That’s the most absurd thing I’ve read in a long time. If you treat people like little children, they will act accordingly.
Cellphones transmit a signal even if no one is talking on it. That’s why you have a dead battery when you land in LAX.
Maybe, but you were supposed to have turned it
off when instructed. If you had done this, your battery would not be dead. Off does not mean just with the wireless part turned off. Off means off. For takeoff and landing, children are not even supposed to have their Gameboys on.
Does anyone remember the short period after a September morning when the phone was part of the solution?
And, in a similar situation I doubt anyone would fault you for turning your cell phone back on--as the f/a did. She probably had no idea whether or not her phone would work. She was just trying it as a possibility. That also says a lot about how low they were already flying. Most cell phones can't get a signal much above 5,000 feet without some sort of on-board booster as is being proposed.
But, the issue is not safety. I'm quite sure that the safety of cell phone use will be thoroughly tested before the rule is changed. The issue is the disruption of people talking louder and louder to make themselves heard over the other people shouting on their cell phones. The ambient noise in the cabin from the engines and wind is not going away. I know from my own experience that it is hard enough to hear on a cell phone when just taxiing after landing.
And, the poor people who actually want to sleep and will have to listen to "Girl, no she didn't. No, she didn't. Don't tell me that. Oh no, she didn't." (Repeated ad nauseum for 2-3 hours) Think of the amount of paperwork the f/as will have to complete after mass murder takes place in the air.
Oh god, I just had another horrible thought. How do we handle the ones who lock themselves in the lav for an hour while they carry on the conversation they can't hear out in the cabin?????
That’s the most absurd thing I’ve read in a long time. If you treat people like little children, they will act accordingly.
Well, considering we already have to referee between "adults" who insist on their right to recline their seat as far as it will go even on a full flight and those "adults" who insist it is their right to cross their legs and brace their knee against the seatback in front of them to prevent the occupant from reclining at all, what makes you think we won't have to referee between two "adults" who insist that is their Constitutional right (and theirs alone) to talk as loud as they want/need to.
Have you not been to a movie theater in the past few years and have someone answer a ringing cell phone right in the middle of the movie and carry on a conversation?
