Man Removed off JQ Flight After Vaping, Exposing Himself, Taking the Piss

[Blacksheep]

I'd prefer they not be allowed onboard in cabin or the hold, nasty cough.

So if a smoker which has cigarettes isn't smoking aren't allowed to have them onboard...? Bit draconian. Most abide, just need one to upset the apple cart.

 

[AIRwin]

Most abide, just need one to upset the apple cart.

@Blacksheep

 

[TheRealTMA]

I'd prefer they not be allowed onboard in cabin or the hold, nasty cough.

YMMV. Not your call. If not used on board, any legal and pseudo legal products can be carried on the aircraft on your person.

IMHO nail varnish etc should be confiscated at the gate. Had a stupid person sitting next to me once using nail polish until I complained.

 

[samh004]

@Lynda2475 Have to agree with @TheRealTMA, just because person A doesn’t like something doesn’t mean person B should miss out. It’s a slippery slope.

I’d be the person eating a snickers and saying you should have brought your epi-pen – taking it a bit far there, but the principal is the same, why should I miss out on something because of your issues. Is there a trade where I get to remove enjoyment from something you like?

 

[p--and--t]

YMMV. Not your call. If not used on board, any legal and pseudo legal products can be carried on the aircraft on your person.

IMHO nail varnish etc should be confiscated at the gate. Had a stupid person sitting next to me once using nail polish until I complained.

@Lynda2475 Have to agree with @TheRealTMA, just because person A doesn’t like something doesn’t mean person B should miss out. It’s a slippery slope.

I’d be the person eating a snickers and saying you should have brought your epi-pen – taking it a bit far there, but the principal is the same, why should I miss out on something because of your issues. Is there a trade where I get to remove enjoyment from something you like?

Where does it stop if we are forbid anything that offends anyone?

Some people can’t stand female perfumes or mens aftershaves either from personal preference or alleged allergies.

Passengers attempting to ban SQ from ever serving anything with nuts in the preparation and even suggestions passengers should not be allowed to bring nuts on board.

As long as its legal and does not effect the safety or operation of the plane and meets general community standards then a certain degree of tolerance and self preparation to be in a “public” space is required.

 

[Lynda2475]

@Lynda2475 Have to agree with @TheRealTMA, just because person A doesn’t like something doesn’t mean person B should miss out. It’s a slippery slope.

Smoking and vaping are proven to have serious health consequences. When an inconsiderate person lights up in an aircraft it forces others to endure passive smoke which can cause cancer, trigger asthma etc. On the ground I can move away, on a metal tube there is no where to go.

If a person want to smoke or vape whilst travelling they can simply buy their cigarettes/vape once at their destination. Alternatively, the battery needs to be be removed and taken on board whilst the device itself goes in the hold so no risk of lighting up on board.

Testing of vapes shows all sorts of nasty chemicals not on the label, second hand smoke causing cancer has been known about for decades which is why it was banned.

IMO if you smoke/vape on board should be a lifetime ban.

Your are free to disagree of course, but smokers are less than 12% and declining, i think its awful that young people are taking up vaping there is nothing cool or necessary about it; and will be creating health problems down the track which costs us all.

I’d be the person eating a snickers and saying you should have brought your epi-pen – taking it a bit far there, but the principal is the same, why should I miss out on something because of your issues.

This is different, i do not think people should be banned form eating nuts of bringing them on board or to school because you have an allergy. The onus is on you to not consume them and carrying an epi pen is wise if you have an anaphylactic reaction.

I have drug and food allergies, but these are easily managed; someone else consuming those items doesn't effect me, cigarettes/vapes OTOH do affect others.

As long as its legal and does not effect the safety or operation of the plane and meets general community standards then a certain degree of tolerance and self preparation to be in a “public” space is required.

But smoking and vaping on board is not legal and does affect the comfort of other passengers and can be a fire/safety hazard as coughs try to disable the smoke alarms in the toilets to get away with it.

 

[Quickstatus]

they must have been in an unfit state upon boarding.

Not necessarily
They can hit the bar airside and start, but the effects dont take effect until soon after boarding depending on the timing.

 

[p--and--t]

Smoking and vaping are proven to have serious health consequences. When an inconsiderate person lights up in an aircraft it forces others to endure passive smoke which can cause cancer, trigger asthma etc. On the ground I can move away, on a metal tube there is no where to go.

If a person want to smoke or vape whilst travelling they can simply buy their cigarettes/vape once at their destination. Alternatively, the battery needs to be be removed and taken on board whilst the device itself goes in the hold so no risk of lighting up on board.

Testing of vapes shows all sorts of nasty chemicals not on the label, second hand smoke causing cancer has been known about for decades which is why it was banned.

IMO if you smoke/vape on board should be a lifetime ban.

Your are free to disagree of course, but smokers are less than 12% and declining, i think its awful that young people are taking up vaping there is nothing cool or necessary about it; and will be creating health problems down the track which costs us all.



This is different, i do not think people should be banned form eating nuts of bringing them on board or to school because you have an allergy. The onus is on you to not consume them and carrying an epi pen is wise if you have an anaphylactic reaction.

I have drug and food allergies, but these are easily managed; someone else consuming those items doesn't effect me, cigarettes/vapes OTOH do affect others.



But smoking and vaping on board is not legal and does affect the comfort of other passengers and can be a fire/safety hazard as coughs try to disable the smoke alarms in the toilets to get away with it.

Me thinks you doth protest too much and not read what was actually posted.

Nowhere did I say I approved of using the devices onboard.

I did not condone any illegal behaviour.

Perhaps reread before you respond again.

 

[Ade]

they must have been in an unfit state upon boarding.

A very interesting point - something I have not *actively* thought about so far. If there is no free flowing booze, then the pax *potentially* could have been intoxicated pre-boarding. I have seen some pax show up drunk at check-in at CBR and I get the feeling that staff at the airport (airline/security/AFP) let those pax be as long as they are not causing trouble. I mean, it is visible that someone is intoxicated, but doesn't cause any troubles.

Checks in, follows security orders, comes into the shops buy a bag of chips or a soft drink and you can see that they fumble to pay the right $ ... can't hold their phone long enough for the POS machine to take the right payment etc ... but they are OK ... they sit near the gate, most likely doze off and board when asked to and again sleep on the plane ... these folks are not a major concern ... but you can see that they are visibly intox on boarding.

 

[Seat0B]

A very interesting point - something I have not *actively* thought about so far. If there is no free flowing booze, then the pax *potentially* could have been intoxicated pre-boarding. I have seen some pax show up drunk at check-in at CBR and I get the feeling that staff at the airport (airline/security/AFP) let those pax be as long as they are not causing trouble. I mean, it is visible that someone is intoxicated, but doesn't cause any troubles.

Checks in, follows security orders, comes into the shops buy a bag of chips or a soft drink and you can see that they fumble to pay the right $ ... can't hold their phone long enough for the POS machine to take the right payment etc ... but they are OK ... they sit near the gate, most likely doze off and board when asked to and again sleep on the plane ... these folks are not a major concern ... but you can see that they are visibly intox on boarding.

I would probably have agreed with you on this @Ade until I thought about the implications of someone being that impaired in n emergency evacuation such as the JAL Haneda experience. I now think that there is no place on an aircraft for someone who is intoxicated. I just don’t know where that line should be drawn. Probably .05 is too low a bar, but the state of some people I have seen on domestic and international flights means they would most likely have struggled with an emergency evacuation.

 

[Ade]

I would probably have agreed with you on this @Ade until I thought about the implications of someone being that impaired in n emergency evacuation such as the JAL Haneda experience. I now think that there is no place on an aircraft for someone who is intoxicated. I just don’t know where that line should be drawn. Probably .05 is too low a bar, but the state of some people I have seen on domestic and international flights means they would most likely have struggled with an emergency evacuation.

Absolutely agree @Seat0B

domestic and international flights means they would most likely have struggled with an emergency evacuation.

Oh yeaaaa ... came of MEL-CBR early this week and one pax looks absolutely smashed ... I mean, you could see in their face they have been drinking the whole day ... has a certain aura around them that makes other become wary ... FA was a bit wary too. But it NYE, so perhaps they started drinking early ...

 

[DejaBrew]

Probably .05 is too low a bar, but the state of some people I have seen on domestic and international flights means they would most likely have struggled with an emergency evacuation.

Not for a moment defending those who see plane travel as the opportunity for an all-inclusive booze-up, but one thing I would point out is that many - especially the casual/first-time flyer - don’t recognise the fact that intoxication occurs more rapidly at altitude so pax can occasionally consume what they know to be their “normal” acceptable volume of alcoholic beverages and unexpectedly find themselves to be significantly more inebriated.

 

[DC3]

Not for a moment defending those who see plane travel as the opportunity for an all-inclusive booze-up …

 

[DC3]

He's been charged, let's wait for a guilty verdict before we sentence him.

Isn’t that contrary to AAF practice?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Smoking and vaping are proven to have serious health consequences. When an inconsiderate person lights up in an aircraft it forces others to endure passive smoke which can cause cancer, trigger asthma etc. On the ground I can move away, on a metal tube there is no where to go.

If a person want to smoke or vape whilst travelling they can simply buy their cigarettes/vape once at their destination. Alternatively, the battery needs to be be removed and taken on board whilst the device itself goes in the hold so no risk of lighting up on board.

Testing of vapes shows all sorts of nasty chemicals not on the label, second hand smoke causing cancer has been known about for decades which is why it was banned.

IMO if you smoke/vape on board should be a lifetime ban.

Your are free to disagree of course, but smokers are less than 12% and declining, i think its awful that young people are taking up vaping there is nothing cool or necessary about it; and will be creating health problems down the track which costs us all.



This is different, i do not think people should be banned form eating nuts of bringing them on board or to school because you have an allergy. The onus is on you to not consume them and carrying an epi pen is wise if you have an anaphylactic reaction.

I have drug and food allergies, but these are easily managed; someone else consuming those items doesn't effect me, cigarettes/vapes OTOH do affect others.



But smoking and vaping on board is not legal and does affect the comfort of other passengers and can be a fire/safety hazard as coughs try to disable the smoke alarms in the toilets to get away with it.

You had originally indicated cigarettes and vapes should be carried at all, even if no intention for them to be used. That's different from banning their use on board.

The Australian government does not support your position that vaping is entirely harmful. They have acknowledged they are beneficial to help smokers quit, which is why vapes will continue to be available by prescription.

They are concerned about the importation of vape liquid that is unregulated, or that appeals to minors. Unregulated vape liquid can, like all black market products, potentially be unsafe.

It is not a case of a vaper being able to easily purchase vape liquid and hardware at each and every destination. Vape liquid requires a prescription and needs to be sourced from a reputable supplier, producing the liquid under international standards.

Buying cigarettes would be far worse health-wise

 

[Lynda2475]

You had originally indicated cigarettes and vapes should be carried at all, even if no intention for them to be used. That's different from banning their use on board.

Suggest you reread my posts. #4 I originally suggested by not allowing them as carry-on you remove the risk/ability of someone smoking or vaping illegally on board.

I then did say I would prefer they not be allowed at all, both items completely unnecessary items for a healthy safe travel - they are not genuine medical needs.

You can disagree, but I am entitled to my opinion that both smoking and vaping are disgusting, inconsiderate habits that the world would be better without.

There are many tools availably to quite smoking, but the delay in adequate regulation for vapes now means we have another looming health issue with the effects of vaping. Lungs are designed to breath air, not carcinogenic smoke or vapours. I willing to bed that they prove real harm from even the legit vapes in the next few years.

In my observation, most you see currently vaping in public are in their teens/early twenties they are not trying to quit smoking, they have never smoked but are under the misapprehension that it is cool.

Yes they are now belatedly cracking down on prescriptions, but you need only look at the over use of antibiotics to see how easily people can get a prescription from certain GPs. And how can they disprove that you are a smoker?

It is not a case of a vaper being able to easily purchase vape liquid and hardware at each and every destination. Vape liquid requires a prescription and needs to be sourced from a reputable supplier, producing the liquid under international standards.

Oh well then if vaping is so important then I guess your travel options would be limited if you couldnt carry them with you. Smoking/vaping is not some inalienable right, breathing safely is.

Such a shame the NZ government back-flipped on their aging out smoking legislation, something we need here along with similar for the vapes.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

…

I then did say I would prefer they not be allowed at all, both items completely unnecessary items for a healthy safe travel - they are not genuine medical needs.

You can disagree, but I am entitled to my opinion that both smoking and vaping are disgusting, inconsiderate habits that the world would be better without.

There are many tools availably to quite smoking, but the delay in adequate regulation for vapes now means we have another looming health issue with the effects of vaping. Lungs are designed to breath air, not carcinogenic smoke or vapours. I willing to bed that they prove real harm from even the legit vapes in the next few years.

In my observation, most you see currently vaping in public are in their teens/early twenties they are not trying to quit smoking, they have never smoked but are under the misapprehension that it is cool.

Yes they are now belatedly cracking down on prescriptions, but you need only look at the over use of antibiotics to see how easily people can get a prescription from certain GPs. And how can they disprove that you are a smoker?
Oh well then if vaping is so important then I guess your travel options would be limited if you couldnt carry them with you. Smoking/vaping is not some inalienable right, breathing safely is.

Such a shame the NZ government back-flipped on their aging out smoking legislation, something we need here along with similar for the vapes.

The australian government disagrees, the same government introducing a ban on the importation of vapes. They have weighed up the medical advantages and have determined that vaping has its benefits. They acknowledge some of the issues reported from overseas, caused by corrupted and illegal liquid. But that is resolved by prescriptions, which will only be available through GPs in Australia. With appropriate safeguards, like all medication.

UK private health insurers consider you a ‘non smoker’ for private health insurance if you have ceased smoking tobacco and only vaped for the last two years. That’s with their specialised actuarial back up and analysis.

It’s hard to support the notion that a vaper, trying to give up, is better purchasing cigarettes. That’s like telling an alcoholic to ‘just buy a drink’ if they can’t find a meeting while they’re interstate or overseas! Vaping is supposed to be short term, as a cessation aide. And it does achieve results, according to the Aussie government.

 

[Lynda2475]

It’s hard to support the notion that a vaper, trying to give up, is better purchasing cigarettes.

Read what I wrote, not what you think i meant. I never suggested any such thing. I am anti smoking in every situation. I noted if you cant buy vapes or smokes at your destination you go without, quite simple really.

No one has to vape or smoke, they simply choose to. Going cold Turkey won't kill them but may well save others.

They have weighed up the medical advantages and have determined that vaping has its benefits.

The studies that support vaping are largely funded by the manufacturers, who are all big Tabaco looking for other markets since the cigarette markets is shrinking fast.

Vaping may be seen as the lesser of two evils by some in government, that is different to agreeing an actual benefit. Vaping is not good for you, just currently seen as marginally less harmful than smoking, but we do not yet have the 100 years of evidence we have have for smoking, it could in fact be worse we just wont know for some time.

Remember also the government is addicted to the tax revenue on nicotine products, but 88% of Aussies don't smoke, and are entitled to not have to put up with the poor choices of a dwindling minority when one of their ilk lights up or vapes on board.

As Forest Gump says Stupid is as Stupid does. No sympathy for the stupid when it's. well known neither smoking nor vaping are good for you.

IMO from an insurance pov a non smoker should be one who has never smoked, have an interim category of former smoker if you will, but unfair to rate the risk of one who has never smoked with someone who smoked a pack a day for 40 years then gives up for 2. Laughable.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Smoking and vaping are proven to have serious health consequences. When an inconsiderate person lights up in an aircraft it forces others to endure passive smoke which can cause cancer, trigger asthma etc. On the ground I can move away, on a metal tube there is no where to go.

Completely agree with you on the health aspects of smoking. Hell I lost my grandmother to lung cancer due to that nasty habit. And certainly I wouldn't want anyone smoking near me either (it ticks me off when people are smoking outdoors when I am working at a cafe, for instance). But there are legitimate reasons for smoking. For instance, whilst I wouldn't consider myself a smoker, there may be times where I will light up a cigar and smoke it. For instance, flying Lufthansa First class out of the first class terminal. Would never be caught dead smoking it regularly, but for a once in the lifetime thing, the hell with it. No risk there!

If a person want to smoke or vape whilst travelling they can simply buy their cigarettes/vape once at their destination. Alternatively, the battery needs to be be removed and taken on board whilst the device itself goes in the hold so no risk of lighting up on board.

It depends on the destination. Some places may not sell cigarettes airside or they may not sell the brand you want.

IMO if you smoke/vape on board should be a lifetime ban.

Completely agree. This (like drinking and driving) may have been acceptable 40 years ago but not today. The health risks of the passengers to say nothing of the danger it posses for a safe flight aren't worth the payoff of looking cool at 40,000 feet in the air.

Your are free to disagree of course, but smokers are less than 12% and declining, i think its awful that young people are taking up vaping there is nothing cool or necessary about it; and will be creating health problems down the track which costs us all.

They are being sold a myth that it is a safer more convenient way of smoking. It is not. The science has proven that over and over again, to the point now where an argument could be made that smoking a cigarette could be healthier than vaping (look up popcorn lungs to see what I mean)

But smoking and vaping on board is not legal and does affect the comfort of other passengers and can be a fire/safety hazard as coughs try to disable the smoke alarms in the toilets to get away with it.

Spot on. I will point out that the airport authorities should do a better job of releasing the pressure on smokers. If they had smoking lounges airside, there would be no need for them to light up in the air, since they could get their "relief" before boarding their flight. Also, I think it is rude to mock those who light up in the air. Yes what they are doing is wrong, but they also suffer from a severe addiction. Frankly more needs to be done by the government to allow smokers to kick the habit for good!

 

[DC3]

.. But there are legitimate reasons for smoking ..

Shall we agree to disagree on this?