How Much Force Is Too Much When Trying To Restrain A Passenger?

Yesterday I wrote about the situation that unfolded on Thursday’s flight DL129 from Seattle to Beijing. Someone seated in business class (who was the son of an employee) clearly lost it and was on something, and tried to open the emergency exit. While passengers sometimes go crazy, they can typically be detained with reasonable force.

That wasn’t the case here, however. The passenger punched several others (including flight attendants and fellow passengers), tried to throw dessert wine bottles at people, etc.

What’s interesting is that the flight attendants tried to smash two bottles of wine over his head. One apparently broke over his head, though he didn’t seem to be impacted, and responded with “do you know who I am?” (well, now we all do).

I think what’s clear based on this story is that the guy was on something serious, where he couldn’t feel pain. Anyone else would likely be debilitated if a wine bottle was smashed over their head, while that wasn’t the case for this guy.

https://twitter.com/ScorpiScorpi808/status/883506664799739904

In the comments section of yesterday’s post, it’s interesting how several people questioned whether it was appropriate to use as much force against him as they did. For example, Bryan T said the following:

Serious question. If someone tries to do something stupid like that, does it really give you free reign to do whatever you want to the guy?

I know they want to subdue him, but that gives someone Carte Blanche to smash a wine bottle over him?

He obviously can’t open the door due to pressurization, I question the need to try and kill him.

Greg said the following:

The wine bottles by the FA are melodramatic. Flight crew should have known the door wasn’t an issue.

Let him fail then get him when he backs away.

They’re valid questions, though let me say first and foremost that I think the crew and passengers deserve to be commended for their actions, because this was clearly a highly unusual situation.

However, I do think the above points are worth addressing. The passenger didn’t pose an immediate threat to the aircraft itself (which is different than posing a threat to the people on the plane):

  • You can’t open the emergency exit at a high altitude, so no matter how hard he tried, he wouldn’t have been able to open it until the plane descended to a lower altitude
  • Some mentioned he could have entered the cockpit, though nowadays there are reinforced cockpit doors, so there’s no way he could have gotten in the cockpit

What that doesn’t address is how incredibly violent and out of it he was. He was punching people, throwing bottles at people, and clearly wasn’t in a position to be reasoned with. The absolute top priority was to get the zip ties on him and have him sufficiently restrained so that he couldn’t do any more damage.

But where should the line be drawn in terms of what kind of action can be taken against someone like that? Personally I think there isn’t a limit. It’s one thing if someone is just intoxicated, being belligerent, etc. However, it’s completely different when someone is having what can only be described as an out of body, drug induced (or something) reaction. This sounds like something out of a horror movie.

It’s true that he didn’t pose an immediate threat to the aircraft as such. That’s to say that as long as he was restrained prior to the plane getting to a lower altitude, there was no risk that he could have opened an exit or entered the cockpit. However, he absolutely did put other passengers’ lives at risk with his violence.

When someone can’t be reasoned with and is having an out of body experience, I do think it gives the crew and passengers carte blanche to use whatever force necessary to stop him, even if it had been deadly. Fortunately that could be avoided, but I don’t think any of the passengers or crew crossed the line in trying to stop this guy. I’d rather see this guy seriously injured than anyone else on the plane.

What do you guys think?

Conversations (70)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Luis Santiago Guest

@Hasse, remember 9/11? At that time Flight Attendants were taught to "reason" with passengers and try their best not to use force. I wonder if force was used to subdue the terrorist if any of those planes would not have crashed. We are in a time and era that people will fight back. Flight Attendants are first responders. If I am on a flight and I see some "wacko" trying to do any harm to the crew, aircraft (that could endanger my life as well of those around me) and mechanics of the plane, it is on! Remember, there was a Southwest flight a year or so after 9/11 were the passengers and crew use force on a passenger to the point that they 'killed' him and the court found all of them innocent and had use 'reasonable' force on the crazy passenger. Therefore, the precedent has been set. We all have the right to use reasonable force to protect ourselves and you bet I will use anything I have to protect my life.

0
‼ 0
J Guest

Whatever means necessary. When someone is assaulting people, it's not the time to think how some commenters on a travel blog may feel about the situation.

0
‼ 0
Jan Member

Yea its nice to have this calm and civilized discussion in a comfortable and safe environment after the fact. Then there are the other people who are stuck on the plane with a drugged out maniac trying to open the doors and kill everyone (not that he was able to). I can relate to everyone on that plane and I dont think too much force was used - hacking the guy down with the emergency hatchet would have been too much force.

0
‼ 0
Steven Guest

In hindsight if someone wasn't carrying a gun on 9/11 and had they shot rhe terrorists point blank when they started the hijacking, we could have some sort of saved history. So no, I'm ok with the amount of force that was needed and was used.

0
‼ 0
Amber Guest

They did what they had to do! Flight attendants are trained to defend the flight deck any means necessary! Punching a flight attendant is a felony and they all did what they needed to do to subdue him! And yes at that altitude most doors won't open however some can be cracked enough to depressurize the plane which in fact could be a huge risk!!!!!

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published

Keep Exploring OMAAT