Pair thrown off plane for graphic shirt

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:31 am

heh

Posted on Sun, Aug. 01, 2004

MIAMI
Pair thrown off plane for graphic shirt
A flight from Miami to New York was delayed and two passengers were escorted off the plane when one refused to remove a T-shirt a crew member found obscene.
BY KARL ROSS
kross@herald.com
Two travelers were removed Saturday from a New York-bound flight at Miami International Airport because a crew member considered a T-shirt one of them was wearing obscene.
The couple, making a connecting flight from Costa Rica, claimed American Airlines violated their constitutional right to free speech.
They said nobody on the earlier flight objected to the T-shirt that Oscar Arela was wearing.
''It's a picture of a man and woman, and the woman's breast is showing,'' said Arela's girlfriend, Tala Tow, speaking to The Herald on her cellphone as she was being escorted off the plane. ``The flight attendant basically walked up to us and yelled, `You have to take off that shirt right now.'
''This is unbelievable. Our rights are being violated,'' she said.
The company, through a spokesman, said crew members acted properly and had broad authority to enforce standards of common decency.
''The description I heard was a picture of a graphic of a naked man and woman performing a sexual act,'' airline spokesman Tim Wagner, said from Fort Worth, Texas. 'We as an airline are in the service business, and we have the same latitude as a restaurant that says `proper attire' is required.''
Tow said four Miami-Dade police and three federal security agents escorted her and Arela off American Airlines Flight 952.
A police supervisor at MIA confirmed police responded to the incident.
Wagner said the couple had not committed a crime, but could legally be barred from the flight.
He said Arela was given the opportunity to turn the shirt inside-out or change it.
''At that point, we had to enlist the help of law enforcement,'' he said.
Wagner said the flight was scheduled to depart at 5:56 p.m. but did not get off the ground until 7:32 p.m. because of the incident.
Tow said she felt ''humiliated'' because other passengers were yelling at them to leave before authorities could remove them.
''We have not committed a crime. We're expressing our right to free speech, and people are like yelling at us now,'' she said.
Tow said she and Arela paid $700 each for the round-trip tickets to Costa Rica, where they were vacationing.
She said the image on her boyfriend's shirt was reproduced from a Venezuelan record label.

STRESSTEST · Post by **STRESSTEST** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:35 am

Guess I'd have to see the shirt...

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:20 pm

From what it sounds like, it seems like indecent exposure, without the exposure being of one's self. "Freedom of speech" doesn't mean I can yell "fire" in the middle of a crowded concert hall. I don't know though, I'm not sure where the line should be drawn.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:51 pm

The airline has the right to insist on "proper attire". They run the risk of annoying their paying customers one way or the other. They just have to decide which group they want to cater to. It is their buisness to run.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:03 pm

Yeah, just like the local roller rink has a right to kick you out if you're wearing offensive clothing. Airplanes aren't public property.

Viralphrame · Post by **Viralphrame** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:07 pm

"We reserve the right not to..."

It's their business, their aircraft, their rules. Reiterating what DCrazy said, airlines aren't like parks or sidewalks.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 4:22 pm

They MIGHT have a chance of contesting it if the 'rules' weren't posted saying "We reserve the right to...blah blah blah".

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:07 pm

Okay, do I have to enumerate what I allow and disallow the next time someone comes to visit me? Nope, if I want to kick you out, I can. It's just not in the airline's best interests to kick too many people out.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:54 pm

DCrazy wrote:Okay, do I have to enumerate what I allow and disallow the next time someone comes to visit me? Nope, if I want to kick you out, I can. It's just not in the airline's best interests to kick too many people out.

Of course not, thats private property. A commercial airline is not however on private property.

My point is, they can easily file a complaint and make a HUGE stink over this making the airline look bad because of one ★■◆● employee. He could have easily taken them aside and dealt with it quietly without much of a fuss. Unless things have changed, there is no sign saying they can't wear such attire (other than a no shirt, no shoes, no service banner on the doors, which is just about everywhere these days.) They obviously got past security and other employees so its quite clear that its not a company policy.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:57 pm

MD-2389 wrote:A commercial airline is not however on private property.

Wait, what?! Are you saying that the airline doesn't own the plane? Anyone can start an airline.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:31 pm

I don't see people being thrown out of malls for wearing offensive shirts.. and malls are private property.

Pebkac · Post by **Pebkac** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 12:41 am

Well, that just means the mall's owners don't care/don't know about it. Maybe the mall has different rules. I went to a private beach one time that allowed nudity. Does that mean I should be able to strip naked on an airplane? Does this mean that I have a case when they throw my tanned ass off the plane?

How is your post relevant in any way to the topic at hand?

He could have easily taken them aside and dealt with it quietly without much of a fuss.

"He said Arela was given the opportunity to turn the shirt inside-out or change it."

That was their opportunity to quietly deal with it.

''We have not committed a crime. We're expressing our right to free speech, and people are like yelling at us now,'' she said.

Someone should have asked this Mensa candidate what statement the shirt was trying to make.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 1:55 am

Ferno wrote:I don't see people being thrown out of malls for wearing offensive shirts

I've heard of a few.

When you buy an airline ticket, it comes with quite a bit of paperwork. I think somewhere in there is a disclaimer along the lines people here have asked for. Next time you get ready to fly, read through everything you get and see if there's something like that...

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:50 am

Ferno wrote:I don't see people being thrown out of malls for wearing offensive shirts.. and malls are private property.

Ive also heard of a few. I think I read one time that some guy got charged with criminal tresspas because the mall owner didnt like his politically slanted t-shirt and he didnt leave immediately when asked. I cant remember exactly which way the shirt leaned...but I think it might have been to the right, believe it or not. Maybe a pro-war t-shirt.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:26 am

Hell, I've *watched* people get thrown out of malls for their clothing. T-Shirts of the general "say the word "f*ck and mention sex as many times as possible" variety are pretty much universally discouraged, but security will only act if it's really graphic/vulgar.

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:38 am

I say the guy is an idiot. I would have turned my shirt inside out or pulled a sweater over it, and get on with my flight already!

If that guy got so cocky about his right to free speech, he got what he diserved. Sometimes people need to use some common sense instead of trying to wield all their rights to the maximum extent. Free speech is a right, not a mandatory obligation.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 10:32 am

or they could have not cared about what shirt he wore and got on with their lives.

either way it sucks. maybe there should be a stated dress code now.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 10:51 am

Or, Ferno, the guy could have taken a stab at being decent and not worn the shirt in a public place for all to see. Common sense tramples some people's need for reaction. It's pathetic how far people will go to stand out. Insecure and selfish.

B-

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 10:58 am

I'd have to go with Tricord on this one. If it was me I woulda did whatever to get on with the flight.

@ MD The airport may be public land but the plane the guy was standing in was owned by a private business and they can refuse the right to service to anyone for any reason!
I'll give you that not approving of a t shirt is a pretty weak reason but still it falls under the "any" domain.

Just my 1/3 cent. -Hat

hybrid of shadowfox&b · Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:29 am

hmmm i wonder how this could ever have been called a "Violation of free speeche rights" they didnt get kicked off because of what he said, its because of what he was wearing, it makes no sense to me how everyone keeps calling things and incidents like this violations of free speechif i walked into a store used a gun to kill the clerk and grabbed the money and left would it make sense to say in my defense i was just using my right to freedom of speech? sigh .........

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:33 am

The way I look at it: There are some parties (mainly young children) that simply don't need to see that sort of stuff. If the stewardess hadn't pissed the guy wearing the shirt off, surely a number of the passengers (esp. ones with young children) would have been pissed off. So, by making the big hubub about it, they probably ended up loosing more customers than they would have lost if they hadn't done anything about it. But, no matter how they handled it at that point, they where probably going to lose customers. The answer: have security screen for inappropriate clothing.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:40 am

hybrid of shadowfox&b wrote:hmmm i wonder how this could ever have been called a "Violation of free speeche rights" they didnt get kicked off because of what he said, its because of what he was wearing, it makes no sense to me how everyone keeps calling things and incidents like this violations of free speechif i walked into a store used a gun to kill the clerk and grabbed the money and left would it make sense to say in my defense i was just using my right to freedom of speech? sigh .........

Freedom of speech is essentially freedom of expression- shooting someone is an expression of ones self, I suppose- but freedom of speech isn't a universal thing. Mostly, what that amendment is trying to prevent the government from telling people how they have to think. You can think whatever you please, and are free to express that in whatever appropriate and peaceful means you would like. But, that's a control on the government, not on the individuals of the U.S., and someone has to define what "appropriate" and "peaceful" exactly means.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:28 pm

Is there even a picture of the shirt available?

Darktalyn1 · Post by **Darktalyn1** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 10:08 pm

The guy's an idiot, he should have just changed shirts ... like it really makes a difference.

What kind of statement was he trying to make, "I like tits"?

kurupt · Post by **kurupt** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:27 pm

people all over this country are like this guy. go grocery shopping in the hood once, you'll see what i mean.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:38 pm

like i said FP; it's crap either way. what some may think is commin sense others think of it as being draconian.

you just can't win in these situations. someone is always gonna be pissed off.