To: JohnHuang2
The Air marshals shouldn't use guns. Why not? Because firing a gun at those altitudes will doom the plane pretty much. Maybe if they carry guns to threaten goons that cdarry guns but they should be trained to mostly use non-ballistic weapons, whether that be knives or martial arts or whatever,
4 posted on
01/09/2004 3:08:45 AM PST by
Cronos
(W2004!)
To: Cronos
Because firing a gun at those altitudes will doom the plane pretty much.
False! Blackbird.
To: Cronos
Because firing a gun at those altitudes will doom the plane pretty much. No, it would not. Explosive decompression from a small hole is strictly a hollywood movie myth, just like bullets that spark on impact.
6 posted on
01/09/2004 6:32:45 AM PST by
GingisK
To: Cronos
Because firing a gun at those altitudes will doom the plane pretty much. How? What proof can you site for that conclusion? Any sources?
9 posted on
01/09/2004 5:10:37 PM PST by
Diddle E. Squat
(www.firethebcs.com, www.weneedaplayoff.com, www.firemackbrown.com)
To: Cronos
Firing a weapon in an aircraft will doom it? That's just nonsense. Maybe in a technically inaccurate movie...
That Hollywood myth should be debunked by now.
Also, LEOs in small, confined spaces normally use frangible ammunition.
28 posted on
01/10/2004 2:16:28 AM PST by
bootless
(Never Forget)
To: Cronos
Because firing a gun at those altitudes will doom the plane pretty much. Nonsense. Planes already have holes in them that are far larger than any bullet hole. The air system is built to pressurize the plane even as air escapes through those holes, and in fact, the system is robust enough to offset the effect of even more holes.
747s would remain pressurized even if a window blew out in midflight.
32 posted on
01/10/2004 7:38:59 AM PST by
NittanyLion
(E-A-G-L-E-S...Eagles!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson