Rude People
by Tom Neven on 03/10/2008 at 6:15 PM
I was in the Denver airport this weekend, returning from a personal trip to the East Coast. While waiting for my short connecting flight to Colorado Springs, I witnessed a certain type you've probably seen yourself: Mr. Self-Important Businessman, talking too loud on his cell phone, his appointment calendar/portfolio open on the seat next to him as he worked on his laptop.
Even as we were boarding he had his laptop open in his cradled arm, click-clacking away with one hand as he walked down the jetway. After the flight attendant told us to turn off all electronic devices, he merely closed his laptop and stashed it under the seat. (I know it was still on because I was in the row behind him and could see its power light still glowing.) The moment we reached altitude, Mr. Self-Important had the laptop out, typing away. Now you have to understand that the flight from Denver to Colorado Springs lasts barely 15 minutes and never really reaches a cruising altitude; it's basically climb and then descend. They have no beverage service on this flight, it's so short, so I wonder why they even bother to tell passengers they can turn on electronic devices.
Meanwhile, sitting diagonally across from me in the aisle seat was a United Airlines flight attendant, in uniform but obviously not on duty for this flight. As we were descending into the Colorado Springs airport, the flight attendant up front announced that it was time to turn off all electronic devices -- less than five minutes after she said they could be used. At that point we were about three minutes from touchdown.
About 10 seconds elapsed, and Mr. Self-Important showed no signs of turning off the laptop. The off-duty flight attendant leaned forward and, in a professional voice, said, "Sir, you need to turn off the laptop." Whereupon he exploded. Red in the face, he yelled across the aisle that he was going to if she'd just give him a chance. "You people are so rude!" he yelled at her. "Give me a [expletive] chance! I can't believe how rude you people are!"
This 40-something man didn't just yell at her; he physically leaned in on her. The young woman, maybe all of 25 years old, was taken aback. I was appalled, and I nearly came out of my seat because I thought he was going to physically attack her. He continued to mumble under his breath, still red in the face. (He still didn't turn it off, either, but did his previous trick of merely closing the lid.) The young lady stared ahead with the look of someone who'd just been deeply frightened and humiliated.
He had the nerve to call her rude. Rude! "Hello, Mr. Pot? Kettle calling." I should have said something. Instead, I just seethed. But we were already on the ground, and discretion was probably the better part of valor at that point.
We pulled up to the gate, and Mr. Self-Important was one of the first into the aisle to get off the plane. I was behind him, still seething. I could not believe the disrespect and unbridled anger this supposedly respectable businessman showed in public. I wonder what he’s like at home.
I'm still angry at myself for not speaking up. (No one else did, either.) But I did make a point of stopping momentarily by the young woman. I patted her shoulder: "Thank you for doing your job," I said. It's all I could think to say.
I never caught Mr. Self-Important's name, but his business cards had a Verizon logo on them. (There's a large Verizon operation in Colorado Springs.) I hope he reads this. More important, I hope his bosses do too.
1. Rachel said the following at 6:27 PM on Mar 10:
1
I don't want to excuse his behavior, it is inexcusable, particularly how he treated that young woman... But I do wonder how much pressure he must be under to not sit back and take in a 15 minute flight... and how empty his life must be, because certainly an outburst like that brings one no joy or personal pride.
2. Lisa said the following at 6:32 PM on Mar 10:
2
There is a good reason why electronic devices are to be turned off for takeoff and landing. The signal can interfere with the aircraft instruments. If I had seen him pull that stunt on takeoff, I would have told the flight attendant on duty while the aircraft was still cruising. Although, chances are good he might have yelled at the flight attendants who were on duty as well. If I were you, I would have gotten his seat number and turned it in to the flight attendant as I left the plane, after explaining the entire situation from beginning to end. My father was an air traffic safety official with the FAA, so I would very probably have reported it to the FAA as well. FAA can post flight inspectors on planes unannounced to make sure airline attendants are following regulations. As for screaming passengers, they can be carted off the airline in handcuffs, as this man no doubt deserved. If the FAA and Homeland Security have this man's seat number, he can be tracked down. If it were me, I would make sure FAA had this man's seat number. He put every passenger on that plane at risk.
3. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 6:42 PM on Mar 10:
3
Rude indeed.
Though I have to ask: all things considered, is it really worth it to take a plane on a 15 minute flight? I mean, considering the time it takes to check in, go through security, wait for the plane, board, await takeoff, fly, land, get baggage, etc? And the money it costs? Is it worth it?
4. Ben said the following at 6:45 PM on Mar 10:
4
Too many people think that manners and general kindness toward our fellow human being seems to be outdated nowadays. As a result, there are a lot of hurt and frustrated people out there. May God give us the courage to show compassion when it is needed. Can't claim I'm a good example of showing compassion like I should all the time, but this little story reminds me to always be on the lookout for those around me. Thanks!
5. Dan Hudlow said the following at 6:51 PM on Mar 10:
5
The electronic devices rules *are* idiotic. :P But, of course, that's no excuse. However, I cannot imagine anyone having objection with the power light being on (i.e. the laptop being in sleep mode)... But then, I consider the rule that *cell phones* must be off to be bordering on paranoia.
This is about the least relevant comment I've ever made... :P
6. Peter said the following at 7:14 PM on Mar 10:
6
First of all, I wouldn't judge him on one incidence. Sure, his outburst was rude and uncalled for. But how do you know what he was going through? Does it excuse his behavior? No, but I wouldn't want to sit in a position of judgment. Also, what would saying anything do? Sounds like its just a way of getting back at him, a form of anger.
7. rivergreg said the following at 7:15 PM on Mar 10:
7
While I certainly can't condone Mr. Self-Important's behavior, just a quick point - many laptops do an automatic suspend to RAM or suspend to Disk (aka Hibernate) when running on battery and the lid is closed. For all practical purposes the computer is off under those circumstances. Normally a single indicator light remains on... so he may have actually turned the laptop off.
Though his behavior was repugnant, I still think he should be extended some measure of grace - for all we know the guy might have been under a "get thing X done by Y deadline or you're fired" type of situation. The business world is like that, especially for executives. Imagine what it is like when you don't have the power of the Spirit active in your life.
8. Tom Neven said the following at 7:38 PM on Mar 10:
8
Andrew R (#3)
If you're just going from Colorado Springs to Denver, yes, it would be silly to fly. It is, after all, only an hour's drive. But many flights out of the Springs (particularly on United) connect through Denver, a major United hub. In that case, it's much easier to fly out of the Springs, a 15-minute drive from my house, than to drive to DIA, pay to park, etc.
As for the laptop's being on or asleep, the issue is the rule is there, and we have an obligation to obey it whether we agree with it or not. I happen to know on good authority that laptops, iPods and the like are little danger to an aircraft. My brother is an electrical engineer who for many years has worked on avionics and communications systems for both military and commercial aircraft. He said there are some specific types of devices that will interfere with an aircraft, but rather than having to delineate a long list of what is allowable and what is not, they just take the easy route and ban all electronic equipment during takeoff and landing. Makes sense to me. And even though I know the rule in most cases should not apply, I still have an obligation to obey it.
And saying something to Mr. Rude would not have been in anger, but in defense of the poor woman. Maybe it's just me: I was raised to believe that the strong should defend the weak, that men should defend women, and quaint notions like that.
9. Lisa said the following at 7:47 PM on Mar 10:
9
I stand by what I said. If I believed that the power was on, as was stated in the post, then I would have reported it. However, if I had felt that the computer was actually off, I wouldn't have said anything. However, the off duty flight attendant did not feel it was in sleep mode. It is unfortunate that she allowed herself to be intimidated by this bully, but if she is as young as the post states, I can understand. Mr. Hudlow, are you an aeronautical engineer? On what grounds do you believe the rules to be "idiotic?" There is alot of research and alot of testing that goes into flight instruments and safety devices, and also what are safe conditions for takeoff and landing. In my opinion, this man poses a danger to the flying public, if he flys frequently and has an established a pattern of ignoring the flight attendants safety requests.
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with anger or grace or compassion. This has to do with air traffic safety, something my father devoted his entire life to. Do you people want to land safely, or do you want to crash and die?
10. Samantha said the following at 7:50 PM on Mar 10:
10
Tom, I cannot believe how judgemental you're being. You don't know anything about this guy, except that he was rude to ONE person on ONE flight ONCE. He could be nearly perfect, but he made one mistake so you're telling everyone on the internet about it. What if, instead of trying to humiliate him and get him fired, (what are the chances his bosses are going to vist Boundless, anyway?) you tried showing some compassion? For all you know, his entire family could have been killed in a car wreck the day before. YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIS LIFE! You can't sit and judge him, only Jesus can do that. The next time you're about to type up some self-righteous drivel, why don't you think about what Jesus would do? I think this was mentioned in the Bible. Wasn't it something like,"He who is without sin, cast the first stone"?
11. Peter said the following at 8:07 PM on Mar 10:
11
And yes, the electronic rules are silly. Essentially the FAA can't afford the resources to certify every device, so they have to disallow everything. 99.9999999% of things would be perfectly fine, including a laptop in sleep mode. He did not put anyone's life in danger. Wouldn't you want another 15 seconds to save your work before closing?
12. Jeff said the following at 8:37 PM on Mar 10:
12
Canadian Boy: Such a short flight becomes worthwhile if you're connecting to/from a longer flight, because you only have to go through security and check baggage once.
Dan Hudlow: The cell phone ban on aircraft has nothing to do with FAA paranoia...it's an FCC rule, not an FAA rule. The FCC prohibits the use of transmitters like cell phones at altitude because UHF communications at that altitude carry way too far, and communications with the cell tower may disrupt other licensed users of the frequency.
(Don't worry if you didn't understand any of that...just trust us engineers and keep your cell phone off during flights. :P )
13. Lisa said the following at 8:38 PM on Mar 10:
13
I feel I have not made myself clear in my previous two posts. For me, this has nothing to do with anger, or someone who was rude, or being judgemental or showing compassion. This has to do with a person who is flagrantly violating FAA regulations, and is being allowed to get away with it. Flight attendants cannot be everywhere; they depend on the eyes and ears of the passengers sometimes, especially if an laptop computer is stowed under the seat and closed, made to appear as if it is off. If I were that off duty flight attendant, and he had said in reply to me, in the sweetest and kindest voice imaginable, "Oh, we'll be landed in a minute, I really don't think it's a big deal." I would have reported him. I would have taken the same steps I outlined in my first post. Repeat: any signs of noncompliance by him, and my actions would have been the same. For me, this is about safety--and only about safety.
14. Claire said the following at 8:42 PM on Mar 10:
14
Everyone is taking the side of Mr. Important Pants and giving him excuses to have an outburst. There is no excuse, even though circumstances can lead to a person having an outburst, it is still uncalled for. Plus, think of the poor flight attendant just doing her job (by the way, if they are on jump seats, they aren't technically working, so she didn't have to chime in. It was a matter of safety). Anyway, what of her day? He completely embarrassed her in front of everyone. She could have been having just as bad a day at him, but unlike him, had learned to control her temper tantrums at 3-5 years old like everyone else.
Yes, I am being harsh, so I apologize. I just think that we get so caught up in ourselves, we forget about others and what they may be going through. Think of how much easier it would have been for him to say (even if he was pressured at work) "Thank you for your reminder, but my computer is off" Or something to that effect. Would have made the whole flight more pleasant for everyone, needless to say it would have been for him as well, his blood pressure was probably through the roof...
Ok, off my soapbox. :)
15. Ben said the following at 9:20 PM on Mar 10:
15
But then, I consider the rule that *cell phones* must be off to be bordering on paranoia.
The issue there isn't just of interference to the plane's systems, it's that a cell phone at altitude is in range of not just the two or three cell sites it typically might be in range of on the ground, but of tens or even hundreds of them at once. Get enough people doing this at once and you'll make a bad impact on cell system capacity.
Note that a cell phone is a transmitter, and legally, you're not allowed to operate a transmitter on a plane without permission of the pilot. If they tell you to turn off the cell phone, do it, whether you consider it paranoid or not.
16. BDB said the following at 9:30 PM on Mar 10:
16
None of us know exactly what we'd do in a situation. The military rule of thumb is correct: you fight how you train. If you haven't planned for a similar situation, it's hard to act decisively and correctly. For those of us who deal with angry customers, we've probably trained ourselves to stay calm in the face of explicatives. Which does help de-escalate situations.
Lisa (#2) wrote:
>>As for screaming passengers, they can be carted off the airline in handcuffs, as this man no doubt deserved. <<
Yeah, I was just thinking, you could say something like, "Maam, I'm sure he doesn't realize he just committed a felony by interfering with a flight attendant in the course of her duties." But that might escalate the situation.
I remember one time I heard someone yelling in our customer lobby. The lobby reported to me, so I ran TOWARDS the sound of yelling. I found that two supervisors got there before I did and were now standing right behind the rep, looking the customer straight in the eye.
I suppose the ideal situation would be for the other flight attendants, in response to the yelling, to immediately converge on the location. Pilots should be locked in the cockpit these days.
If you wanted to soothe her afterwards, you could give her a business card and say that if the police need a witness, you saw the whole thing. Write down your seat number and his on the back of the card.
Sometimes people can be stopped simply by making eye contact. The trick is to do it without escalating the situation. If someone were to say to me, "What the *&^# are you looking at?!?" I might be able to, in my customer-service voice, "Sir, do you understand that it is a crime to interfere with a flight attendant?"
I did almost have a customer arrested once, and I managed to stay calm throughout the half-hour-long-plus experience waiting for the police to arrive. We didn't have a silent alarm at that location. He did back down when they arrived and then and we were able to wrap it up without further ramifications. But I did offer the guy a way out, and he took it. As soon as he took it, I quickly hand-wrote the document he needed. Always give them a way out so they can save face; someone who feels they are trapped in a corner becomes more dangerous.
One thing you can say is, to the flight attendant, "Is there a problem?" Or you can hit your "call" button. Others around you might also hit theirs. Though on a small plane, there might not be enough flight attendants to do anything.
Now, if he had gotten out of his seat and moved towards her...well, let's just say that I have no problem explaining to a jury that the folks on Flight 93 did the right thing and we can't afford to sit by and not take action...
17. Lee Grace said the following at 10:52 PM on Mar 10:
17
For what it's worth, I'm a (private) pilot, and evidence that indicates that electronics actually interfere with an airplane's instruments is pretty scarce. It's more a safety precaution, I think: "Better safe than sorry" seems to be the airlines' motto. Which is why I refuse to ride them unless absolutely necessary.
As Benjamin Franklin (allegedly) said, "Those who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither," and will lose both.
18. HMWelch said the following at 12:33 AM on Mar 11:
18
When you only get to see a person one time (in this case, thankfully!), then I believe it is entirely fair to judge them based on what you observe. Not that you "judge" in a judgemental, I'm-better-than-you, condemning way, but in an objective-truth kind of way. Furthermore, there is no excuse, whatsoever, for the kind of assault this man made on the young woman. Period. It doesn't matter what stress you're under, whatever excuse you have for doing wrong doesn't make it OK.
Sometimes people are afraid to speak out, tell it like it is, and confront people about sin in their life because they will be labeled "judgemental." I believe that if you do it in the right way that there is nothing wrong with it and that as believers we are actually supposed to be doing it. There is of course a right way and a wrong way of judging/examining/truth-telling.
"but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ"
Ephesians 4:15 (NASB)
Love without truth, or truth without love, is wrong. The ideal combination is to speak the truth in love - and no one should be judged for that! ; D
(Sorry this got a bit long-winded; I feel pretty strongly about this and have been thinking about it lately.)
19. Chin Wee said the following at 12:56 AM on Mar 11:
19
The turn-off-all-electronic-gadgets rule is not idiotic as some of you have put it. There are literally millions upon millions of electronic parts in an airplane, they can't risk if even ONE interference to any of them and risk a plane crash. Remember, there are hundreds of people on a plane, better safe than sorry.
20. Kathryn said the following at 3:19 AM on Mar 11:
20
It's probably a good thing that you didn't say anything to him as you might have not been at your most gracious, being under the influence of anger.
I know there are many times when I would love to say something, but then been vary glad later that I hadn't, or that my computer chose that time to crash so I couldn't post that comment, etc. :)
I'm glad that you show the lady some support though. Having been in a position much like hers before, I'm sure she would have been very glad of it.
21. S said the following at 4:02 AM on Mar 11:
21
Granted, there's no excuse for yapping to loud on a cell phone, yelling at the flight attendant or not following FAA rules.
However, as someone who travels multiple times each month {and has the frequent flier miles and hotel points to prove it} , I can certainly understand why, "his appointment calendar/portfolio open on the seat next to him as he worked on his laptop." When I'm traveling, sometimes the brief 1/2 hour in the airport between flights is just about the only time in the middle of that day that I can check e-mail or listen to messages. {Especially on those trips that are cross country and basically take up the whole day.}
For me, it's called being efficient, and not trying to be "Miss Self-Important Businesswoman".
22. Jeannie said the following at 4:14 AM on Mar 11:
22
I think this is also to make a stand for social injustice and not about being judgmental. This might not be as big as abortion, or slavery. but still... I think it's absolutely unnecessary to be rude to the flight attendant, or anyone just because one has a bad day.
While it's true that we should extend grace to someone like him, I think we also have to stand up for the people who are not in a position to defend themselves, like the flight attendant. So it's more like if I were the flight attendant, I'd extend grace to someone who's been rude to me, and not tell him off(obviously). But if I were a third party, I wouldn't do that. Perhaps I'd tell that man to calm down.
I think it was a very nice gesture that you went up to her to thank her for doing her job. I think if might cry if you were to tell me that after some guy shouted and embarrassed me. :)
23. Amir Larijani said the following at 6:05 AM on Mar 11:
23
:::planting tongue in cheek:::
Tom:
You should have given Mr. Verizon some military training. His MOS would be "Impromptu Involuntary Teacher Assistant for Close Quarters Combat Training."
Had you done that--and made a YouTube video of it--you'd be the Presidential frontrunner this November.
24. khalil said the following at 6:29 AM on Mar 11:
24
I echo poster's comment (#7)...I was going to say something along the same lines about sleep and hibernation mode. The guy was clearly rude and improper, but the laptop lid being closed and flashy blinking light on is not the issue. If the light wasn't on I'd say the laptop was still fully powered and he wasn't "playing fair".
for what it is worth the electronics on/off during take-off/flight is taken way out of proportion.
Thanks for the kind words you said to the flight attendant, at least there was some kindness exhibited on the flight.
25. Jonathan said the following at 7:18 AM on Mar 11:
25
In response to #3, yes, a 15 minute flight is ridiculous...that being said, I lived in Colorado Springs for a few years, and there were several times that I booked a flight to or from there and where my parents lived that ran through Denver (because Denver is a bigger airport/hub for United). Given that you can drive between the two cities in around an hour, flying from one place to the other is pretty insane however.
I am a bit amazed at many of the responses so far advocating 'grace' or 'non-judgment' toward this man. Yes, we have no idea what is going on in his life, true he may be under enormous pressure. But even if that is true, since when does that justify his actions? All actions have consequences...his resulted in the humiliation and abuse of another innocent human being. While it may have been inadvertent and he may be sorry that in no way lessens the judgment he should receive for his behavior. I see this type of attitude exhibited almost daily in my commute to and from work, and it just reminds me how fallen we all are...and how selfish the core of our being truly is, regardless of the state of our souls.
26. Caleb S. said the following at 7:34 AM on Mar 11:
26
It isn't amazing how sinful man is? But honestly, I think you should pray for him rather than call him out on a public forum. Your last line especially concerns me. It seems you are wishing he is called out and punished. Part of me does too, but we are called to pray for our enemies, I have realized lately this is something I NEVER do, aside from praying for the salvation of those I like and want to see come to the Lord.
Our pastor recently preached on the passage where Abraham prayed for Abimelech after he had taken Sarah, his wife. The Lord ended up blessing Abimelech and opening the wombs of the women in his household. I believe we should do the same for Mr. Rude, I should do it for that one person at work who hates me and has it out for me. We just honestly need to love more.
27. Lucie said the following at 7:35 AM on Mar 11:
27
Saying something to the flight attendant at the end of the trip was appropriate and kind. But I have to agree that confronting Mr. S.I. while he was in that frame of mind could have been downright risky. A shame, but we never know these days when someone will completely "go postal..."
28. Patricia said the following at 7:48 AM on Mar 11:
28
I agree with others who have said that this behavior is deplorable, it's possible he was stressed out or upset about something else. I often react this way (as probably other people with passive aggressive traits). I dislike conflict and discussing my feelings/dealing with stress, so I ignore the problem/issue until I explode about something totally unrelated to the initial problem. I've gotten better at stopping the cycle, but it's something I struggle with. Perhaps he is the same way....which doesn't excuse his behavior but at least is a way to understand it.
29. Rachael said the following at 8:27 AM on Mar 11:
29
Jonathan (25) -- Thanks for your perspective on viewing rudeness in your last line. Consciously realizing the weight of our sin may more often turn our attention turn to the cross. Now if only this approach could be applied we see sins (in common attitude/speech/behavior) among our Christian brothers and sisters. If only our eyes would be more open to the disgusting sin in ourselves.
But remember Newton's words: "My memory is nearly gone, but I remember two things — that I am a great sinner, and that Christ is a great Saviour."
30. Carrie (the original) said the following at 8:38 AM on Mar 11:
30
Samantha #10: I'll encourage you to remember "From out of the heart, the mouth speaks". Yes there is grace, to be sure. However, sometimes the Lord affords the ultimate smackdown for those He loves in order to teach them a lesson. God is not all fluffy clouds and sweet hymns. He is also the God that Jacob wrestled with, brought the Flood, rained fire on Sodom and Gomorah, turned over tables in the temple, and told the cornerstone of the Church (Peter) to "Get behind me, Satan".
I would encourage Tom to pump some iron and ask the Lord to enable him to be the sword of truth next time it is needed.
31. Shannon said the following at 9:11 AM on Mar 11:
31
Does anyone here really believe this guy's employers at Verizon would care what he did? It's their culture that trained him to be that way. They only care if he gets his work done, no matter who gets stepped on in the process. That's just big business.
As to the question of intervention: which is worse, being rude or being afraid?
32. Leah said the following at 9:30 AM on Mar 11:
32
Dan Hudlow, those rules are NOT idiotic. Electronic devices which use transmitters can interfere with the aircraft's communication equipment. Anyone who willfully uses equipment which interferes with the safety of an aircraft is the idiot. While you're unlikely to make a plane crash like one commenter suggested, you can still cause problems for people by interfering with communication.
Caleb S, while we should pray for people like this man, they also need to be called out too. Paul talks about disciplining each other many, MANY times!
33. Khalil said the following at 10:20 AM on Mar 11:
33
to Claire, #14...I don't think I can see where people are giving the man described here "permission" to act rudely. Can you point it out where we've said that?
to post #19, sometimes rules and limits need to be pushed and challenged. Are we all supposed to blindly do what people tell us to do? Are we not allowed to think and learn for ourselves? I would imagine we've all been on flights were people have forgotten to turn off some electronic device...the plane still flew.
Post #17...bravo. I agree with you. However, with international travel you are stuck flying. Oh well.
34. faye said the following at 12:29 PM on Mar 11:
34
Samantha, What if the 25 year old woman had just found out her family had been killed in a car accident and had then been shouted at by this man?
Everybody responds to stress in different ways, but there still is such a thing called, "being rude." and it's still something that shouldn't be ignored all of the time.
You can still approach the man in a kind way and with a "gentle response" not be self righteous.
And I'm thinking, what if he had no idea he was being a jerk? Wouldn't it be loving to say, just between the two of you, "listen, I think the woman was just trying to encourage you to turn off your computer because we're going to land. Maybe you want to apologize for reacting in that way?" And then maybe you would want to talk to him later. But really, if he has no idea he's being rude, then maybe he'd think to himself, "wow, that was kind of rude... maybe I need to slow down.. apologize and finish my work when we land."
Just a thought. By the way, I don't want to come across as being judgemental... the Lord knows I've been really rude- even today. I would hope that someone would have the kindness to politely respond to me rather than let it go, (or worse yet do what a lot of people might do: pick a fight and blast me for my rudeness in front of the whole plane.)
35. rivergreg said the following at 1:31 PM on Mar 11:
35
Jonathan wrote:
Grace doesn't contend that someone's actions are justifiable - rather it in the face of seeing that the actions are entirely unjustifiable chooses to extend goodness towards the person. Grace is not about "what someone did really wasn't all that bad" or "someone's bad circumstances justify his/her bad actions". Grace is definitely an "in spite of" sort of thing :) That's the whole point. If what someone did was not really wrong or was justifiable, then the goodness extended is not really grace. I strongly recommend Randy Alcorn's book The Grace and Truth Paradox. Excellent reading and very thought provoking.
And - Tom - as others have said, thank you for your kind words to the flight attendant. I can't imagine how she must have felt.
36. Ariel G. said the following at 1:39 PM on Mar 11:
36
I see this kind of behavior throughout public life in the U.S. regularly and it is quite dismaying to see a grown man, such as the one on this plane, who uses profanity at the top of his lungs whenever he is even gently chided. Some people here have replied, quite indignantly, that the author of this article has been "judgmental" in his estimation of this man but Proverbs 20:11 states:
"Even a child is known by his actions,
by whether his conduct is pure and right."
Whether we like it or not, if we are going to throw a tantrum like that man did, we ARE going to be judged by others as revealing poor character. Possibly this has hit a nerve with some viewers and that is why they have responded so indignantly?
I do know this: I was rude to a library clerk this week (no cursing but a really huffy attitude). God convicted me on the spot and I apologized immediately and straightened up. I say this just to show that no one is perfect, but we are still responsible for how we act towards one another.
37. Brent said the following at 2:25 PM on Mar 11:
37
In the old days, if some one mistreated a woman when you were around, such as this man did, you would take your glove, slap his face, then go out and duel him.
Might make you think twice next time you want to yell at a woman if we still did that.
:-)
38. Caleb S. said the following at 2:50 PM on Mar 11:
38
Leah #32, I agree but based on his behavior I assume he is a non-believer so there is no grounds to call him out on. So praying the Lord would bless him and change his heart is the best thing one can do. Your, "rebuke" will only provoke him more, but if the man happened to be a believer discipline would be in order.
39. Jeni said the following at 4:35 PM on Mar 11:
39
Personally, I think Mr. Self-Important Business Man is just an example of how rude our society in general is. Whether or not people are saved; manners, common decency and being kind to your fellow man is no longer a way of life in our culture. Extending grace to people is important. We don't know what's been going on in their lives. However, I do think a call to return to using manners and being conscientious is also in order.
40. Amanda said the following at 5:25 PM on Mar 11:
40
Comment #37: Bravo! By the way, there are some men out there (my husband being one of them) who will stand up to any man seen mistreating a woman. And for all those who say that we don't know this man's circumstances, no we do not, but we can still make the judgement that he was being rude, which is unacceptable.
41. Rachael said the following at 5:44 PM on Mar 11:
41
BDB's (16) comment about the military rule of thumb is interesting. There's a lot of truth to that rule, though I'm guessing personality and sin tendencies play into it as well.
It was very interesting how I saw how wait time actually seem to work last year. Someone was angry with me, but I couldn't continue to waste others' time in dealing with him, and we weren't getting anywhere, so we stopped discussing the matter. It was neat to see that in the time that lapsed after our exchange and by the end of the class he was calmer! Yay!In fact, it's possible I may encounter passionately frustrated people on Thursday. Would rather not, but if so it could be good training :).
And on a final note, thanks BDB for the suggestion about eye contact. I don't deal with incredibly overtly angry people very often, though sometimes I can detect or possibly deal with bad attitudes. Perhaps being intentionally more friendly might also help people in these situations. I think my mom (who used to teach) once said that friendliness can cover a lot [of mistakes] or something like that...I don't know. There is that verse that says "love covers over a multitude of sins." (1 Peter 4:8). Does that mean sin should be overlooked? Not always. But perhaps it would help in the forgiveness department...and perhaps a little respect could help the people keep their cool...
Interesting. Interesting to observe what makes people tick and what sets them off...
42. BDB said the following at 6:04 PM on Mar 11:
42
Shannon (#31) wrote:
>>Does anyone here really believe this guy's employers at Verizon would care what he did?<<
Yep. No employer can afford a workplace shooting, so they DEFINITELY would follow up on a report of an employee demonstrating unprovoked anger in public. And once they receive an official complaint via a corporate ethics line, they become legally liable for any of this employee's further actions against co-workers or customers because they were informed and did nothing...
I can assure you, airport security would take something like this VERY seriously. At a minimum, if a passenger complained about this outburst, the guy could easily find himself spending two hours in a holding cell explaining to the TSA why he wouldn't comply with a flight attendant's instructions immediately. Noncompliance with taking your shoes off results in additional screenings now - what this guy did could easily get him kicked off his next flight.
And given the behavioral pattern, I wouldn't be surprised if he cussed out security who inquired of him what happened, and that would land him in trouble by itself...
43. James said the following at 7:12 PM on Mar 11:
43
Lisa, I'm an avionics systems engineer, and I can tell you that NO device interferes with the aircraft's radio and navigational systems, or does so enough to override the extensive shielding and protection such devices are MANDATED to have (the applicable requirements ALL avionics adhere to is one of the current revisions of a document called DO-160).
Now, there are SOME risks, and that is why the rule exists. The main risk is SOME devices can interfere with an aircraft's tail and wing lighting systems, which are important closer to and while on the ground than at cruising altitude. And.....that's about it. That is why the rule is enforced, but not strictly. Especially with what we're developing these days. The rule is still important, but it is not a critical rule.
So, the man closing his computer probably WAS acceptable (I usually just close the cover on my ipod and take out my earbuds after pausing the music), but he still was very rude in his outburst. His burst of anger was more a danger than him not shutting off his computer.
Still, it's helpful to know that you're NOT going to make a plane crash and fall to the ground because you didn't set your cellphone to "off" (I do anyways just to conserve power, though). Trust me when I say that airplane nav and flight control systems are VERY robust and redundancy is built in and required by FAA Technical Standard Orders which are supported by the industry standards we all adhere to depending on the application (different docs for different devices). How do I know for certain? I'm a SYSTEMS engineer. Requirements writing and full system testing is what my job description consists of. And, my degree is in electrical engineering. Welcome to my neck of the woods.
44. Kelly said the following at 8:32 PM on Mar 11:
44
Just one comment on this part:
"bout 10 seconds elapsed, and Mr. Self-Important showed no signs of turning off the laptop. "
I've been in similar situations, you have a train of thought, you want to get it written down before you lose it, and it will take maybe 30-60 seconds. So you're typing as frantically as you can and hoping that they do have 60 seconds 'grace' built into the 'please turn off electronic devices' warning.
There is nothing to excuse his overreaction, though. It makes me so sad because this is exactly WHY people are afraid to speak up.
I was once on a bus where some teenagers started smoking. One passenger asked them (politely) that smoking wasn't allowed on the bus, and the teenager stood up and started hurling abuse at the passenger. Swearing and threatening; it was quite terrifying. After that, everyone moved away and left the group of teenagers by themselves at the back of the bus.
45. Claire said the following at 8:45 PM on Mar 11:
45
Khalil, (#33) I never said permission, but meant that people saying "he might have been having a bad day" appeared to make it 'less bad' to have yelled at the flight attendant. I don't think people were giving him permission at all. Just to clarify. :)
Brent, (#37) hahahaha, dueling and white glove slaps. That would be an interesting confrontation.
Which reminds me...anyone here ever seen Count of Monte Cristo? Duels in that movie are no cake walk, and certainly don't end up making me feel like it was necessarily a more chivalrous time.
46. Naomi said the following at 12:38 AM on Mar 12:
46
I'm a waitress. I can't even tell you how wonderful it is when a brave customer defends me to a rude person (I'm not talking typical, everyday rudeness that every person should learn to deal with; I mean the sort of thing that is scary for a small, twenty-something woman). It rarely happens, though what you did -- approach her afterwards -- is also very encouraging and can make me feel like a human being again. I've had my job for nine years, dealt with countless situations of the sort, and I can count on one hand the number of times someone has come to my aid. It means so very, very much.
47. Bridget said the following at 7:02 AM on Mar 12:
47
The best way to fight extraordinary rudeness is with extraordinary courtesy. Since this seems to be morphing toward a discussion of chivalry, a good example would be for gentlemen to start taking the time to hold doors for ladies-- and for we ladies to start graciously accepting chivalry whenever it's offered.
The incident above probably couldn't be much helped, but I'm afraid growling about it isn't helping much either. There was a quote by St. Francis-- "Sanctify yourself and you will sanctify society". "Civilise" would apply as well.
48. Dan Hudlow said the following at 9:47 AM on Mar 12:
48
To the people who responded to my comment, I admit I'm no expert (though I'm not completely without knowledge either--I'm an engineering student), but I've seen a few studies. There may be some validity to some of the arguments, but on the whole, I'm still skeptical.
Think about this: if they were all that dangerous, why do they even allow them on the plane? With all the concern about malicious activity, it would be *easy* for someone with bad intentions to have a transmitter in a cell phone intentionally do all kinds of wacky things. Yet, have any problems arisen from malicious transmissions?
And I'm willing to bet hundreds of people fail to turn their phones off every day. You simply cannot control the actions of thousands of people. When was the last time you heard about a plane being brought down by a phone? Because if it was going to happen, it very likely would have.
Reality may be harsh to the idealist, but it's often kind to the pessimist.
In any case, I think others have sufficiently argued my main point. A sleeping laptop is of no more concern than a powered-off laptop. And I'm in no hurry to have the rules changed. The last thing I want to deal with on a packed flight is someone chattering on their phone right next to me.
49. Tom Neven said the following at 10:20 AM on Mar 12:
49
Bridget (#47) said,
Well said. I recently read a humorous incident in which a man held a door open for a woman. She angrily asked, "Are you doing that just because I'm a woman?" He replied, "No, because I'm a gentleman."
50. BDB said the following at 12:07 PM on Mar 12:
50
James (#43) wrote:
>>And.....that's about it. That is why the rule is enforced, but not strictly.<<
Well, there's another reason. If there's an incident on landing requiring evacuation of the plane, you don't want laptops, wires, earbuds, etc. tripping people up as they try to get out. People using those items are going to be too distracted to listen to any kind of safety instructions. I've often wondered why they don't make me put my book away on landing, but at least I can always hear while reading.
Of course, I like the legroom in the exit row, so I'm always very attentive to the flight attendants.
Rachael (#41) wrote:
>>Perhaps being intentionally more friendly might also help people in these situations. <<
Well, yes. I had one of those yelling episodes where I came around the corner and was faced with a guy twice my size. I was calm and said I would listen and take care of his concern but this was not the right way to handle it. Within about 30 seconds he had calmed down, was apologizing, said he was on Paxil, etc.
Later I thought - this must be how female cops feel. I also learned that the female reps on the counter had their finger on the silent alarm button, but stopped when I came around the corner. It might have been better to just go ahead and push it - it wasn't a false alarm. But even in that situation, it takes 2-5 minutes for someone to arrive. And if it was a petite female cop that arrived first, this guy would still have been bigger than both of us combined. Better to verbally de-escalate the situation.
Of course, due to some interesting experiences in ROTC, if I do say something, I'm just as likely to blurt out, "Hey - at ease that!"
Which tends to just confuse people...
Achieving voluntary compliance sometimes involves having superior information. I have two examples.
Once, when I was a kid, I was doing yard work. I saw some teenagers throw an empty can down on our propety a ways away. I yelled out, "You better pick that up." I was 8 and hiding under a tree. They looked around...picked up the can and sauntered away...
On another flight on Southwest Airlines, the pilot stopped the plane after landing and announced that seven people had taken their seatbelts off and we were going to sit there until they put them back on.
>click< >click< >click<
(Pause)
>click< >click<
(Longer Pause)
>click<
(Longer Pause)
>click<
And the pilot came back on and said thank you, we'll now taxi to the gate.
I don't know how they knew, but it was impressive!
51. Lisa said the following at 12:16 PM on Mar 12:
51
"Welcome to my neck of the woods"
I don't appreciate being patronized. I'm glad you have a degree in EE. My father does too, he was an FAA supervisor with flight inspector priviledges. He was part of a team of engineers who designed several of the black boxes one hears about whenever an airplane crashes, and also the device that goes off in the cockpit when two airplanes get too close to each other. Upon his retirement, he had more letters of commendation than any other of the other supervising engineers with his level of expertise and experience. There were contractors who would postpone their projects for months just so that they could get my father to be their engineer.
It's true, I don't know all the facts behind the FAA regulations. It doesn't matter to me. My father taught me to respect the flight attendant and to obey her (or him) always. It is one of my biggest pet peeves when people think they don't have to follow FAA regulations, or they think they have a right to abuse a flight attendant. A flight attendant is charged with the safety of the passengers in flight, and should be obeyed, the same way you would obey a police officer, as far as I'm concerned. I'm going to close for now, before I say something I really regret.
52. Leah T. said the following at 1:24 PM on Mar 12:
52
I think this man's behavior towards someone who "didn't matter" essentially (In the way that bosses, and friends, and fellow church members, and those one would wish to impress would matter) is actually pretty telling of his overall character. I know we're looking at one singular incident and therefore can't know everything about him, etc., but still...as someone who is daily cast as one of those people who doesn't matter (ie: a face in a uniform behind the counter at a coffee shop), let me reassure you that rude customers tend to remain rude customers, day in and day out. (The trick, by the way, of getting them to stop is by learning their name and a little about them. Once they realize that you "know" them, you become less faceless, less disposable, and far more difficult to be rude to).
As far as throwing stones goes....
I think it's important to not take that particular verse out of it's context. There's so much more going on here than the simple concept of "don't judge." I think it's really more of a statement of hypocrisy. Furthermore, If you look at the Word, Christ is actually very blunt in acknowledging sin in those around him (a quick example that comes to mind is the woman at the well). I think it's the difference between having a holier-than-thou attitude, and calling a spade a spade.
53. James said the following at 8:10 PM on Mar 12:
53
Lisa, I didn't mean arrogance with my comment, but more just saying that this is stuff I work with all the time.
BDB did bring up another point I did fail to consider: tripping hazards. that's a very good and valid safety point. It's just that THAT is not the reason given when they say to turn off the devices. They say, "they could interfere with the plane's navigational equipment." That, for the most part, is cock and bull for those of us who design such things. I wish they'd tell you the REAL reason, "They can interfere with our wing and tail lighting, and we do not want stray devices out to be tripped over in the unlikely even that the plane needs to be evacuated."
BUt you are absolutely right, the flight attendants need to be obeyed. My point was that the reason given is bull (not that the flight attendants would know or should be expected to know that, but whoever wrote that script I hear no matter what carrier I fly on SHOULD know better). The least they could do is tell the passengers the truth. To say what they DO say often scares people who are afraid of flying ANYWAY even more. And then some of us who know or can reason these things out have to calm them down. I'd think the reasons being that of eliminating distractions and tripping hazards for the initial part of the flight should an emergency occur is valid reason enough. THere's no reason they should blow up a possibility of a certain cell phone screwing with the tail and wing lighting into, "May interfere with the plane's navigational systems."
54. BDB said the following at 12:02 AM on Mar 14:
54
James (#53) wrote:
>>That, for the most part, is cock and bull for those of us who design such things.<<
Well, yes. And to those of us with some pilot training, too. My ground-school instructor was telling our CLASS how he used to bring his NAVCOM on commercial flights and listen in to the pilots in the cockpit. If he'd ever keyed his mic, it WOULD interfere with their communication. But he was of course smart enough to not do so. He would probably argue "safety through skill," but still, it's illegal.
Today, my bigger concern would be that someone with a laptop COULD set it up with something that would interfere with something on purpose, such as jamming the radio on takeoff when there's a need for contact with air-traffic control. If everyone is supposed to have everything electronic stowed, then it reduces the chances of anyone pulling a stunt like that.
In theory FCC regulations prevent interference with those radio frequencies. In practice, when I worked for the cable company, we were constantly doing maintenance to prevent signal leakage that would interfere with aircraft. And lest I think aircraft couldn't tell, we tested for leakage by hiring a plane to fly over the city with a sensor. So, while properly-working laptops, etc. likely pose no danger, a MODIFIED system or transmitter could create problems. Heck, a cable system has signal leakage problems caused by people doing home-improvement projects and accidentally cutting the cable...