Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy
It's a perception problem, certainly. People "think" the rule is silly. The question is, how do you convince them that they're not as smart as they think they are.
|
Exactly. But perception is reality. And the fact that we even have a thread on this topic - not to mention that it's gone to 9 pages so far - is evidence enough that a significant number of people are questioning it, and probably deciding to break it too.
I'd forget about trying to convince people that they're not as smart as they think they are. That's probably impossible.
The truth is, it's probably impossible for a typical consumer electronic device with no radio transmission technology inside it to affect a plane. The last I remember seeing, there weren't any documented cases of that happening. There's a big difference between "probably impossible" and "proven impossible" though.
So maybe the question is: Which is more likely to be a danger to a plane - loosening the "no devices on during takeoff and landing rule" or encouraging passengers to get into the habit of circumventing the rules?
Is there some way to massage the rule a little bit so that a few common, very probably benign, devices can be used and then make the rule seem more sensible and, therefore, remove the incentive to question the rules?