AjayM
Screenwriter
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2000
- Messages
- 1,224
quote: Because even ol Bin isn't stupid enough to bring a knife to a gun fight. If you force Hijackers to have to attempt to get a gun onto a plane to take it over you GREATLY increase the chance of catching them before they get on the plane. Think of this as a cold war with terrorists.[/quote]
But he's smart enough to send groups of people to their death by ramming a plane into a building. You can't use the fear of death (being shot) to deter the people on these planes, they're going to die anyways.
quote: And this has to be the most assinine piece of unintellectual rhetoric I have ever read. Obviously whoever wrote this has not read ANY studies on concealed carry laws and their outcome. Ever notice that Vermont has the lowest crime rate in the nation (1 murder per 100,000 people). Vermont's laws simply state that if you are not a felon, or are not committing a crime, then you can carry a concealed firearm. There are no Taxes or fees, no finger printing, no background checks, NO REGISTRATION OF GUNOWNERS, no classes to pass, no licenses. You are treated as innocent unless you prove to be otherwise. Why has Vermont not been flooded in a sea of blood?[/quote]
And a comparison to everyday life to a terrorist incident isn't assinine? Again, simply answer the question of how much can one person do. Certainly you must have seen some of the specials on TV about the training an Air Marshall goes through, do you think you should be giving the pilots the same exact training? Do they have time for that? Will they be able to handle the stress of maybe having to shoot a hostage so they shoot the bad guy? If you think there is any similiarity between carrying a concealed gun as a citizen and a highly trained "special forces" capable person who has the ability to stop multiple "bad guys" then you've been watching to many movies.
I have no problem with guns on planes in the hands of highly trained people. The problem with giving the pilots guns is that they won't have the level of training that is needed to cure the problems. I've shot lots of guns in the past, but if you put me in a highly stressful situation (like a hijacking), and in a room the size of a cockpit (maybe a whole 5-6ft from door to pilot), and add multiple bad guys (these planes had 5 people on them) and I see a recipie for big problems for an untrained person. I would say the average street cop or FBI agent couldn't handle this, there have hundreds if not thousands of situations where cops have had shoot-outs and fired off lots of rounds and not hit anything....they certainly weren't anywhere close to 100% hit rate.
From Edit: Some more thoughts on the bullets and the skin of the plane. That report is interesting, and probably mostly true. But we've seen more than a few incidents of where a plane decompresses and rips big holes in the skin of the plane. Now that's not the norm, but we are talking about a fleet of planes that are getting up there in age in some cases and there is certainly more of a risk of something catestrophic happening.
The post below points out other ideas, and the problems associated with it. You're never going to make this 100% safe, arming pilots isn't the answer, remote control planes isn't the answer, etc, etc. Everybody is so keen to point out El Al, and they have a great record...but there's reason's for it that the American people won't put up with. Racial profiling is the biggest, and they don't care about your civil rights over there...if you are even remotely suspected of something you don't get on the plane...which is fine, but they pick out the Iraqi's, Iranians, Afghani's, etc....and the first thing they base their decision on is looks and race. El Al and the Isreali's also have another little fact that isn't brought up, but when a terrorist incident happens in Isreal, the army/special forces units go out and assasinate the leader of the terrorist organization and his immediate "workers", and they make sure it's fairly public knowledge. This may have been Bin Laden's mistake, he's done all kinds of things to the US in the past, and nobody has really done anything to him.
Andrew
[Edited last by AjayM on September 28, 2001 at 11:09 AM]
But he's smart enough to send groups of people to their death by ramming a plane into a building. You can't use the fear of death (being shot) to deter the people on these planes, they're going to die anyways.
quote: And this has to be the most assinine piece of unintellectual rhetoric I have ever read. Obviously whoever wrote this has not read ANY studies on concealed carry laws and their outcome. Ever notice that Vermont has the lowest crime rate in the nation (1 murder per 100,000 people). Vermont's laws simply state that if you are not a felon, or are not committing a crime, then you can carry a concealed firearm. There are no Taxes or fees, no finger printing, no background checks, NO REGISTRATION OF GUNOWNERS, no classes to pass, no licenses. You are treated as innocent unless you prove to be otherwise. Why has Vermont not been flooded in a sea of blood?[/quote]
And a comparison to everyday life to a terrorist incident isn't assinine? Again, simply answer the question of how much can one person do. Certainly you must have seen some of the specials on TV about the training an Air Marshall goes through, do you think you should be giving the pilots the same exact training? Do they have time for that? Will they be able to handle the stress of maybe having to shoot a hostage so they shoot the bad guy? If you think there is any similiarity between carrying a concealed gun as a citizen and a highly trained "special forces" capable person who has the ability to stop multiple "bad guys" then you've been watching to many movies.
I have no problem with guns on planes in the hands of highly trained people. The problem with giving the pilots guns is that they won't have the level of training that is needed to cure the problems. I've shot lots of guns in the past, but if you put me in a highly stressful situation (like a hijacking), and in a room the size of a cockpit (maybe a whole 5-6ft from door to pilot), and add multiple bad guys (these planes had 5 people on them) and I see a recipie for big problems for an untrained person. I would say the average street cop or FBI agent couldn't handle this, there have hundreds if not thousands of situations where cops have had shoot-outs and fired off lots of rounds and not hit anything....they certainly weren't anywhere close to 100% hit rate.
From Edit: Some more thoughts on the bullets and the skin of the plane. That report is interesting, and probably mostly true. But we've seen more than a few incidents of where a plane decompresses and rips big holes in the skin of the plane. Now that's not the norm, but we are talking about a fleet of planes that are getting up there in age in some cases and there is certainly more of a risk of something catestrophic happening.
The post below points out other ideas, and the problems associated with it. You're never going to make this 100% safe, arming pilots isn't the answer, remote control planes isn't the answer, etc, etc. Everybody is so keen to point out El Al, and they have a great record...but there's reason's for it that the American people won't put up with. Racial profiling is the biggest, and they don't care about your civil rights over there...if you are even remotely suspected of something you don't get on the plane...which is fine, but they pick out the Iraqi's, Iranians, Afghani's, etc....and the first thing they base their decision on is looks and race. El Al and the Isreali's also have another little fact that isn't brought up, but when a terrorist incident happens in Isreal, the army/special forces units go out and assasinate the leader of the terrorist organization and his immediate "workers", and they make sure it's fairly public knowledge. This may have been Bin Laden's mistake, he's done all kinds of things to the US in the past, and nobody has really done anything to him.
Andrew
[Edited last by AjayM on September 28, 2001 at 11:09 AM]
