The airlines WERE responsible for the safety of passengers who paid to travel on that mode of transportation. If the airplane dropped an engine or a wing fell off, the airlines would be responsible. The airlines were negligent in providing a reasonable level of protection. This wasn't the first time an airline had been hijacked, the risk existed. The airlines couldn't find room in the budget for air marshalls. Now the American taxpayer is paying for that. Why should I subsidize safety for something I don't use?
You corporatists are worse then communists.
True, people who don't fly shouldn't have to subsidize onboard marshalls.
That said, I'm betting these airline companies pay out alot more in taxes then they receive.
The Airlines were victims of the Muslims. People who used to own three airplanes no longer do. The Airline was doing what it contracted with the passengers to do, move them from one place to another. The Muslims broke the law, did wrong and are the ones responsible for what happened. Bleeding hearts moping along looking for deep pockets to sue, are a plague on society along with the terrorist.
Cars get hijacked occasionally, it is a known threat, and can happen anywhere, even to a safety conscious person. Of course you would hold the car owner responsible, and never the car jacker.
Congress should of passed a law protectecting the airlines from frivolous law suits, because the terrorist are to blame, and should not of paid off the 9/11 families if they agreed to to sue.
As far as subsidizing the airline industry goes, we could deal with a lot less subsidizers of Farmers, Airlines, Steel Makers ...
Was it the airlines or the government that decided pilots should be disarmed?