US

Frontier Pilot Refuses to Transport Quadriplegic Man, Forces Him off Flight

Yesterday, a Frontier Airlines pilot refused to transport a quadriplegic man. The man — named John Norris — and his family claim that the incident caused them severe humiliation. Following the pilot’s refusal, the flight crew called the police and the family was inevitably forced to vacate the plane. ABC7 has more:

“When a flight attendant saw John strapped in, they said they would have to clear it with the captain,” said Kathleen Morris.

She said that her son is a quadriplegic with limited upper body control.

Morris has flown Frontier Airlines in the past, using an airline seat-belt extension to secure his chest and legs to the seat. The extension is normally used by larger passengers who need a longer seat belt to secure their waist.

“But this time, the pilot refused to take off,” she said. “So, I said that we wouldn’t get off the plane until they figured it out.

In the end, the family did vacate the plan, but Frontier placed them on a later flight. When describing what happened, John said, “I felt horrible. I just felt like I didn’t belong…”

Following the incident, the family plan to take legal action. Watch below for more:

Comments (164)

1 2 3 4
  • jose wasabi
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:21pm

    The pilot was thinking about the safety of ALL the passengers and crew, not just one person’s. If they had an incident and had to evacuate quickly, someone else’s life was going to be in danger, either because the quardraplegic was blocking the aisle, or someone had to take time to help and perhaps would lose their own life. Again, I think the pilot was acting on behalf of EVERYONE’s safety.

    Report Post » jose wasabi  
  • apollo18
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:08pm

    Another thing, flight crew has FAA rules to back him up. I think everyone else has been “excoriated” far beyond public view, and is either looking for new employment or guaranteed to NEVER let something like this happen again. Pilots are at THE TOP of the pecking order. This wasn’t a “situation” of his making. The passenger had to display needs the regular flight crew wasn’t prepared or willing to accept. THAT would be the REAL lawsuit. Plenty of “civilians” have military experience today (read “reservists”). They are familiar with what it takes to fly patients with special, medical needs. This is an uninformed boarding staff error, from beginning to end. The pilot just dumped it back in their laps.

    Report Post »  
  • RightPolitically
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:06pm

    Don’t have enough facts here to decide who is right on this one. However, let’s be honest, a person like that would never make it off the aircraft in an emergency. That would be the Captain’s only excuse to leave him off. His call.

    Report Post » RightPolitically  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:16pm

      Yes, we do.
      The pilot in command is always correct. Even if he is ‘incorrect’, he is correct.
      This affords all pilots the freedom to make their absolute BEST call every single time.
      To second guess a pilot interferes with all pilots’ ability to do their job to the best of their ability.
      The SOLE consideration is, and must be, the safety of all passengers, including the man himself.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • Shackleford
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:59pm

    It‘s a shame we don’t live in a universe with a compassionate god that would give his creations the ability to heal from injuries like this instead of forcing them to basically live a tortured life of immobility. Oh, wait, this is one of those situations where we’re supposed to jump through all sorts of hoops to come up with a lame reason on why his horrendous situation is actually a blessing.

    Report Post » Shackleford  
  • Aaron in Polk County
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:56pm

    Racing a quadripeligic man is on my bucket list.

    Report Post » Aaron in Polk County  
  • leary1
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:52pm

    Time to eliminate the pilot that refused to do his specified job. Did he somehow feel threatened? I hope the family does sue and the airline co. should give him lifetime free flights for him and caretaker…FIRST CLASS !!

    Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:13pm

      The pilot’s JOB is to make sure that all passengers are SAFE! INCLUDING THE MAN HIMSELF!
      He DID DO HIS JOB, and did it AS HE SAW FIT.
      A pilot does not look at passengers, and think to himself, “She’s ugly, I’m kicking her off.”
      NO, the pilot looks at passengers and says to himself, “Will this POTENTIALLY cause any additional risk?”
      When an aircraft fills with smoke, things are extremely difficult to do, let alone to do quickly.
      If the man is unable to disembark by himself, he is a risk to himself. That means somebody else must be responsible for disembarking him. Can that person do so without delaying other passengers from exiting a smoke-filled plane? A sinking aircraft?
      You should be THANKING him for making what he knew would be an unpopular decision.
      boo hoo – you hurt my feelings – you embarrassed me – is nothing more than a cry for a free flight or for a monetary settlement from a big airline with deep pockets.
      Most handicapped people understand airlines will do their best to accommodate their needs, but, cannot and will not do so, if it means compromising the safety of themselves or the other passengers.
      If the aircraft went down, and this man was stuck blocking the aisle, and all the passengers behind him perished while those ahead of him survived, how would you feel if your family had been behind this man?
      The pilot acted SOLELY out of SAFETY CONCERNS for all passengers.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • apollo18
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:43pm

      If the pilot was informed about the scenario above, had the crew request the passenger, or his family provide his current medical clearance to fly, and they couldn’t produce it. He can’t fly without “properly credentialed” medical staff in attendance, to assume responsibility for the patient’s needs. What if he had respiratory distress at altitude? Most quadriplegics have been “vented” before. What if he threw a pulmonary embolism or had simple intraabdominal gas he couldn’t clear? (autonomic dysreflexia?) You know you have to vent his urine collection device? Ever been on a long flight and babies cry LOUD throughout decent? Why is that? Walking past a “special needs” passenger is insufficient for proper medical assessment. Would you take a stranger’s word for it? The flight may have to divert, the consequences are huge. Why? Why is the pilot supposed to take risks like this? This is like saying the passenger with the most “frequent flyer miles” gets a vote on how to fly the plane. Come on…

      Report Post »  
    • Entropy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 7:58pm

      @Leary1
      Come on be real, the pilot made a decision. He felt a risk somehow, and , TomFerrari is right about what he says, although, he may in the future want to re-phrase his argument to not be so insulting us “regular folks”. Tom is smart, but he is probably a person that does not like his “authority” questioned and is most likely a younger person without much world knowledge except that required to fly a plane.

      Report Post »  
  • apollo18
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:50pm

    Was medical flight crew, way back when. Frontier just has to forward FAA part 135 to the “aggrieved party’s” attorney. This won’t go anywhere. Pilot was simply following the rules. Poor communication plus unfamiliar passengers, (how did these people get past the boarding agents?) equals bad PR, settled w a few free passes on “accommodating” resources. (Lifeguard flights) “Next?”

    Report Post »  
  • UPSETVET
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:43pm

    Well, I predict that after the dust settles from the law suits that are going to be filed on the behalf of John Norris, he’ll be flying first class for the rest of his life. If he was a threat to the safety of the crew and other passengrs that should have been determined before boarding the flight.

    Since he flew on a later “Frontier Flight” it doesn‘t seem like it’s that airline’s policy to throw physically handecapped passengers off their airplanes.I don’t believe this is going to turn out well for frontier Airlines or for the pilot that threw John off the airplane.

    Airline crews are not all sugar and cream as some seem to believe. Some can be really arrogant and rude to passengers. Years ago a stewardess opened an overhead baggage compartment I happened to be standing close to while boarding and the door struck me in the forehead.

    The stewardess saw that she had struck me but didn’t say a word. No apology or anything. I said to her “ Excuse you for striking me in the head”, She still made no comment. When blood started to run down my forehead she didn’t even offer me a wet towel or anything.

    That airline company, Braniff, went bankrupt years ago and I can understand why. In my opinion the airplane crew failed to use tact or common sense and really mishandled the incident causing a great deal of discomfort and embarrasment to John and his family members. Make ‘em pay John !

    Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:21pm

      Well, your handle is correct. You are clearly upset.

      You’ve got that bone nice and tight in your chops, huh?

      Just because you had a bad experience with a rude person does not take away the right or RESPONSIBILITY of all pilots to make their best efforts to fly the aircraft as safely as they can. This includes making tough decisions that may be unpopular.

      When that rude person injured you, they were wrong.
      When THIS pilot tries to AVOID injury to the man himself, or to other passengers, you are upset with that.

      There is no pleasing some people.
      Some people are just “UPSET”

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • Entropy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 8:19pm

      Hey Tom. all Americans appreciate your service to your country-if indeed you did serve. But just because you are a “commercial pilot” does not mean that you are better than ther rest of us. You are no tougher, no smarter, no more of an american than us pions that you spout off to. In the streets, without protection, you would be eaten alive. So watch your mouth. You are not as tough as you think you are.

      Report Post »  
  • Jenny Lind
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:41pm

    Frontier was my favorite airline when I lived in Colorado. The big question in my mind is where was he sitting and did the strap meet the safety qualifications? I suspect any humiliation came from the famil‘s reaction to the questions the pilot had for the safety of other passengers and for the man’s safety. Depending on where he was sitting, it could be a major evacuation problem in getting other passengers out in a hurry. This should have been done in advance with all details worked out and the pilot made aware before he ever got on the plane. Betcha the next captain got a passenger with all the details worked out, just like the first captain should have had. Great little money maker for the family-and yes that was cynical because I put some of this on the family-details were on them to work out with Frontier.

    Report Post »  
  • Skip63
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:33pm

    Wait untill his brother Chuck hears about this!

    Report Post »  
  • OneofMany
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:25pm

    ALL thanks to incredibly immature culture of frivolous law suites allowed in this country. Remember the $10 MILLION dollars against McDonald’s for HOT COFFEE a guy spilled in his own lap!! What people don’t realize when they award this ridiculousness is that it hurts all of us. So now Frontier has to think of law suits against them if this guy falls and bumps his head or something like that.

    I think the pilot was just trying to make the best decision for the air carrier…I think people are naive to be upset with the airline company. Sure they were willing to help the guy, but if the airline get’s sued, would they open their wallets to help pay when something goes wrong?

    Having said all that. I agree with the passenger who said it should have been taken care of at the gate, not on board the plane.

    IF you are on a jury where a person is trying to hit the LOTTERY with a law suit that is obviously their own fault or common sense.. DO NOT JUDGE in their favor!

    Report Post » OneofMany  
    • TexasCommonSense
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:32pm

      OneofMany, good point. Loser pays would kill this crap, too. If you have a legitimate case, and it would be obvious to a jury, you have nothing to worry about.

      Report Post » TexasCommonSense  
  • Patriot Z
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:21pm

    “When a flight attendant saw John strapped in, they said they would have to clear it with the captain,”

    this shows te pilot has final say on safety issues. the had to clear it, and fo whatever reason he did not want to giv the ok. it may have been ok before with other pilots. but its the pilots duty to put the safety of the plane ad its crew and passengers ahead of political correctness. and like i said earlier. i have a hrd time believing he just didnt like weelchair people.

    Report Post » Patriot Z  
    • Bonnieblue2A
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:26pm

      Agree that there must be more to this story. There are a number of medical conditions for which people cannot travel on airplanes, not because they cannot physically but because the staff cannot be responsible if something happens. Most airlines are trained well in accomodating needs and guidlines per ADA.

      Report Post »  
  • teddyc73
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:21pm

    Saw the very last sentence and said out loud “of course, as usual”. Our society now feels the need to sue over everything.

    Report Post »  
  • eat-more-bacon-USA
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:15pm

    Pilots have the final say and in this case, it appears that the pilot acted appropriately and according to guidelines. All passengers who have special needs which can impact their safety or the safety of other passengers or crew are required to make special arrangements ahead of time. It sounds like these people are looking for a lawsuit opportunity – they won’t find it in this situation.

    Report Post » eat-more-bacon-USA  
    • beekeeper
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:31pm

      Then why did previous and a subsequent pilot permit him to fly?

      Report Post » beekeeper  
    • eat-more-bacon-USA
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:53pm

      @BEEKEEPER – Each pilot has the final say on safety issues on his/her plane and flight and can have any passenger removed over safety or health concerns. It certainly is not the pilot’s fault that this passenger chose not make proper and required prior arrangements for his special needs.

      Report Post » eat-more-bacon-USA  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:50pm

      @Bee- because every flight is unique. The same pilot may have even decided differently on a different day – perhaps there were more or fewer pax on one aircraft – perhaps his weather forecast included severe turbulence. Perhaps other handicapped passengers had better assistance travelling with them. There are a seemingly infinite number of considerations. But, we have placed that deicsion squarelyl upon the shoulders of the pilot in command. It is his responsibility and, therefore, his authority.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • Entropy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 6:10pm

      I must admit TomFerrari that THAT is a valid argument. It could have been that the weather was hairy that day and that the risk of a crash was a possibility. I can see that. Every flight is unique.

      Report Post »  
  • Patriot Z
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:13pm

    ok ereis way to much missing here. WHY was he kickedoff? thats the question? Do we really think the pilot just hates ‘crippie people’? whatis th reason. im not even saying that i will be good and the pilot is right. but lets think logically. Also what about thoes chairs? how are they secured? i have never seen a specialsection n a plaqne where special wheelchirs like that can be secured. so what happens when a person canot physically be removed from a wheelchair? where do they go? it aint cargo.

    Report Post » Patriot Z  
  • affinnity
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:08pm

    Let me see if I understand this: They sold the guy a ticket, passed him through security and the gate, boarded him on the plane, strapped him in and than after he was on the plane and ready to go on a trip they finally noticed he was a Quadriplegic. Everyone that allowed him to board the plane without discussing his situation in advance should be fired immediately and the airline should be sued.

    Report Post » affinnity  
    • teddyc73
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:20pm

      and right there is what is wrong with so many people today. You dont know the entire story, you dont know the pilot’s reasoning, you dont know the pilot’s authority, but everyone should be fired and sued. Fired and sued, fired and sued. I think that might just be a tad extreme dude. Give me a break.

      Report Post »  
    • affinnity
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:36pm

      All I’m trying to say is they should have handled this entire affair before the man was actually allowed on the airplane. Once they knowingly allowed the crippled guy on the plane he had a right to be flown to the destination on his ticket unless he did something wrong. If the airline had an issue with his handicap they should have said something before publicly humiliating him and his entire family.

      Report Post » affinnity  
  • bjornskis
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:07pm

    now if he was a gay quadriplegic he would have a case

    Report Post »  
  • codec
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:02pm

    i’m not a pilot, but i studied to be one for a little bit. captains have ultimate authority on their planes and can choose to ask anyone to leave for any reason. i’m not defending the pilot, i think it was silly of him to do this, but i dont know what his reasoning was. if it’s just bad customer service, then Frontier airlines will likely lose customers over the incident, and the free market works as its supposed to.

    Report Post »  
  • frustratedwithgovt
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:00pm

    I tend to think this is grounds for discrimination especially given that he has flown on the same airline in the past.

    Report Post » frustratedwithgovt  
  • selenesteets
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:58pm

    The captain was worried about liability. It was the responsibility of the man and his family to inform the airline of his special needs ahead of time. The airline cannot allow a man to fly using makeshift safety equipment. I seriously doubt that the airline was in any way disrespectful or abusive. This looks sad, because it is sad for anybody to have a broken body, but it is not an injustice. He is suing now because he was ‘humiliated’? If there was some turbulence and he was injured in flight, he would be suing then. We need to stop hero-fying people who victimize themselves. The airline did the right thing.

    Report Post » selenesteets  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:12pm

      The way I understand it there is no democracy on a airplane or ship at sea. The Captain, legally, is in absolute control of his vessel, crew and passengers. If he deems it necessary to remove a passenger for a certain reason, he can do so. He can put troublesome passengers in the brig if he needs to.
      So, behave yourself and do not challenge his authority.

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
    • Barb1954
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:23pm

      That’s PURE BS! Do you REALLY THINK that was the FIRST time they had a quad on one of their planes???? OMG WHAT AN IDIOT! The guy SAID he had FLOWN with them in the PAST and with NO PROBLEM!

      This crap is just SO OUT OF CONTROL NOW I don’t know HOW we will be able to STOP it!

      Report Post »  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:35pm

      Barb, you see, it’s people like you that get thrown off airplanes by the Captain.. Settle down and stop yelling,

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
  • nomercy63
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:58pm

    You have to contact the airline when booking that you have special needs!! DAH!! They will be respectful and respond to what you are requesting!!! Stop with the lawsuit nonsense,use your common sense!

    Report Post »  
    • affinnity
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:17pm

      Great point. The airline knew he was a Quadriplegic. Security knew he was a Quadriplegic. The gate personnel knew he was Quadriplegic. When he got on the airplane and rolled his wheelchair down the aisle to get to his seat everybody had to have noticed he was Quadriplegic.

      Report Post » affinnity  
    • TJexcite
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:35pm

      Goes the same way with the TSA. You can plan ahead on what you have on carry-on and know what the pat down is fast and over before you know it.

      Report Post » TJexcite  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:49pm

      @TJExcite:

      I do not trust those vultures of the TSA in any shape or form; the last time I tried to fly with my own mother back east I was assaulted by them when trying to pick up my computer bag. No warning or nothing, they hit me with multiple tasers and then slammed me into a metal furnishing while one of them hit me with a club across the shoulder and upper back along with the head.

      This was caught on several cell phone cameras; the only reason that I was not charged with anything was due to these clear pictures of not doing anything against the law other than getting my own personal property.

      These are the same people who have repeatedly threatened my sister and her family when they do travel; and accosted my mother several times as well. Once even trying to arrest her for going in the direction of the public bathroom.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • Ironeagle
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:58pm

    There are two sides to this story, what‘s the pilot’s side?

    Report Post » Ironeagle  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:44pm

      PILOTS SIDE: I’m responsible for the safety of everyone on this aircraft, including the man himself. I make what I consider to be the best decision each time under the unique situation that faces me. I do so without regard to financial, corporate, or political pressures. To do so would interfere with my ability to make the SAFE decision each time. You DO want me to get YOU there safely, do you not?

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • selenesteets
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:52pm

    I would think the pilot was worried about liability. It’s unfortunate, but it really was the responsibility of the man and his family to inform the airline of their plans and make proper arrangements. It looks sad, but the airline was perfectly in the right here. He got on the very next plane. I seriously doubt anybody treated him abusively. An airline cannot allow a disabled person to fly in makeshift safety equipment. They are suing the airline now, if he had gotten injured during turbulence, they would have been suing then.

    Report Post » selenesteets  
    • selenesteets
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:59pm

      double post…

      Report Post » selenesteets  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:01pm

      Yes, I agree Selene. Also the captain of a airplane or a ship do have the authority to make these decisions as he is responsible for the well being of all passengers and his command of his ship. He is the boss and what he says, goes. That is why the police do not interfere with his decisions. people need to respect his authority. That’s why he is called the Captain.

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
    • jedi.kep
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:05pm

      That’s the horror of our country today. Do the right thing and get sued. Do the wrong thing and get sued. Decisions based on the least likely chance of getting sued, instead of decisions based on doing what is right because it is right. The right thing to do was to secure the passenger like they had before, and fly the danged plane.

      Report Post » jedi.kep  
    • Brad Wesselmann
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:18pm

      We spend too much time trying to adhere to the laws of men that we have little time or effort left to bother with the laws of God. I respect the authority of the pilot of this aircraft, and if I didn’t would it matter…I can’t fly the damn thing! Shut up and fly or walk…the choice is yours.

      Report Post » Brad Wesselmann  
    • turkey13
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:23pm

      I had a cousin like this and when he had an accident he had one. The pilot was worried about the smell and other passengers having to look at this guy – they might have actually felt sorry for him.

      Report Post »  
    • beekeeper
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:31pm

      The argument that the pilot had a valid point is lost as soon as the same person boards another plane and is then considered “secure”. Each pilot is responsible for the passengers and gets final say over who is and who is not on their flight, but I find it hard to believe that two pilots, both presumable equally comitted to the safety of their passengers could come to opposite decisions – one says he can’t fly, the other does.

      Either the first pilot was too restrictive or the second was to permissive – and his story of flying on the same airline several times before makes me, and most readers, think the first pilot was too restrictive.

      Report Post » beekeeper  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:59pm

      Pilots consider ONLY the security of the passengers and the aircraft when making decisions.

      Pilots are protected from reprimand or repercussion for such decisions – for a reason – so that pilots are NOT beholden to financial, corporate, or political pressures.

      The pilot is responsible not only for other passengers safety, BUT ALSO for the safety OF THE MAN HIMSELF.

      If FOR ANY REASON the captain was concerned for the safety OF ANY PASSENGER, or for the safety of the aircraft, he would refuse the passenger. This is done for EVERYONE’S SAFETY.

      You should be THANKING him for making a decision he knew could/would be criticized.

      boo hoo – he hurt my feelings – is nothing more than a cry for free flights or for a cash settlement.
      Too many victims and too few people accepting responsibility for their own actions.

      I am speaking as a commercial pilot myself.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • Midwest Blonde
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:49pm

    Since when do pilots have that much authority ?? NO HANDICAPPED person, who has managed to get ON the plane, should be booted OFF the plane.

    Report Post » Midwest Blonde  
    • Salamander
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:47pm

      With my luck, I’d be the one RIGHT BEHIND the handicapper in an incident requiring timely evacuation! That’s why they have Mercy flights! The pilot on the subsequent flight may have had different equipment or the individual may have been in a ‘better’ seat for his situation! People with special situations need to advise the airline AND the airport AND airport security! It may have been as simple as different seating, had advace arrangements been made! I’d bet the pilot was worried about the OTHER passengers and NOT overly concerned about the handicapped individual who made the choice to fly commercial! The Captain should be applauded for making a command decision. Right or wrong, that is his job! And, he HAD TO KNOW that he’d hear about it!

      Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:53pm

      As a commercial pilot, I can tell you…

      You are wrong.

      In an emergency, you do not have the luxury of time.
      Just because you can manage to get on the plane does not mean you can disembark safely and quickly.
      When a plane is filled with smoke, things become much more difficult.

      It is not only the other passengers’ safety, but also THIS MAN’S OWN SAFETY that is considered by the pilot.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:54pm

      @salamander
      From this commercial pilot to you,
      thank you for being a voice of reason!

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • rpp
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:01pm

      Midwest Blonde, since you asked, pilots have had that much authority since the first time a passenger was carried on an airplane by Wilbur Wright. Pilots have the final authority because they they also bear the legal responsibility if ANYTHING goes wrong on a flight. For example, if they pilot ]let this man fly and he was injured or killed because he could not evacuate or get out of the way, or if someone else was injured or killed because this man was blocking them, the pilot would bear the full legal responsibility.

      The safety of air travel cannot be left to the whims of political correctness or utopian fools.

      Report Post » rpp  
    • USAMama
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:18pm

      My mom used to work for the airlines in reservations. If you have ANY special needs you have to tell them ahead of time so they can prepare. My mom is retired now and on oxygen which she needs to fly. She can still fly but knows that she HAS to report that she has the oxygen and can only be seated in certain seats (I forget if it’s window or aisle). One time I flew with her and she forgot to report her oxygen and we could not get on the flight, but she knew it was her error and we simply got on another flight later. Inconvenienced? Yeah. But was it the airlines fault? Nope.

      Report Post » USAMama  
    • Entropy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:21pm

      Ok TomFerrari, we know you a pilot and that safety is a concern ad nauseum. But, would it really have been that difficult to get some compasion and accomadate the guy? The other pilot did not have a problem with it. Could it be that the pilot in question was a moron? If the guy was blocking an exit, move him to another seat. How would you feel if it was YOUR kid? You would be angry just like these folks.

      Report Post »  
    • USAMama
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:35pm

      If it were my kid I would be understanding that I should have let them know my situation ahead of time and not assume that they could accommodate me on the spot. That’s our problem, people expect everyone else to be responsible for their own situations. Take responsibility for yourself and make the proper arraingements ahead of time.

      Report Post » USAMama  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:40pm

      Ok Entropy, you read my posts. Yeah for you.

      Anything you take into consideration aside from safety interferes with your ability to make the SAFE decision. The other pilot is free to make the decision he feels is correct. Maybe one aircraft was full and one was empty, maybe one expected turbulence and one did not. Maybe one had an MD on the passenger manifest and one did not.
      In an emergency, the man could become tangled or trapped WHILE BLOCKING AN AISLE, this would place all other passengers at risk.
      HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF YOUR FAMILY DIED IN AN AIRCRAFT FIRE because this man became tangled in an aisle? You would be demanding action because the pilot should have known better.
      How would I feel if this were my kid? The same as I would feel if it were ME! I would feel like, “oh darn, I’m gonna get there later than I hoped.” Most handicapped people understand they have special needs, and know that airlines will do their best to accomodate those needs, but, cannot and will not do so at the cost of SAFETY.
      So.. NO, I would not be angry.
      YOU, however, clearly share the “victim mentality” that is rotting our nation!
      You should be THANKING the captain for making the tough decision.
      Oh, and JUST FOR YOU, entropy… I’m just saying this “as a commercial pilot”
      (not everyone reads every single post and I have a bit more knowledge on this subject than most)

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • Entropy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 6:03pm

      Hey big TomFerrari. A victim I am not. I was in the AirForce for 23 years and have paid my way my entire life my brother. No need to get yourself all worked up and start insulting people. I did not insult you. I was merely speaking of compassion and the idiocy of the first pilots decision when the other pilot did not see a problem. I must concede that you know more about it than me, but what is with the name calling?. And also, we know pilots are smart guys, you don’t have to rub it in our faces though. Take care partriot.

      Report Post »  
    • Mil Mom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 11:46pm

      @TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:53pm
      As a commercial pilot, I can tell you…

      In an emergency, you do not have the luxury of time.
      Just because you can manage to get on the plane does not mean you can disembark safely and quickly.
      When a plane is filled with smoke, things become much more difficult.
      It is not only the other passengers’ safety, but also THIS MAN’S OWN SAFETY that is considered by the pilot.
      ******
      Obviously, I’m no commercial pilot, but I do wonder, “How can you be sure that your other passengers don‘t have ’ INVISIBLE ‘ handicaps which would make it impossible to disembark the plane in a timely manner? ” I’m thinking primarily in the vein of things like Panic Dis-order, or a Heart Condition, and with my husband being diabetic I learned that stress raises sugar levels, then there are the people on medicines which effect their co-ordination, and rationalization, (anyone one personality changing drugs) those with Inner Ear Infections, which may cause balance problems, or persons with a limp, etc. maybe the pregant woman who might go into labor….? If this is the current criteria for flying, will patients need a Dr’s slip, (similar to athletes highschool) in order to fly? Yes, passengers’ safety is of the utmost importance, but we aren’t able to say honestly that ANYONE in an emergency would be an IDEAL passenger to evaquate? Why couldn’t the handicapped persons risk have been evaluated,then he be seated so as not to imped

      Report Post » Mil Mom  
  • Exrepublisheep
    Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:44pm

    Free market. Sux for him.

    Report Post » Exrepublisheep  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 3:54pm

      In this case there may be legal grounds for a discrimination suit. Unless the captain can prove there to be a legitimate threat to the safety of the crew and/or passangers.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • TexasCommonSense
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:04pm

      Exrepublisheep, not free market, just a dumb ass pilot. He successfully flew on a later Frontier flight.

      Report Post » TexasCommonSense  
    • Patriot Z
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:18pm

      there possibl;y could. the pilot as far i was aware the plot has ffinal say so, or at least a big chunk of it on safety issues. nothing tod with freemarket. but he pilot has a right and duty not to put the safety of the plane and its cew and passgers in jepordy die to politcal correctness.

      Report Post » Patriot Z  
    • cessna152
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:18pm

      If he was a handicapped Muslim the ACLU would have sued Frontier. This is BS… the pilot is a dope and probably a Progressive.

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • click_name_4_impeachment
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:24pm

      What’s the rest of the story?!?!?!?

      Report Post »  
    • Robert-CA
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:25pm

      @ EXREPUBLISHEEP
      Did someone dropped you on your head when you were a child ?
      This had nothing to do with free market you piece of government & regulations lover .
      The pilot didn’t use common sense & he humiliated Mr Morris in front of everybody .

      Report Post » Robert-CA  
    • click_name_4_impeachment
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:28pm

      And free market does not suck by the way. Free market does not mean you CAN’T call out businesses for making bad choices…In fact that is the job of consumers, and the airline will probably lose business over it….oh wait no they wont, because the consumers now just expect government to take care of the issue, and it wont happen anymore….so they will just fly the airline anyways assuming that the airline will get their slap on the hand…..

      Report Post »  
    • Cloth Stews
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:36pm

      The pilot is the final authority as to wheter the flight leaves the ground. The pilot may have thought this to be a safety issue in the case of an emergency aircraft evacuation. It would seem to me that this individual would be incapable of an evacuation without extra assistance and the pilot did not want that responsibility. Another pilot later did not feel the same way. This is not a case of discrimination but rather a choice of how much responsibility the one in charge wants to accept.

      Report Post »  
    • The_Fox
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:36pm

      EXREPUBISHEEP:
      So, now you are a DEMOSHEEP ? Either way, you are, and probaaaaably always will be… a sheep.

      Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:50pm

      As a commercial pilot, I can tell you, the “pilot in command” (captain) has the FINAL say and the ultimate RESPONSIBILITY for the safety of all passengers on board.
      If the pilot perceived a danger to EITHER THE MAN HIMSELF OR TO OTHER PASSENGERS he would be right in refusing to fly in such a manner.
      If there is an emergency and the plane must be evacuated, can all the passengers be evacuated safely? INCLUDING THIS MAN?
      Aircraft are designed and tested with the seats in a certain position with seatbelts secured in a normal position. This is why you must return seats into an upright position for landing – not because it is DEFINITELY safer, but, because that is the only position for which they have been approved (passed testing).
      This is also why people are asked to leave exit aisles if they are seen to be blind, overweight, elderly, weak, etc. In an exit aisle, the passenger is expected to open the exit door, which is often heavy and must be LIFTED and moved to an empty seat row. If you cannot, you place other pax in danger.

      Pilot acted as he saw fit.
      Period.
      Even an airline will not supercede a pilot’s decision.
      Pilots are also protected from repercussions for making those decisions; this is to ensure pilots make the safest decision every time, without consideration of financial or political pressures – only the SAFETY comes into consideration.
      END OF STORY.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • rpp
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:52pm

      As a pilot, I can tell you that pilots have a legal responsibility for EVERYTHING that happens on a plane, similar to a ship’s captain. That includes the safety of all on board. If a passenger cannot be safely placed into a seat, based on the PIC’s (pilot in command) judgement, then the pilot is in violation of FAA regulations. The pilot has has the command authority and bears the legal responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight. (For example, if a passenger is injured during turbulence because they refused to fasten their seat belt as instructed, the flight attendant, the Chief flight attendant and the captain of the plane are all subject to FAA actions and fines.)

      This is a difficult decision for pilots to make.

      Report Post » rpp  
    • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:59pm

      How is a guy, who is or isn’t strapped in the correct way, a danger to the crew or flight? Seems to me that he is only danger to himself and the pilot was afraid of a lawsuit.

      Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
    • encinom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:02pm

      This is the “free market” that Ron and Rand Paul want. This is the free market where the government is unable to protect its citizens from a company refusing to provide services to another for what ever reason the company or its employees may offer. This is what the nation would look like without the Civil Rights Act or ADA.

      Report Post »  
    • last frontier
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:05pm

      RPP: every time you bring a medivac or an old person in a stair chair, the pilot and airline would be liable based on your comment, because in an emergency they wont be able to move any faster than this guy.

      Report Post » last frontier  
    • rpp
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:18pm

      @ Last Frontier, you are exactly right. The pilot IS responsible for people on medivac flights. As such, he has the right to decline to take on that responsibility.

      Report Post » rpp  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:29pm

      @anonymous – if he is a danger to himself, that is enough reason to deny him boarding.
      PLUS
      When there IS an emergency, if he is unable to disembark by himself, somebody else must do it. This makes it even MORE difficult and time consuming, a luxury not available in an emergency. When a cabin is filled with smoke, things get VERY difficult to do (zero visibility).
      Will a surrounding passenger know to unbuckle his chest if his travel companion is unconscious?
      Will he block an aisle if he has appartatus that can become readily tangled?
      If your family was behind this man and there was an emergency, and this man became trapped in the aisle, blocking their exit, and your family perished, how would you feel then?
      You would be screaming that the pilot should have refused to allow the man to fly.

      The pilot-in-command makes the call he sees fit based soley on the safety of the passengers, including this man himself, and the safety of the aircraft.

      You should be thanking him for making what would clearly become an unpopular decision.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • USAMama
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 5:30pm

      Not free market, dummy, it’s called personal responsibility. The family had the responsability to tell the airlines of their situation and make the proper arrangements. If they did and THEN got booted off that’s a different story, but if they didn‘t make their situation known ahead of time that’s their fault.

      Report Post » USAMama  
    • MidWestMom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 6:22pm

      Pilots do have the final authority. But, I’m curious to see why the pilot felt this passenger should not fly.

      Report Post »  
    • OneFootRandy
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 6:38pm

      Any chance we can get both sides of the story before posting it here to create outrage and reaction?

      Sloppy work, again, Blaze.

      Report Post »  
    • chazman
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 7:00pm

      … what the hell, man …

      Report Post »  
    • boomboom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 7:25pm

      free market…sue their pants off….hahahahah

      Report Post » boomboom  
    • Rightsofman
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 9:32pm

      Excreteashee.. whatever..the incident had nothing to do with free marke just a dumb crew. The free market got him on the next flight.

      Report Post »  
    • BoiseBaked
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 9:59pm

      Yeah, free market. Guess which airline I’ll never use.

      Report Post »  
    • Libertarian
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 10:01pm

      @Exrepublisheep

      You are correct, this is the free or a freer market (than most). I would not support a discrimination law suit on the airline, because a business has the right to refuse service to anyone – as horrible as this incident was.

      Only in a free market, Frontier Airlines will suffer the consequences of the pilots actions. I am no longer a customer of Frontier.

      Report Post » Libertarian  
    • Professional Infidel
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 10:29pm

      instead of a little compasion, a kick in his teeth, which were strapped in a secure way , you could not have missed with that extra point: “just a little more to the left, how, perfect!!”

      Report Post »  
    • Mil Mom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 11:08pm

      @Aaron in Polk County
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 4:55pm
      WWWwwhhaaaaaaaaaa. My quadripligic puzzy hurts. *sob* I can’t ride in a plane.

      Well guess what wheelie, you can’t walk either! So, point your chair to the Exit and get to rolling.
      ******************
      If you are an example of the thinking of Caring Prog’s, I sure don’t see much reason to progress down that road ! I wonder if you wouldn’t be the first to complain if an amusement park had a ride which discriminated against someone you cared for, whatever the basis of perceived discrimination. I don’t know if you realize it, but airplanes are made to carry a large group of passengers, and in years past, (before our country enjoyed all this progress.) nearly all airlines would go out of their way to find ways to accomodate a handicapped passenger. In those days, people depended on other people’s opinion of an airline, to determine whether to fly it or not. In the post-government bail-out years, courtesy and compassion are no longer necessary for an airline to remain solvent. Your attitude makes me wonder if you’ll even recognize the meaning of the words courtesy and compassion! Look them up, the people around you might like them!

      Report Post » Mil Mom  
    • Mil Mom
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 11:17pm

      @Libertarian
      Posted on June 20, 2011 at 10:01pm
      @Exrepublisheep

      You are correct, this is the free or a freer market (than most). I would not support a discrimination law suit on the airline, because a business has the right to refuse service to anyone – as horrible as this incident was.
      *********
      A BUSINESS HAS THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO ANYONE….!!!!
      In the year 2011, REALLY ??? Would someone please tell the courts about this right ? I’m sure that about 1/2 the discrimination lawsuits of the 60′s till now, have argued that point!

      Report Post » Mil Mom  
    • Libertarian
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 12:32am

      @Mil Mom
      Yes in the year 2011 people are more than ever beholden and conditioned to a government that tells adults how they can act and conduct business. It gets redundant debating soccer moms, but it is my duty as a countryman to inform you that freedom comes with responsibility.
      In a free country you are either on the side that gives individuals (business) freedom to make good and bad choices – or on the side that allows government to amass, legislate, mandate then penalize adults for being ignorant or nasty and not providing a service or product to another individual(s). Otherwise you are inconsistent in your philosophy of what role government should play in our lives.
      The context I used the word “right” figuratively but nonetheless there were reservations about having a Bill of Rights for this very reason; they did not want to limit “rights”.
      A progressive ultimately wants social freedom and economic slavery (socialism), conservatives want economic freedom but social slavery (legislative morality); each side having a bunch of confused followers that lean left or right, known as independents. It is why I am a libertarian.
      When I say I am small government, I actually mean it.
      God bless you

      Report Post » Libertarian  
    • tsosumi
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 1:03am

      ADA forbids discrimination on many factors. it is why everyone must undergo security screening. Imagine if airlines refused to allow men who appeared to be middle eastern to fly.

      Report Post »  
    • WeDontNeedNoStinkingBadges
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 2:10am

      Wait a second here! They didn’t GET ARRESTED like when that other guy (with the slipping pants) was also “removed” from the plane? Police need to be fired for “causing crime” where none existed before!

      Report Post » WeDontNeedNoStinkingBadges  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 6:17am

      Too many holes in this story. The pilot, idiot that he was, has the legal right to deny someone flying on “his” plane. Where was this guy seated? How would he be safely evacuated in case of emergency? If anything happened to him during an emergency, the airline would be sued. Sorry, but there’s more to this story than is in the story.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • Ryan
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 12:46pm

      If this man was refused service for being gay instead of handicapped… honestly, how many of you would still care about his rights?
      It happens even to me. And a lot more than to handicapped people I bet.

      Report Post » Ryan  
    • Secret Squirrel
      Posted on June 21, 2011 at 8:45pm

      .
      I think there is more we are not hearing.

      Report Post » Secret Squirrel  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love