Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You have completely miss understood the complaint.

The complaint is about the FAA hold passenger items after the emergnecy is over while they "investigate"

The process should be

Evac -> Fire Dept clears the plane > Airline gets passengers there stuff

it should not be

Evac > Fire Dept > NTSB Looks at things > FAA Looks at things > Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things

because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff, then if they knew once evacuated they would get their belongings before leaving the airport, not at some undetermined time later

FAA Policy increases the danger for everyone.




>because the FAA as the latter policy, people will be more prone to try to take their stuff

Approximately nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications, come ON.

The reason people do stupid things is they are in shock and they revert to ingrained habits and behavior because it's really hard to do any higher level thinking at that moment.


> nobody in an actual emergency has any idea of the details of FAA policies or is running through their logical implications

It certainly occurs to me now. I'm not going to pull an overhead item. But I may be more inclined to grab my laptop if it's already in the seat in front of me.

More productively: if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency during the in-flight safety message, maybe you'll influence behavior.


>if you can honestly say that passengers will get their onboard items within 7 days of an emergency

You can't honestly say that...that's why it's an emergency.

Everybody knows that, so you can't change behavior.


In other words:

It's understandable that when confronted with an irresponsible behaviour of one particular person we tend to blame that person for being irresponsible.

But the fact is that there will be a given number of irresponsible people around.

It's also irresponsible to set up rules in such a way to make it more likely that some irresponsible people will do irresponsible things. Especially when there may be other rules that could reduce the chances.


That's the pure safety analysis.

There's also "why are you not giving people their bags promptly, you assholes".

Also important medication can get left behind, as someone else mentioned. It's worth some risk to delay for some seconds in that case, where math can tell you the exact amounts.


It's one thing to do the math to estimate how many idiots there are.

It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math.

To describe throwing a ball, you may use calculus.

But if you then reason that people who throw things must know calculus, that's going to lead to incorrect inferences and decisions.

(as you may know it's not allowed to say "correlation != causation" on HN so I'm not saying that)


> It's another thing to claim that the idiots are doing the math.

Did someone say that?

If someone keeps a bag because they don't trust the airline, that's an emotional decision, not a math one.


Ok. I'm maybe not following your point.

Do you think the FAA's policy is a problem?


I do. For three reasons:

1. If people are worried nobody will get their bags for a long time, they'll be less likely to follow safety protocols and leave them behind.

2. It's bad to take people's things away for a long time.

3. Even if you assume people will obey, it can cause more harm than good in non-dire situations.

None of those reasons require the passengers to be notably logical.

And I have no idea what correlation you're talking about.


People worry in an emergency because they don't know what's going to happen.

People do not worry more or less because of some particular 1 in a billion billion event that happened yesterday. Well, maybe yesterday, but wait a day!

On the other hand, revising rules and regulations would have real costs for you the taxpayer.


If people regularly lose access to their belongings when there's an incident, that's not a 1 in a billion billion and a good number of people will learn about it and have it affect their behavior. If that's what the regulation says, it's going to keep happening. The premise of this conversation is that this is the regular process, right?

> On the other hand, revising rules and regulations would have real costs for you the taxpayer.

I am happy to pay the cost of revising a few paragraphs so that the regulation stops screwing people over! Don't steal people's most important bags! If that needs a rules change, it won't be a complicated one. Once the plane is safe to be on, get everyone's carry-ons within a few hours.


>If people regularly lose access to their belongings when there's an incident, that's not a 1 in a billion billion

It was an estimate for an individual.

>The premise of this conversation is that this is the regular process, right?

The premise seems to be that if somewhere some policy changes, people will not feel insecure in a (purported) emergency and grab their bags.

But they will, because they don't have a time machine to see it will be ok, and they don't trust the authorities, by assumption.


> Someone 3 years later Passengers get their things

It's been a couple of hours since the incident. I think calling three years is premature.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: