To: markomalley
From the article:
>>better safe than sorry<<
That excuse never flies with me. If people really believed that, they would never get into their cars for anything but the most critical travel. After all, better safe than sorry, right?
8 posted on
01/21/2011 8:45:48 AM PST by
RobRoy
(The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
To: RobRoy
Another stupid phrase. Safety is our top priority. Obviously that’s not the case because the company would just shut down and tell people to stay at home. Making money/increasing shareholder value is their top priority.
10 posted on
01/21/2011 8:49:17 AM PST by
for-q-clinton
(If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
To: RobRoy
Coasting a plane to the side of the airway is a bit more problematic than costing a car to the side of the road.
That being said, My GPS is fun to use while sitting in the back.
Note that Filght 93 crashed after passengers began to use their cell phones. Coincidence?
12 posted on
01/21/2011 8:51:56 AM PST by
Paladin2
To: RobRoy
A U.S. ban on airborne use of cell phones has been in place for 20 years because of concerns transmissions would interfere with cellular networks on the ground. While many airlines now offer Wi-Fi access via portable electronic devices from laptops to smartphones, cellular voice and data services on domestic airlines fall under that Federal Communications Commission ban.
It's an FCC ban. The FAA just went along with them because it was the path of least resistance and meet their needs at the time. My question is this, How can my old Sony Walkman cassette player interfere with any electronics during take off and landing? I'd wager it doesn't. They just don't want me staring at them with earbuds in.
15 posted on
01/21/2011 8:53:54 AM PST by
John.Galt2012
(I'll take Liberty and you can keep the "Change"!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson