Why didn't anyone stand up for the passenger who was injured while being forcibly removed from the United flight?

And then you have to transport that person person without the mandated safety equipment---thus violating federal law and opening yourself up to the lawsuit by the person without the seat who falls asleep while standing up (and where would he be standing exactly?) and strikes his head as he falls to the floor.

You have two principles that are frequently inconsistent in actuality (safety requirements and legal regulations).

They do not mix well, so both have to be codified in rules dispositive of the anticipated situation.  You can remedy a wrong and attempt to prevent future ones by thought and negotiation, but not while the incident is occurring. 

(I would maintain the analogy applies---you can't mix them in their current form.)

Hmmm...I think you may have some more direct knowledge of this kind of circumstance than I...I am perhaps thinking more of the general principles...you of the specific circumstances?

But I don't think these UA folks would have given much thought or negotiation, had it not been for the huge public outcry...?
And maybe my concern has to do with the fact that these corporate entities, all too often, their standard is NOT what is right or fair, but rather what can they get by with legally.

Also, the word "contract" here; that implies two parties, but I am guessing the airlines just wrote it up unilaterally, and then say "Well if you want to fly, here is what you MUST agree to." 

The life experiences are not significantly different.

I have spent a good portion of my life actively defending and protecting individuals from the arbitrary authority of corporations that would treat you as a poultry farmer would like to treat his chickens.

One guy whose cause I took up suggested I must have "brass balls."

The "point past which I will not go" is easily reached in me.

Defending...are you telling of your experience as an attorney, if you care to say online?
Also, I don't understand "brass balls"...I know that balls is courage, but brass?

* * *
Tom, bottom line for me...I would be interested in your opinion, your experience; do you think this process is working okay, the ongoing dialectical qualities...? This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 13, 2017 2:32 PM MDT

I laughed when I read this reply from you.


From the Urban Dictionary:

Contrary to its recent misuse as a euphemism for audacity or courage, to have "brass balls" actually means to drive a hard bargain and to refuse to sell for less than what you ask for.

The term dates back to the days when pawn shop brokers would traditionally hang three brass balls outside their shop doors to indicate their services.

I have some legal training, but not in a JD program.  I ate it up.  I love the precision of physics (first degree) and I have a great interest in many disciplines and training in various ones.  Advocacy is not limited to those admitted to the bar.  

My mother always told me (deprecatingly) that if I was so smart, I should figure it out whenever I asked questions as a child.  Finally, when I was in my 50's, I realized that was impossible.  But while it took me forever to realize that was a fool's mission that I had been sent on, I have an excellent memory and I amassed a significant amount of information, knowledge, and critical evaluation skills.

I am being somewhat non-specific on purpose as to my further education.  If I sound like I know what I am talking about and it is valuable to whoever reads what I right, that should serve as sufficient credentials for the validity of what I say.

One of my best and "most wonderful" teachers in college was a man with 3 PhD's----everything he said made sense.  It happened to be a required course and I didn't realize the extent of his education until I happened to read his qualifications a few weeks into the course.

Coincidentally, he was my age now at the time I was in school.

So two people have really influenced my personal over time---the above teacher and St Thomas Aquinas (my patron saint).  What fascinated me about the Summa Theologica is that he would list 3 or so objections to what he was maintaining, and then put forth one that no one had thought to bring up.  He would then state his position and then answer each objection specifically---including the one he himself had raised.

There is a concept called horizontal and vertical attitude buttressing in psychology.  Basically it refers to both breath and depth of your convictions.  Analogously, I like that I have many different resources to support the the answers that I give. If I choose to answer, you may disagree with my solution, but I am seldom (if ever) told that I what I say is "bullshit."
(Normally if I speak, you can hear a pin drop at meetings.)

And yes, I do think this process is not only working okay but is quite useful.

Regards...

Read and appreciated, Tom Jackson.
I do not know much about St. Thomas Aquinas, but he is mentioned prominently in my beloved book on Existentialism, his philosophy contributing strongly.

Also I had not heard of, am not familiar with, horizontal and vertical attitude buttressing...but respond to the concept!

I am more cynical than you perhaps, because I tend to think the dialectic needs improvement...but yes, to me it is significant that you do think it is okay and useful... that I find comforting.

AND ;) I will never again need to wonder about brass balls, I got THAT now!

Brass balls does also mean audacity or courage in common parlance, despite what the Urban Dictionary says.  Both do apply to me and they are used interchangeably occasionally---but both meanings are accurate in my case.

Tom...there is one more question I would like to ask you, to get your take... however, not sure I want to post it publicly without you at least knowing something like that is coming...
So I am going to think about it a bit more, and don't be surprised if something shows up in you private message box!

At your convenience....