Not needing the cops in the first place. Had the cops not been called to remove the guy it would not have happened. Had they not had a fully booked flight, it would not have happened. Had they not had a system in place that uses overbooking, it would not have happened. Had they had a workable plan that would allow them to move crew where needed that did not depend on passengers being removed it would not have happened. The police were their fallback position, for when the peasants object to being told whatever United wanted. The police should never be used to enforce company policy, rather to remove passengers who might be a danger to their selfs or others, period. United created this mess with arrogance, no customer concern, and really bad management.Also, even though they own the plane, they enter into a contract, that contract has all kinds of provisions for things BEFORE you board the plane, not after. In fact there is a Federal regulation that requires written notification of the passenger as to why they are being removed and what options are available, mainly to be used for nasty people (drunks, buffoons, etc). They did not do that http://either.It is not the cops jobs to go on a plane and try to negotiate with passengers to get what the company wants, that's why they have gate agents. United did not have the management skills to ask itself: What if someone doesn't want 1000.00 to get off?, and have a plan to deal with it gracefully (like the guy who ran Jet Blue said, " You tell them to bid it up until you get a taker". They could have sent the 4 people to an air taxi service, a plane rental, have an agreement with a company to borrow a jet, or anyone of a dozen options.
As far as cops go, yes, they have become aggressive in the last few years, especially after you had an administration that basically justified any criminal act and then blamed the cops for trying to do their job. There also are people who are cops who should not be doing it. Police departments are controlled and administered by the same useless government cronies that run the rest of our broken civilization, so it is not a shock that they do some of the cringeworthy things they do. Had the airport cops been given a decent ROE such as "You go on for drunks, druggies, criminals. Other than that, stay off planes" this would not have happened. Again poor management and failure to do simple "what if" problem solving.

Well, there you go. Yet they always elicit that same response...CT.

The answer to all 3 is the state.

"How is that free market or capitalism?"
I am not saying airlines are run by pure capitalism. I just won't give up the word capitalism because of the PR hit due to things like that American Magazine article mischaracterizing it.

"not needing them"
What's them? I missing your meaning.

How about not needing them in the first place? Chicken and egg situation here...

I think the terms are required to be used together. There can be no capitalism without a freemarket, and that is exactly what caused the issue here. Airlines are so secure in the regulated empire (and despite the myth of "deregulation, which only effected fares) they know there is no competition and it is virtually impossible to start any. Richard Branson had to reduce his holdings of Virgin to get it to be allowed to fly into the US because of regulation "no individual can hold more than 25% of an airlines stock". How is that free market or capitalism? The airline industry is regulation at it's worse,along with most of our transportation infrastructure.

"I think that “overbooking” by airlines would be much less widespread if there were a true free market in air travel."
Yes. I also think some vendor screwups are a part of life no mater what.

To me the bigger issue is our police departments are not good at diffusing conflict and doing things like removing people from other's people's property without beating them. It's easy for me to say and a lot to ask of police officers, but I think we should ask it. Police officers acting like combatants in a war with citizens has gotten out of hand. It seems like our attitude is in the short-run it's safer for police officers to move in armored vehicles than to walk around and get to know people. Ideally the gov't structures would create laws the reflect citizens' needs, so police would have an army of law-abiding people everywhere who want to help them stop/solve crimes. We're so far from that. This environment is what caused the police to physical beat the guy on the plane.

The police probably could have diffused the situation with no force by talking the guy down, maybe saying they see why he feels wronged, but they own the plane, so they can kick people off for bad reasons if they want. They could have offered to help him get to the customer service people and complain. They could have asked if any other passengers would reconsider since this guy says he really needs to travel. Instead it's the war mentality. We're at war against drugs and guns and whatever, and if we really mean it then that means US citizens are the enemy in an armed conflict.

Well, there you go. There are so many questions (like how did 9 buildings go down when only 2 were hit?) that no one wants to answer. we are near 20 years on, and it is now like the "Mystery of Pearl Harbor" no one solved or "Who killed JFK".

"You're just a conspiracy theorist(NO snide voice)"
That's an un-brainwashed American public commenting on the official conspiracy theory. ;^)

"Unfortunately “capitalism” is taking another PR hit. "
I disagree wholeheartedly with the American Magazine piece. I understand why you avoid the word capitalism, but I won't. It's a fact of the universe that resources and our time alive to use them and enjoy them are limited. There has to be some decision making process as to how scarce resources are used. Capitalism gives people the freedom to enjoy their wealth now or put it to use building something that may create more wealth in the future. I don't see how that relates to the United issue. People have finite time to build airplanes, operate them, and extra fuel to power them. It takes human work to provide transportation or any service. You can have the king's experts, backed by whips and guns, figure out how much everyone should work, consume, and invest in future production; or people can control their lives and everything make.

Under any system, there's always scarcity. People rightly want more trips, free time, etc, but someone has to do the work. This fact of life is why the Christian Bible opens with a myth explaining why unlimited food doesn't crop up without human effort. The myth says it's because just as children grow and rebel against the benevolent dictatorship of their parents, it's in humankind's nature not to want to remain children and have everything handed to them. My only point in repeating a myth is to show scarcity has been a key issue for humanity since antiquity.

That is indeed true.

Well, they did make some international changes post 9/11 including locking cockpit doors, so it is a little harder to execute. However, there is nothing saying you could not charter a smaller plane, load it up with explosives, and pretend you were Japanese and in WW2. The fact we have not seen that does make doubting the whole story more valid. The whole pre-9/11 thing has so many holes in it that have never been addressed, beyond "You're just a conspiracy theorist (snide voice)"

Definitely with you on use of "free market" because it is a much more accurate term.

Amazing that no one has commandeered and flown any of their planes into buildings in Europe either, especially given all the other alleged terrorist attacks in Europe.
More reasons to suspect the federal government's tale explaining 9/11.

Exactly the sort of point a guy made in an Op Ed in the LA Times. He illustrated his points by using the European system as an example where they have many airlines, some barely surviving, but lots of competition, little regulation, yet they are safe, have low fares and many choices.

Unfortunately “capitalism” is taking another PR hit. Another reason I avoid the term and use “free market” instead.

http://www.americamagazine.org/politi...

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/...

Here’s an encouraging opposing view:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlOkp...

I think that “overbooking” by airlines would be much less widespread if there were a true free market in air travel.