Someone tell me that I misread the headlines.
Someone tell me that I need to listen more closely because I’ve obviously misunderstood the news reports on the radio.
Someone tell me to calm down because there’s no way anyone would ever consider an idea like this one.
Because, if not, then the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Communications Commission really are considering whether or not to allow the use of cell phones on commercial flights.
Lord, give me strength.
It’s bad enough having to play “dodge the car cutting into your lane” because someone with a cell phone surgically attached to his or her ear is enmeshed in a discussion of last night’s meatloaf.
It’s bad enough trying to enjoy a meal in a nice restaurant while some individual at the next table is regaling the entire room with the details of his last colonoscopy.
It’s bad being at a movie and having a digital version of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony sound off at precisely the wrong moment to let everyone in the theater know that someone ignored the request to turn the blighted thing off.
It gets worse.
These things “ring” at weddings. They “ring” at funerals. They “ring” during classes, meetings and recitals. In short, they “ring” everywhere and in every situation wherein thoughtful, considerate, polite, solicitous, caring, courteous, respectful, civil and well-mannered human beings would never allow any such intrusions or disturbances to take place. Worse, it’s been repeatedly proven that there are individuals who will answer them in those situations. If there is any justice in the universe, such individuals will surely spend eternity not only burning in the fires of hell, but also residing in an area of poor coverage and extremely high usage rates.
Minor aside (1): In perhaps one case out of a bajillion, the calls made or taken in the above situations are actually necessary.
Minor aside (2): “Necessary” does not mean a call whose topic is: “Guess where I am?” Neither does it mean a call to pass on (or receive) the details of someone’s latest bout with heartburn, bloating or toenail fungus. In fact, in any of the above scenarios, if a call doesn’t involve an imminent asteroid strike, a Richter Scale 12 earthquake or the news that Ichiro has been traded, it can wait until later.
I’ll make a concession here. Cell phones, when used with consideration, are useful. They can save lives. They can get stranded people out of trouble. They can help with a host of things. Unfortunately, we stopped teaching consideration somewhere in the mid-1960s. That was when “do your own thing” replaced “think about others” as the mantra of an entire (my) generation and, now, the chickens have come home to roost.
Knowing all of the above, it’s hard to believe that the FCC and the FAA are considering allowing the use of these things on airliners.
Do consider that many passengers are already irritable because: (1) they’re hungry and in-flight meals are a thing of the past; (2) airline seats are now designed for someone approximating the size of Shirley Temple in her early movie years; and (3) the boarding process now requires more poking and prodding than your annual physical.
A flight attendant’s job is already tough enough. Adding the requirement to prevent in-flight riots will probably have airlines looking for a new generation of recruits. My guess is that, should this idea come to pass, future flight attendants will be a cross between Luca Brazzi and Nurse Ratched while having rsums overflowing with references to their experience as bouncers in waterfront bars.
Not knowing better, one might conclude that this whole idea is a conspiracy hatched by the government to make airline travel even more unpleasant than it already is. Such a situation would reduce the number of travelers and immensely simplify security since each flight would consist of about five passengers – two of whom would be air marshals.
Such a theory can be discounted by remembering an old saying: “Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.”
Since it’s not likely that the government is actively trying to destroy air travel, one must assume that the folks considering this proposal are about two clowns short of a circus.
If such an idea should, however, come to pass, we might consider a compromise. Cell phone users on airliners could be granted an entire section of their own.
I’d support a proposal that such a section be located just outboard of the No. 4 engine on a two-engine jet.
“Reasonable” is, after all, my middle name.
Larry Simoneaux lives in Edmonds. Comments can be sent to larrysim@att.net.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
