Smoking
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Crawley
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smoking
I have just returned from Spain. On my outward flight there was a nutcase passenger. Soon after the meal service had been cleared in he took a packet of cigarettes from his bag and selected an artificial one. He sucked on it and the tip glowed red and it smelt of tobacco. It was spotted by a very vigilant cabin crew within 15 seconds. He explained that it was a joke and was nevertheless instructed not to do it ever again. The stewardess concerned then went to the galley. About a minute later he started the same ruse again. Within 10 seconds he was spotted by the No. 1 stewardess. She instructed him to put it out. He explained again that it was a toy. She told him that that did not matter. Smoking in any form was prohibited. He was very indignant about it all and said again that it was a joke.
When the aircraft arrived in Spain he was instructed not to leave the aircraft until the captain had met with him. He was told in my hearing that the airline intended to ban him from flying with them ever again.
I thought that the cabin crew handled an unnecesary and frankly pathetic situation very well. Anyone who chooses such an absurd prank on an aircraft needs mental treatment.
When the aircraft arrived in Spain he was instructed not to leave the aircraft until the captain had met with him. He was told in my hearing that the airline intended to ban him from flying with them ever again.
I thought that the cabin crew handled an unnecesary and frankly pathetic situation very well. Anyone who chooses such an absurd prank on an aircraft needs mental treatment.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I am a bit confused....you say this was a 'toy' that glowed, presumably therefore it was not alight? If so how can the cabin crew have told him to stop smoking....If it was a 'toy' that wasn't alight, then he wasn't.
If he wasn't smoking, then you may have a problem of false imprisonment....(you said he was instructed not to leave the aircraft until the captain had spoken to him). You can't detain someone (telling him he cannot leave is detaining him) unless by thier lawful arrest....I'm at a loss to see what that is? He may have been a prat...but that isn't a crime.
If he wasn't smoking, then you may have a problem of false imprisonment....(you said he was instructed not to leave the aircraft until the captain had spoken to him). You can't detain someone (telling him he cannot leave is detaining him) unless by thier lawful arrest....I'm at a loss to see what that is? He may have been a prat...but that isn't a crime.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yawn. More over-reaction from the humour-impaired. Personally I just walk round the terminal with an unlit real one. Guaranteed to evoke a "you're not allowed to smoke in here" admonition a minute.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CR2
Ain't the phrase something like "any lawful command by the crew must be complied with yadda yadda yadda"? Is "smoking" an un-lit ciggie a crime? If not, is it a lawful command to ask pax to put out something that is not lit? I mean, in the extreme a command from a crew member to an attractive pax of the opposite sex, or same if so inclined, along the lines of "strip and blow me" would hardly be considered lawful? It should of course be, no doubt about that!
Irritating prat, absolutely. But an outright banning, or the threat of same? A good telling off, or even better, totally ignoring the "joker".
Irritating prat, absolutely. But an outright banning, or the threat of same? A good telling off, or even better, totally ignoring the "joker".
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8000 feet of cabin altitude
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the bloke thought that was funny, how far was he willing to go? Bomb hoax for example? Maybe the crew thought that by sorting him out now they may get a message through to him, preventing something a bit more serious in the future. It could also be that if the other pax, who do smoke, saw him 'smoking' and the crew aren't doing anything about it, they'd all light up as well. Then the crew would have a hell of a time trying to explain why its ok for him and not for them....Just my thoughts.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: ask gavin
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they next time he travels he'll have a pretend bomb with "real" ticking sound, but thats ok because its fake, and no harm done, not like the pax around him would get a little restless or anything!
Good on the crew, last thing we need deal with is prats like that!
EB
EB possible got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Good on the crew, last thing we need deal with is prats like that!
EB
EB possible got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flip Flop Flyer
No not quite...
Air navigation order part V Para 67
' Every person in an aircraft shall obey all lawful commands which the commander of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons and property contained therein......'
Original post, says that Cabin crew told him to put it out. Cabin Crew are not the Commander of the Aircraft. It may be they were acting on the instruction of the commander of the aircraft, however...
Is it a lawful order? No, he was not smoking a cigarette...ergo how can it be put out? It can't. Was he doing something he was not entitled to do? Well no not really, I can find no staute that prohibits imintation cigarettes.
Even if the order was lawful, was it for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft, the passengers or property? No, as it was an imitation cigarette, he was not doing anything to endanger the aircraft, passengers or property.
Yes he's a prat, however being a prat is not an offence...it should be but isn't.
As for what he may or may not do in the future, he might do something else silly, so might most people, the pilot might get knocked over by a bus, but then he might win next years Grand national....You can't assume that someones going to do something ilegal in the future on the basis of thier actions today.
No not quite...
Air navigation order part V Para 67
' Every person in an aircraft shall obey all lawful commands which the commander of that aircraft may give for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft and of persons and property contained therein......'
Original post, says that Cabin crew told him to put it out. Cabin Crew are not the Commander of the Aircraft. It may be they were acting on the instruction of the commander of the aircraft, however...
Is it a lawful order? No, he was not smoking a cigarette...ergo how can it be put out? It can't. Was he doing something he was not entitled to do? Well no not really, I can find no staute that prohibits imintation cigarettes.
Even if the order was lawful, was it for the purpose of securing the safety of the aircraft, the passengers or property? No, as it was an imitation cigarette, he was not doing anything to endanger the aircraft, passengers or property.
Yes he's a prat, however being a prat is not an offence...it should be but isn't.
As for what he may or may not do in the future, he might do something else silly, so might most people, the pilot might get knocked over by a bus, but then he might win next years Grand national....You can't assume that someones going to do something ilegal in the future on the basis of thier actions today.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Great White North
Age: 51
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think rules and regs aside for one second, and a little common sense to fill in the void. Speed freek makes a point.
Put out that fake cigarette.......
Stop that fake bomb from ticking......
Put away that fake combat knife...Oh Your a BBC Journo? It's okay then.
Please do not joke around trying to open the door at 35'000 feet. Passangers may think you are actually doing it. Sit down.
I aint' no crew commander, but if some idiot is gonna "joke around with a fake smoke, if it looks real enough, he can stuff it, and put it out. Ban him. What's next, fake hand grenades rolling down the aisle?
Put out that fake cigarette.......
Stop that fake bomb from ticking......
Put away that fake combat knife...Oh Your a BBC Journo? It's okay then.
Please do not joke around trying to open the door at 35'000 feet. Passangers may think you are actually doing it. Sit down.
I aint' no crew commander, but if some idiot is gonna "joke around with a fake smoke, if it looks real enough, he can stuff it, and put it out. Ban him. What's next, fake hand grenades rolling down the aisle?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Common Sense?
OK all those who have ever played any form of joke should now be banned from flying....?
The fact that someone has done something silly once is not evidence that they will do so again. How do you know he wasn't a heavy smoker and that made him feel better about not being able to smoke on the aircraft?
The common sense approach is to ignore him, if its a joke it falls flat on its face...At the end of the day humour is not a crime, it may be inappropriate, but thats still not illegal
OK all those who have ever played any form of joke should now be banned from flying....?
The fact that someone has done something silly once is not evidence that they will do so again. How do you know he wasn't a heavy smoker and that made him feel better about not being able to smoke on the aircraft?
The common sense approach is to ignore him, if its a joke it falls flat on its face...At the end of the day humour is not a crime, it may be inappropriate, but thats still not illegal
Join Date: May 2002
Location: DXB
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cabin crew have a difficult enough job, without idiots trying to make it harder. If it looks real, it needs to be accepted as being real, especially in this environment. As was stated earlier, if others see a passenger doing it they may well light up. If this idiot hasn't got the commen sense to fly, then keep him on the ground. I for one would be a much happier pax.
Well done to the crew.
Well done to the crew.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Wight
Age: 79
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How are Cabin Crew (or other pax) to judge how far to let this kind of joke run? The commander of the aircraft, and the CC acting on his authority, has to be responsible for such simple common law offences, such as conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace, which could endanger the aircraft or its occupants.
If I'd been sitting next to this prat, and he started making a smell like he was smoking, I'd have been inclined to smack the brain-dead zombie in the mouth, the crew have a duty to stop that!
If I'd been sitting next to this prat, and he started making a smell like he was smoking, I'd have been inclined to smack the brain-dead zombie in the mouth, the crew have a duty to stop that!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not going to comment on the rights or wrongs of the Cabin Crew's reactions, but what does concern me is the tiny writing at the base of the packaging where it states
Words fail me! 
Surely today we know enough about the harm which smoking does, so why do we allow such a "toy" to be sold? Children DO learn by example and allowing them to "smoke" these things is irresponsible. Maybe the bad example being set might have been something to point out to the offending passenger.
* It is difficult to read the exact age but it is a single figure.
Not suitable for children under 2 years*
Surely today we know enough about the harm which smoking does, so why do we allow such a "toy" to be sold? Children DO learn by example and allowing them to "smoke" these things is irresponsible. Maybe the bad example being set might have been something to point out to the offending passenger.* It is difficult to read the exact age but it is a single figure.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Common Law offence of Breach of the Peace...OK...
Well first we have all assumed it is a UK registered Aircraft, otherwise B of P cannot have happened (the full title being breach of the Queens Peace).
Jaydoubleyou...You say that he was committing a B of P which could endanger the safety of the aircraft...Where's your evidence? You don't have any you were not there. Secondly Endangering the safety of the aircraft is a specific offence quite seperate from B of P. I can see no evidnce that supports your assumption. It's made crystal clear on UK aircraft that smoking is not permitted. This guy was not smoking. Yes the CC have the duty to establish that, but after that point, wheter you like it or not, thats the end of the matter. In any case as the original post says the toy was 'put out'. Any B of P would at that point cease (had there been one in the first place) What could or could not have happened is irrelevent as nothing did happen.
If the mans actions amounted to Endangering the safety of the aircraft, then why were the local Police not called on arrival? That offence is serious and carries a prison sentence, it's also by International convention capable of being dealt with in another country than the country of registration of the aircraft (B of P isn't)
Given that any B of P ended at the point of the toy or whatever you want to call it was put away, and there is no evidence whatso ever of endangering the safety of the aircraft, then for what reason was he detained until the captain had spoken to him? None...there is no such power. The Human rights act forbids the detention of anyone unless by means of thier lawful arrest, there is no lawful arrest, as there is no offence. That leads the crew open to procceddings.
Well first we have all assumed it is a UK registered Aircraft, otherwise B of P cannot have happened (the full title being breach of the Queens Peace).
Jaydoubleyou...You say that he was committing a B of P which could endanger the safety of the aircraft...Where's your evidence? You don't have any you were not there. Secondly Endangering the safety of the aircraft is a specific offence quite seperate from B of P. I can see no evidnce that supports your assumption. It's made crystal clear on UK aircraft that smoking is not permitted. This guy was not smoking. Yes the CC have the duty to establish that, but after that point, wheter you like it or not, thats the end of the matter. In any case as the original post says the toy was 'put out'. Any B of P would at that point cease (had there been one in the first place) What could or could not have happened is irrelevent as nothing did happen.
If the mans actions amounted to Endangering the safety of the aircraft, then why were the local Police not called on arrival? That offence is serious and carries a prison sentence, it's also by International convention capable of being dealt with in another country than the country of registration of the aircraft (B of P isn't)
Given that any B of P ended at the point of the toy or whatever you want to call it was put away, and there is no evidence whatso ever of endangering the safety of the aircraft, then for what reason was he detained until the captain had spoken to him? None...there is no such power. The Human rights act forbids the detention of anyone unless by means of thier lawful arrest, there is no lawful arrest, as there is no offence. That leads the crew open to procceddings.
