If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
A Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:23:40 -0700, "Larry R Harrison Jr"
escribió: Unless you can give me a better reason than that, I still say it's kidnapping. And you would still be wrong. -- bicker® |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
*bicker* wrote:
You are mistaken. Government officials are supposed to maintain secure areas secure. Kidnapping describes a felony, committed by a criminal, not a control action taken by an authorized official. Sorry, but detaining anyone against their will without any legal reason is kidnapping. The USA government may wrap itself into its onw flag, but the kidnapped victims are Gantanamo have been detained against their will, without any legal reason, haven't been charged with any crime and have been tortured. Not only that, but they were taken from their place of residence against their will and transported across the world where they are kept in dog cages and treated as dogs. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
nobody wrote:
Sorry, but detaining anyone against their will without any legal reason is kidnapping. Your argument would be treated a lot stronger if you would use the correct terminology. There's a significant difference between kidnapping and unlawful detention. What we are discussing here is what a reasonable limit is. No one would argue that a country has the right to screen passengers upon entry to the country to ascertain their citizenship. They also have the right to implement policy and rules to implement that process which could include keeping the passengers in a sterile area (defined as no contact with non-passengers) until screening is complete. Clearly, making that screening process take months or years is unreasonable. Making that process take an hour or two, while possibly uncomfortable, is not. The question on the table is when does a reasonable process become unlawful detention? |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
In message , at 10:27:43 on
Fri, 31 Dec 2004, "Clark W. Griswold, Jr." remarked: What we are discussing here is what a reasonable limit is. No one would argue that a country has the right to screen passengers upon entry to the country to ascertain their citizenship. They also have the right to implement policy and rules to implement that process which could include keeping the passengers in a sterile area (defined as no contact with non-passengers) until screening is complete. Clearly, making that screening process take months or years is unreasonable. Making that process take an hour or two, while possibly uncomfortable, is not. The question on the table is when does a reasonable process become unlawful detention? There are normally tests of "reasonableness". So, for example, how far is this rural airport from Seattle, and how quickly could a team of people be driven there to complete the formalities? Well, it's 183 miles, and the airport at Seattle is supposedly closed. So I guess 6 hours might be enough. Alternatively, those 6 hours could have been spent bussing a new flight crew from Seattle, as air transport was clearly a bit dodgy that day. -- Roland Perry |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
In message , at 10:27:43 on
Fri, 31 Dec 2004, "Clark W. Griswold, Jr." remarked: What we are discussing here is what a reasonable limit is. No one would argue that a country has the right to screen passengers upon entry to the country to ascertain their citizenship. They also have the right to implement policy and rules to implement that process which could include keeping the passengers in a sterile area (defined as no contact with non-passengers) until screening is complete. Clearly, making that screening process take months or years is unreasonable. Making that process take an hour or two, while possibly uncomfortable, is not. The question on the table is when does a reasonable process become unlawful detention? There are normally tests of "reasonableness". So, for example, how far is this rural airport from Seattle, and how quickly could a team of people be driven there to complete the formalities? Well, it's 183 miles, and the airport at Seattle is supposedly closed. So I guess 6 hours might be enough. Alternatively, those 6 hours could have been spent bussing a new flight crew from Seattle, as air transport was clearly a bit dodgy that day. -- Roland Perry |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Roland Perry wrote:
Alternatively, those 6 hours could have been spent bussing a new flight crew from Seattle, as air transport was clearly a bit dodgy that day. Big question is whether it would have been considered acceptable to bus uncleared passengers to SEATAC where they woudl clear customs/immigration. Would it have required on cop per bus ? or would they have trusted the bus driver to provide the sterility ? Of course, one issie is that if the airport keeps saying"we'll re-open in 5 minutes", then it becomes much harder for pilot to make a decision to abandon hope of going to Seatac. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
In message 1104516730.6c80942955e8dffd40f9d2c41e6220ca@teran ews, at
13:22:01 on Fri, 31 Dec 2004, nobody remarked: Alternatively, those 6 hours could have been spent bussing a new flight crew from Seattle, as air transport was clearly a bit dodgy that day. Big question is whether it would have been considered acceptable to bus uncleared passengers to SEATAC where they woudl clear customs/immigration. Would it have required on cop per bus ? or would they have trusted the bus driver to provide the sterility ? That would require far more transport; easier to take the officials/pilots to the plane. Of course, one issie is that if the airport keeps saying"we'll re-open in 5 minutes", then it becomes much harder for pilot to make a decision to abandon hope of going to Seatac. The main delay seems to have been getting the new crew to the rural airport, rather than sitting around wondering when Seattle airport was going to open. -- Roland Perry |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
In message 1104516730.6c80942955e8dffd40f9d2c41e6220ca@teran ews, at
13:22:01 on Fri, 31 Dec 2004, nobody remarked: Alternatively, those 6 hours could have been spent bussing a new flight crew from Seattle, as air transport was clearly a bit dodgy that day. Big question is whether it would have been considered acceptable to bus uncleared passengers to SEATAC where they woudl clear customs/immigration. Would it have required on cop per bus ? or would they have trusted the bus driver to provide the sterility ? That would require far more transport; easier to take the officials/pilots to the plane. Of course, one issie is that if the airport keeps saying"we'll re-open in 5 minutes", then it becomes much harder for pilot to make a decision to abandon hope of going to Seatac. The main delay seems to have been getting the new crew to the rural airport, rather than sitting around wondering when Seattle airport was going to open. -- Roland Perry |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Roland Perry wrote:
The main delay seems to have been getting the new crew to the rural airport, rather than sitting around wondering when Seattle airport was going to open. That's an airline issue though - not an immigration check delay. Which gets back to my original point. NWA, of all airlines, should have been better prepared with procedures in place to deal with passengers locked up in an aircraft for hours on end. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Roland Perry wrote:
The main delay seems to have been getting the new crew to the rural airport, rather than sitting around wondering when Seattle airport was going to open. That's an airline issue though - not an immigration check delay. Which gets back to my original point. NWA, of all airlines, should have been better prepared with procedures in place to deal with passengers locked up in an aircraft for hours on end. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My terrible Dragoman experience in Africa | Nadine S. | Africa | 5 | April 26th, 2004 06:54 PM |
Trip Report LHR-DXB-SYD-OOL-SYD-WLG-AKL-WAIHEKE-AKL-SYD-DXB-LGW | Howard Long | Air travel | 3 | March 29th, 2004 12:35 AM |
Trip report CPR-LAS/LAS-CPR | Michael Graham | Air travel | 4 | October 27th, 2003 12:09 AM |
Air Madagascar trip report (long) | Vitaly Shmatikov | Africa | 7 | October 7th, 2003 08:05 PM |
Passengers tell of Concorde horror | Chanchao | Air travel | 7 | September 22nd, 2003 04:04 AM |