFF!" as they swig the last drops from the bottle of vodka they brought on is going to certainly result in a diverted aircraft, an arrest and drunk-shaming on TMZ.

TMZ and dancing with pants off...makes me think of Justin Biber for some reason figuring out another way to get in trouble by acting like an idiot. Imagine getting a call up front that Justin Bieber is drunk and dancing with his pants off, singing about being in love with Selena Gomez. I saw the other day something about him now being investigated for allegedly throwing eggs at his neigbour's house. At least say the Jews are responsible for everything like Mel Gibson. Throwing eggs is such a silly reason to get yourself in trouble.
 
Especially if you are rich and famous like Bieber. We common and unknown people are the ones to throw eggs at houses. Stars must shout about Jews, hump in public, or at least commit some felony. As long is it is not murder or rape you get to still be a star and go around Hollywood like nothing happened. But dancing with you pants off, that takes guts. But being drunk gives you that. :)
 
In my four short years working for the airlines, I've seen the number of alcohol related incidents rise dramatically. Like Dough said, it's typically the old xanax-ambien-colada that is the culprit. We actually had a guy a few weeks back that decided it would be a great idea to get his Vegas vacation started early with a mega does of Xanax and booz. The rampers didn't even have the tow bar disconnected before the guy full on coded, flight crew had to zap him with the AED.
 
Back
Top