Should Airlines Ban Unruly Passengers Permanently?

When a flight is delayed, inconvenienced, and worst of all, compromised, due to an unruly passenger, one can't help but wonder if there is a solution that could prevent such incidents. Introducing a permanent ban could be the answer. Imagine a scenario where passengers, upon displaying unruly behavior, are never allowed to board a commercial flight again. This would not only deter such behavior but also ensure a safer and more enjoyable environment for everyone aboard.

A Clear and Simple Fix

The idea is straightforward: if a person displays any form of unruly behavior, be it fighting, injuring, attacking another passenger, gate agent, or crew member, then they should be escorted off the aircraft and banned for life. They would have other options for travel, but at a significant financial and personal cost. This could serve as a powerful deterrent and a test program might be sufficient to gauge the impact.

Current Systems and Challenges

One might argue that existing systems, such as the 'NO FLY' lists curated by various U.S. federal agencies, already exist to handle such cases. However, the current system relies heavily on subjective assessments, which can lead to inconsistencies and potential biases. These federal agencies currently share information among themselves, but airlines do not share passenger information to the extent that could solve the issue at hand.

Objective Definition and Implementation

The term 'unruly' is inherently subjective, making it challenging to establish a blanket policy. Defining a set of objective behaviors is crucial to avoid discrimination and legal repercussions. Any standard that could be enforced uniformly across airlines and jurisdictions is needed to prevent abuse. The lack of a clear, objective definition leaves room for interpretation, leading to potential lawsuits and other forms of conflict.

Alternative Travel Options

While a permanent ban might seem extreme, the traveling public does have alternatives. If an airline bans a passenger, they can choose to travel by train, bus, ship, car, or even a hot air balloon. However, the idea of a 'master list' in the hands of airlines or the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is fraught with risk. Such a list could be misused or abused, leading to an unbalanced system.

As a society, we must consider the broader implications. The growing sense of entitlement and the propensity to sue any authority that challenges our rights are concerning. These factors combined with the subjective nature of 'unruly' behavior make the current approach potentially risky.

Crucial Exceptions

There is no denying that some behaviors, particularly those that threaten the lives of the general public, should be strictly addressed. Individuals who endanger the lives of others should be restrained and possibly have their rights severely restricted. This includes those who refuse vaccination (anti-vaxxers) and pose a direct threat to public safety.

While a permanent ban on unruly passengers might be an extreme measure, the underlying principle of holding individuals accountable for their actions remains valid. Clear, objective definitions and strict enforcement would be necessary to prevent abuse and ensure that the system serves its intended purpose.