The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Overweight people shouldn't be allowed on planes, let alone have to pay extra.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,781 times Debate No: 27151
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)




This debate will be about personal thoughts on airline safety- and overweight regulations. I humbly thank whoever has an opposite opinion which I respect and I wish them the best of luck.

First, let me be perfectly clear. I do not hate fat people, by any means. But, that doesn't mean I can't dislike the way society tip-toes around them to make them feel good.

I am a frequent long-distance flyer. In my time flying, nothing has disappointed, angered, and bothered me more than sitting next to/seeing a fat person on a plane.
Let me clarify with an experience.
On December 22, 2011 I boarded United Airlines flight 946 from Washington DC to Amsterdam. I received a window seat despite my preferences for an aisle seat, but it wasn't a big problem. For a while, of course. As I look out of my window, I hear grunting and feel my armrest go up. Turning to see my fellow passengers, I see a fat couple. Lifting their armrests, they barely fit in their seats so by this time, I am deeply worried since I always love to stretch my legs by walking to the lavatory. I decided to ask them if I could have the aisle seat since I am tall. Their only response was a simultaneous grunt. I tried to notify a flight attendant, but sadly, the flight was full and no passengers were willing to switch (hey, I don't blame them).
So I was stuck next to snoring, loud, fat people for the 7 hours of flying time. Thank god I went to the restroom before boarding the plane.

Now let's say we encounter an emergency (ditching, fire while taxiing, etc.). You know why the flight attendants tell you not to inflate your life jacket while still in the aircraft? So you can still fit in the plane and get out of the doors without slowing anyone down. Fat people are essentially people with life jackets inflated. They WILL get stuck in an aisle or exit door killing everyone behind them including themselves.

This isn't even the only way fat people can jeopardize a flight. On January 8, 2003 Air Midwest 5481 (Beechcraft 1900D) took off from Charlotte/Douglas Intl. Shortly after takeoff, the plane climbing steeply, up to the point where it stalled and crashed killing all 21 people aboard. Among the causes, overweight passengers was a contributing factor. Small regional planes aren't the only victims. A crash with a big commercial jet would be Arrow Air 1285 (DC-8), carrying US troops to Kentucky from Gander Intl. The plane took off and was unable to climb and crashed into a forest in front of the runway, killing all 285 people aboard. Icing and overweight were the main causes of the crash.
Looking at this picture, another reason to not let fat people on flights is for their own personal comfort.

I really hope the U.S. enforces these rules to not allow fat people on planes so it could give these fat people motivation to exercise and lay off those Big Macs.

Thank you, and I look forward to a counter opinion.


I believe that we should not ban more than 60% of Americans from flying on airplanes.
That’s the finding of the latest Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, which shows that 63.1% of adults in the U.S. were either overweight or obese in 2009.("
Your first point is that you had an uncomfortable experience flying on a plane. This is unfortunate but this does not really help your point. Banning 60% of Americans from flying to simply for a little bit of comfort is just irrational and bluntly stupid.
Your second point about safety. The fact that they may clog up the isles has no examples to make sure that that is real and could really happen. The fact about it hurting the planes is just incompetence in not checking top see if the planes engine could handle that weight. You also say that another cause is the icing.
Debate Round No. 1


First of all, thank you for the good reply.

-Regarding the 60% obesity rate, you are correct. I had not remembered that the majority of the U.S. population was overweight. I should have been more clear as to what I thought overweight was. I did not mean overweight, I meant really obese (nearly impossibly fat, as seen in the photo). Thank you for providing the URL as well. And yes it would be bluntly stupid to reject 60% of the population :)

-My first point wasn't meant to be a "point" at all, just a personal experience story to give reason to my opinion. But I do see where you are coming from.

-As with the aisles, no, I could not find evidence that people have died for this reason (the closest thing would be people getting caught with life jackets, which I compared to obese passengers). But from personal experience I can say I had to wait to get to my seat because an obese person got stuck in the aisle/seat, which is where I got that point.

-As with the obese passengers being the cause of the crashes, there is never only one cause of a plane crash. It is a deadly mix of contributing factors (with one of them being weight). In the Air Midwest crash, most of the obese passengers were in the rear of the aircraft, throwing off the balance. But the pilots were unable to recover because of the plane being too heavy (Documentary: ). An overloaded plane is a very real and dangerous thing (Plane crash due to overload and inadequate lift: ). The Arrow Air crash is very similar to the previous video and it's documentary can be seen here:

-Yes, in general, engines can handle overloaded planes but Newton's Law applies here. Big, heavy plane= slower reaction time/more force needed to takeoff or land (which is what happened to Air Midwest).

I thank you very much for this debate (as this is my first one) and I look forward to your next post :)
Again, thank you.


First of all I have no sound in my computer so the documentary are worthless to me. Sorry about that. My opponent admits to his personal experience and his first point to be invalid as the debate topic says overweight and not obese. Even so where do we draw the line? I win the debate as my opponent agrees with my side."Regarding the 60% obesity rate, you are correct. I had not remembered that the majority of the U.S. population was overweight. I should have been more clear as to what I thought overweight was".
My opponent agrees to the con side of the debate so I urge con ballot. I recommend to my opponent to redo the debate with better wording.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by MilesSilvagni 5 years ago
Recognizing my mistake isn't necessarily an automatic loss... is it? :)
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by One_Winged_Rook 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering G's vote-bomb Also... Con.. you knew what Pro was saying... I know he didn't specify no semantics, but come on
Vote Placed by G0102676 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: BATMAN NANANANANANANANANA