Punches thrown in luggage rage SQ219

[Hvr]

OVERHEAD baggage compartment rage has arrived in Australia on Singapore Airlines SQ219. Punches were thrown when two passengers got into a stoush over space in the luggage lockers, reports the Daily Telegraph.


The two men had to be separated by airline staff after one became so irate he punched his fellow passenger. The victim was relocated to another seat. It is not known if he was upgraded.


Industry experts warned that the case of baggage rage in Australia may be the first of many as airlines charge for checked-in luggage.

Would have been an interesting flight knowing that the two combatants were still on board.

Wonder what they each carried on board?

 

[Mal]

Wonder what they each carried on board?

Well at least one carried on a huge ego and behavioural management issues...

It's good to see AFP are investigating, although the person should have been offloaded and dealt with in Singapore. They don't take too kindly to loutish behaviour.

 

[djfuzz]

Yes, but we don't know whether either of them was 'French' or 'dramatic' yet.

 

[medhead]

Yes, but we don't know whether either of them was 'French' or 'dramatic' yet.

yes, very good

 

[JohnK]

Well at least one carried on a huge ego and behavioural management issues...

Why do we tolerate people who resort to violence as the solution at the slightest bit of inconvenience?

It's good to see AFP are investigating, although the person should have been offloaded and dealt with in Singapore. They don't take too kindly to loutish behaviour.

The agressor should not have been allowed to fly. There is no place for that sort of behaviour on a flight....

 

[anat0l]

Hoy, here we go again. *cracks knuckles* (no pun intended)

Firstly, this is apparently the first case of "baggage rage", is it? Wow, I think we've just invented a new kind of rage and a new term. How quaint!

Secondly, this is the first case in Australia? The so-called rage occurred in Singapore on Singaporean soil; the flight was bound for an Australian city, yes, but this did not occur in Australia and more importantly not within Australian legal jurisdiction (i.e. if anything was to happen - and we pray that something will - it would be dealt with under Singaporean law). Does beg to wonder how the AFP are getting involved (notwithstanding in direct cooperation with Singaporean authorities).

Thirdly - and this is very disturbing - since when is Ben Sandilands an "aviation expert"? I'd rather cut out my tongue than own up to that fact. :evil: He may wax lyrical about the psychologies of air travel as much as he likes - I can agree to disagree with that. But that is - and he is - by no means an expert.


Finally, to add some off-topicness and some perspective on the thread, I'm assuming if we assume a full plane (i.e. every seat occupied) and each seated individual carried on-board one item which was at the maximum allowable dimensions (e.g. a rollerboard, but doesn't have to be), there would be enough overhead bin space for everyone?

I find that real life kicks in often on this one, hence priority boarding does have that distinct advantage; even if I'm in Business there's still a point in making sure you get a space quickly. If there's no space above you when you get to your seat - too bad, unless you can convince someone that they're taking more than their fair share of space, you arrived later so you'll need to find more space, negotiate or deal with in another way. I've had experiences in having to stow my bag (usually aft) up to 10 rows away from my seat.

There's often an argument about whether soft/small items should be put under seats and leave the bin space for large/heavier items. This annoys tall pax as well as those that only carried a solitary soft item (e.g. backpack) on board (expecting to be able to stow it above).

 

[medhead]

I find that real life kicks in often on this one, hence priority boarding does have that distinct advantage; even if I'm in Business there's still a point in making sure you get a space quickly. If there's no space above you when you get to your seat - too bad, unless you can convince someone that they're taking more than their fair share of space, you arrived later so you'll need to find more space, negotiate or deal with in another way. I've had experiences in having to stow my bag (usually aft) up to 10 rows away from my seat.

There's often an argument about whether soft/small items should be put under seats and leave the bin space for large/heavier items. This annoys tall pax as well as those that only carried a solitary soft item (e.g. backpack) on board (expecting to be able to stow it above).

Really this all gets down to the willingness of people to have their stuff moved around in the overhead. Usually, I get to an overhead that is fairly full, but there is always scope to repack and then everyone can fit in. I'm always going to repack the overhead to make space for my stuff, perhaps I risk carry on rage. But recently I've encounter FA who just don't see it that way and what to find out space, maybe to save time or something. But how much time can be saved by checking 3 or 4 lockers, against putting that one roller on it side instead of "back", or putting that backpack on top of my roller?

JohnK Unfortunately there are people who are not able to expres their feelings in words and can only use (only know) violence. We should tolerate this, IMO, because it represents the failures of the education system and of society.

 

[Mal]

JohnK Unfortunately there are people who are not able to expres their feelings in words and can only use (only know) violence. We should tolerate this, IMO, because it represents the failures of the education system and of society.

That's an interesting view. Should we also tolerate bank robbery because of a failure of society, and the Government's economic handling?

There is too many instances of young thugs and thugettes with an attitude or substance abuse problem and swinging punches (or broken glasses as is the current trend).

Perhaps a justice system like Singapore's would sort them out...

 

[JohnK]

JohnK Unfortunately there are people who are not able to expres their feelings in words and can only use (only know) violence. We should tolerate this, IMO, because it represents the failures of the education system and of society.

I am sorry but these people do not deserve to breathe the same air as the rest of society. And I do speak as someone who has been on the receiving end and also seen friends on the receiving end.

You cannot blame the education system. We all have a choice in how we conduct our lives and it has nothing to do with the education system or that our parents went through a separation or divorce. As a society I believe we need to be less tolerant and more strict on these individuals. There comes a time where poor, meaningless, excuses are no longer valid....

 

[anat0l]

That's an interesting view. Should we also tolerate bank robbery because of a failure of society, and the Government's economic handling?

There is too many instances of young thugs and thugettes with an attitude or substance abuse problem and swinging punches (or broken glasses as is the current trend).

Perhaps a justice system like Singapore's would sort them out...

I agree, although if you even mentioned that in Australia then you would probably be the first one to experience the system physically first hand - by the public.

The real thing that stops us from having a strict society based on such legal repercussions is the fear of the wrongful conviction of an innocent person (much like the fear of executing an innocent person on death row).

 

[JohnK]

The real thing that stops us from having a strict society based on such legal repercussions is the fear of the wrongful conviction of an innocent person (much like the fear of executing an innocent person on death row).

So when 100 totally unrelated people witness the same crime it is conspiracy against the accused and then the crime is only an alleged crime rather than actual crime.

Sad that we live in a society that tolerates everything....

 

[medhead]

That's an interesting view. Should we also tolerate bank robbery because of a failure of society, and the Government's economic handling?

There is too many instances of young thugs and thugettes with an attitude or substance abuse problem and swinging punches (or broken glasses as is the current trend).

Perhaps a justice system like Singapore's would sort them out...

Your talking about complete different things. You mention things for which there are laws. theft, bank robbery, anti social behaviour. These are people who are making a choice in how they behaviour.

I'm talking about people who have learnt via their place in society that the way to resolve an argument is by violence. If one is being confronted and doesn't like what they are hearing then they have learnt to lash out before they get hit first. Especially, when in the wrong. Basically, they have no choice, they are just following what life has taught them. This is a failure of education by not teaching these people that there is alternatives.

So when 100 totally unrelated people witness the same crime it is conspiracy against the accused and then the crime is only an alleged crime rather than actual crime.

Sad that we live in a society that tolerates everything....

Sorry but that is a funny conclusion to reach. Things are only alleged while they remain before the court. Otherwise to call someone a criminal before they are convicted would deny justice. Someone is accused until proven guilty and then the actions is no longer an allegation. That is not a sign of toleration of crime at all.

 

[notzac]

JohnK Unfortunately there are people who are not able to expres their feelings in words and can only use (only know) violence. We should tolerate this, IMO, because it represents the failures of the education system and of society.

I respectfully disagree. Violence is never an answer for anything, blaming societal or educational issues is a cop out. If someone has such poor people skills that their only way of handling a bad situation is to abuse someone, then that person shouldn't be around other people as they clearly can't cope with it.

 

[tuapekastar]

Bye and large, people are a product of their upbringing, and it is a self-perpetuating cycle.

Dad, aged ~30, in court for bashing his child. As a young 'un, was bashed by his own father.

Go forward 20 years, bashed child from previous sentence in court for bashing his own child.

And so it goes...

This is a generalisation of course, but holds true in a lot of cases.

 

[medhead]

I respectfully disagree. Violence is never an answer for anything, blaming societal or educational issues is a cop out. If someone has such poor people skills that their only way of handling a bad situation is to abuse someone, then that person shouldn't be around other people as they clearly can't cope with it.

Some sections of our society are extremely violence where people will lash out if you put them down with words. Someone who is born into that world and manages to survive and grow up knows no other way to express themselves. It is not a cop out to ask why society didn't rescue that young child from the violence and show them the real way to get on in the world.

I'm also not blaming society or education for their issues. I'm simply suggesting that these people exist in the world and expressing an opinion about the cause. Until "we" decide to fix those issues, these people will continue to exist.

 

[Mal]

I'm also not blaming society or education for their issues. I'm simply suggesting that these people exist in the world and expressing an opinion about the cause. Until "we" decide to fix those issues, these people will continue to exist.

My (late) father used to strap me with a belt if I was out of line. I also had the cane in school once for also doing something out of line. It taught me that I shouldn't misbehave - or if I did, that I should hide it very well

I've also experienced punches thrown at me over the years. Did I deserve them? In most cases - no. In very few cases, perhaps yes.

Perhaps other children should have been strapped with a belt, or perhaps a cane at school to help them realise what is right and what is wrong... (and no I'm not insinuating child abuse either)

Hang on, that is cruelty. We can't have that in our warm fuzzy society where children are untouchable - even by police.

No wonder society is breaking down slowly.

 

[UP4014]

Ever wonder why it is actually easy to drive a car in the US, people are polite on the road, rarely is there road rage.

As a member of the Moab Police Deptartment in Utah once said to me "an armed society is a polite society".

If you don't know who is packing, you just might be polite before going off.

Matt

 

[medhead]

Ever wonder why it is actually easy to drive a car in the US, people are polite on the road, rarely is there road rage.

As a member of the Moab Police Deptartment in Utah once said to me "an armed society is a polite society".

If you don't know who is packing, you just might be polite before going off.

Matt

Gotta say that is the biggest load of horse do that I have ever heard. Typical view though from the land of the free, where they think guns make them free but they actually make them prisoners. What he is basically saying that if you're not polite someone is going to shoot at you. Guess what? shooting at someone is not the answer either, that is also violence and IMHO shooting at another driver would have to be the ultimate form of road rage.

Besides if you what to see polite driving come to adelaide. I have literally seen cars stop in the middle of a major 2 lane road to let someone in from a side street.

Mal I'm sure you were raised properly. How about I finish my thoughts with an example. I once worked with a guy, who was a decent bloke, would do anything for you. He was not out there robbing banks, or thugging over people in the street. Anyone one day our boss put out the accusation that I allegedly (yes JohnK, I was not guilty) didn't think him and his offsider were doing their job properly. His response was I'm going to bash you for that, I know where you live. This didn't change my respect for the guy, I just understood that was his world, that is how his life has been, such that a bashing is his response to that situation. Not to respond and say that I was full of horse do.

No, I didn't end up getting a bashing because I talked to the man. at a distance

 

[UP4014]

Besides if you what to see polite driving come to adelaide. I have literally seen cars stop in the middle of a major 2 lane road to let someone in from a side street.

Would have to say South Australian drivers are pretty annoying, slow, drive all the over the road and you confirm it with your comment above. Stop in the middle of a major road to let someone in - that is poor judgment if ever there was.

Have a nice Christmas everyone.:mrgreen:

 

[medhead]

Would have to say South Australian drivers are pretty annoying, slow, drive all the over the road and you confirm it with your comment above. Stop in the middle of a major road to let someone in - that is poor judgment if ever there was.

Have a nice Christmas everyone.:mrgreen:

Yep and I want to shoot them everyday.

Happy Christmas to everyone