Freeoples Thread 300

[Darlin']

I know it sounds strange but sometimes the people singled out for closer scrutiny are chosen randomly. Such as determining every 4th person at the boarding gate will be pulled aside for further questions. It often has nothing at all to do with the profile of that passenger but it may have something to do with making a psychological impact on the other passengers.

[celtic gal]

Well, hellllllllooooooooooooo everyone....Now I see you have been pretty good kiddies most all day while I have been away. Mo, your room usually looks pretty picked up..now eat your veggies at dinner time! Then you can have dessert.Now I know I always said life is short so order dessert first but ya still gotta eat healthy stuff.

[Servant of the Nine]

Good point, but there are technical solutions that would allow only the Stew to fire his or her weapon. A coded biochip in the hand comes to mind, or a coded ring, or print recognition. It doesn't have to be perfect, there are redundant flight attendants.

There are none of those systems that cannot be defeated in 30 seconds by any competent operator. On the other hand there is not one system reliable enough in alowing the authorized user to fire the weapon on demand that anyone in their right minds would trust it. I would not equip one of my carry pieces with any of them for literally $1,000,000.

So9

[Servant of the Nine]

You trust random passangers more than Stews? Now I'm confused...

I trust any one who has passed a background check for a Federal Concealed Carry Permit. The aplicants would be largely people who care about their safety and have some firearms experience. They are far more likely to be competent with them than a professional waitress.

So9

[null and void]

It doesn't have to be 100% reliable. There are multiple Stews. I think with a little effort the United States might be able to find one engineer that possibly could design a system that can't be defeated and made to operate in 30 seconds. (Probably Windows based)...

[catpuppy]

If I were a male ... I believe I could find a way to ... that Stew and avail myself of her weapon.

Darlin', many of us frequent travelers tried that often in our younger days but met with little success. :(

[null and void]

So if multiple passenges stand up with guns, you will know which ones are the good guys and help them take out the bad guys, right?...

[Darlin']

No, I'm sorry. I'm not flying on any aricraft with armed flight attendamts (unless, of course, .38sw decides to be a stew. LOL) They have 100 to 350 passengers per flight demanding their attention and most of them are inexperinced travelers. They have meals to prepare and serve, safety regulations to enforce and pain in the behind passengers to took after. In other words, numerous distractions. An armed stew would just be too vunerable and I would not fly on that plane.

[null and void]

So which plane would you fly on?

[Servant of the Nine]

So if multiple passenges stand up with guns, you will know which ones are the good guys and help them take out the bad guys, right?...

If they would let passengers with permits carry onboard, there would be no atempted hijackings. People don't hold up or hijack places full of armed patrons.

So9

[null and void]

People don't hold up or hijack places full of armed patrons.

You missed the word RATIONAL at the start of that sentence...

[Darlin']

"Darlin', many of us frequent travelers tried that often in our younger days but met with little success. :("

catpuppy, dahlin', While I can, indeed, believe you were up to no good, I sincerely doubt your intentions were deadly ones. :) Besides, that you were unsuccessful validates my lack of confidence in the judgement of some flight attendants. LOL.

[Darlin']

Flights with armed pilots and armed, undercovr sky marshals.

[Servant of the Nine]

IBM Creates 110 ghz Silicon Germanium Circuit

WOW

So9

[Servant of the Nine]

People don't hold up or hijack places full of armed patrons.

You missed the word RATIONAL at the start of that sentence...

The hijackings of 9/11 were done by crazy people, but they weren't stupid. They were carefully planned.

You don't have to make hijackings impossible, just make the difficulty greater than the reward, and they will stop. Terrorists will move on to some other nastiness.

So9

[catpuppy]

Ha! I like that answer.

[null and void]

That still begs the question, if the guy next to you stands up and pulls a weapon, is he a friendly or a terrorist? Do you let him shoot someone (The real terrorist??? An innocent passenger???) or do you coldcock him? (Thereby saving an innocent passenger? or allowing a terrorist free reign?)

At least you KNOW which side a uniformed airline employee is on...

[null and void]

(that was sweet)

[lodwick]

It often has nothing at all to do with the profile of that passenger but it may have something to do with making a psychological impact on the other passengers. 761 posted on 4/15/02 7:36 PM Central by Darlin'

I know that your love of funning us is tremendous, but please, think now; you've gone to the airport to go see the kids...you see some old lady jerked into an interrigation room, and you decide not to bomb the flight? I know that you kid around a lot, but please, let's go into the lounge and talk about this. OK?

[sweetliberty]

" his or her losing focus on the primary job may be hazardous."

Ummm Nully, not to belabor the obvious, but isn't it rather hazardous to have the plane taken over by hijackers?

He may be dead, but by golly he was focused on his flying right up to the end, bless his heart.