Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is It Time for a New "Concealed Carry" Category.........for Air Travel?
self | 09/11/01 | RightOnline

Posted on 09/11/2001 8:16:26 PM PDT by RightOnline

In light of today's horrific events, wherein a group of highly-trained, highly-motivated terrorists apparently armed with knives and/or box cutters hijacked no fewer than four civilian airliners, I'd like to offer a proposal for your consideration.

Is it time, in light of the state of our world today, for a new category of "concealed carry" licensing? Let's call it, for lack of better phraseology for the time being, CCW-ATQ (ATQ = "Air Travel Qualified").

What I envision is a category of armed citizens who are a subset of those with "CCW" licenses. They would undergo much additional training, akin to the training given to the "Air Marshals" whom we've all read about. They would undergo background checks, etc., much like individuals seeking higher security clearances.

Once certified, a citizen possessing a CCW-ATQ license would be approved to carry a weapon aboard a civilian airliner. The aircraft crew would be notified whether or not they had any CCW-ATQ certified passengers, but would NOT be given names or seating assignments (terrorists would know if such was provided to aircrews, thereby making such passengers easy targets..........nullifying much of their effectiveness).

I don't offer this suggestion lightly or flippantly, but as a proposal for protection of air travellers in American airspace. I cannot help but think that if such was allowed today, the hijackings just might not have been so successful.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-147 next last
To: RightOnline
Well, you certainly have my agreement. I just finished posting your concept on a couple of gun-related boards ( www.thefiringline.com and www.1911forum.com ). The more chances it gets to be shot down, the more "bulletproof" it becomes. Let's see if it holds up...
101 posted on 09/12/2001 7:22:53 PM PDT by Skibane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
bump
102 posted on 09/12/2001 7:58:31 PM PDT by UnChained
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Skibane
I appreciate that.........greatly. Please keep me posted on the overall reaction. If I'm full of it, I'd just as soon find out early. If it's met with a positive reaction, then maybe we're really onto something.
103 posted on 09/12/2001 8:06:38 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
Damn fine and thought provoking thread amigo!
104 posted on 09/12/2001 8:11:23 PM PDT by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skibane
Let’s issue every passenger a handgun (not children) with Glasser rounds just for the trip, and collect them after they land?
105 posted on 09/12/2001 8:41:30 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Let’s issue every passenger a handgun (not children) with Glasser rounds just for the trip, and collect them after they land?

Sure! We could have the flight attendants rent them, along with the headphones! ;-)

106 posted on 09/12/2001 8:47:44 PM PDT by Skibane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Thanks much, Travis. Yours is an opinion I respect here......and especially on such topics.
107 posted on 09/13/2001 4:01:14 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: LoanPalm
"Hey Travis, Would I qualify?"

Well, I wouldn't pretend to answer for Travis, but in my opinion, you'd be the type that I'm looking for to possess a CCW-ATQ permit. In a heartbeat.

108 posted on 09/13/2001 4:16:55 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: harpseal
I would also suggest inspection of firearms for the correct ammunition at each boarding.

Some here (not you) are advocating the creation of yet another "priviliged segment" of the firearms-owning population.

CCW permitting is just a way to turn part of what, according to God, is a RIGHT, into a PRIVILEGE. Air-travel CCW permits above and beyond just continue the process. Let everybody carry, with their firearms and ammunition being made subject to inspection prior to boarding.

(I just had a vision of a ticket agent asking if you wanted to sit in the armed section (front of the plane in order to protect the crew, bigger seats, etc) or the unarmed section. ROTFL.)

El Neil had such a scenario in one of his books, Henry Martyn, perhaps.

At boarding time, the protagonists were asked if they had loaded their weapons with ammunition that had been approved for air travel.

And El Neil, if you're lurking, Barnes and Noble has some of your books in stock. It's the first place I've seen them outside of used bookstores. I'd have bought both of them that day except for the fact that I'd already picked up Seven Myths of Gun Control. Ah, well, so many books, so little cash.

May the trend continue.

109 posted on 09/13/2001 5:59:10 AM PDT by George Smiley (george.smiley@lycos.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
I am against the idea of the pilots being armed. I don't want them involved in gunfights, I want them to fly the plane. The flight compartment should have a sealed, bullet proof door and the pilots should never come out as long as the plane is in the air. Air marshals in plain clothes with immediate contact with the ground appears to be the best idea.
110 posted on 09/13/2001 2:43:38 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
I appreciate your thoughts, but if you read through the above replies (I know; there ARE quite a few), you'll see some pretty compelling arguments against sky marshalls only being armed on flights. How many per flight? Who pays 'em? How many passengers must be on a flight to justify the presence of a sky marshall? This proposal (the topic of this thread) could help ensure that there are FAR more trained, motivated, trustworthy, well-trusted, and well-armed American Citizens on board a typical flight....and THAT means serious deterrence. Sky marshalls would be better than nothing, no doubt. However, I'm for strength in numbers and for empowering citizens to defend ourselves (AND each other) again.

As for pilots not being armed..........Well, as a former pilot, I like the idea of the crew being that "last line of defense". Either of the two guys up front can fly the plane with proficiency, freeing up the other to serve as a final barrier that the scumbags would have to overcome. Give them that chance.

111 posted on 09/13/2001 3:29:14 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: George Smiley
"Some here (not you) are advocating the creation of yet another "priviliged segment" of the firearms-owning population."

No, George, not even close. This isn't about "privilege" in the sense you mean it. This is about a realistic solution to a very, VERY real problem.

"CCW permitting is just a way to turn part of what, according to God, is a RIGHT, into a PRIVILEGE. Air-travel CCW permits above and beyond just continue the process. Let everybody carry, with their firearms and ammunition being made subject to inspection prior to boarding."

I didn't invent the concept of CCW laws. My proposal would be hard enough to push through via legislation. Your stance is just plain impossible in the year 2001. You know it, I know it, everyone here knows it. Sure, in the best of all possible worlds, such could happen. Not in our lifetimes, George.

Idealism is great, but idealism doesn't solve problems. Don't take that as a personal slight. We must deal with reality, and my proposal here would be hard enough (and I've been told MY stance here is impossible), so let's not sneer at it and crow for the obviously impossible.

112 posted on 09/13/2001 3:35:14 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
Then what about this:

The pilots can have a high capacity pistol with extra mags but under no circumstances are they allowed to open the door.
Passengers can acquire a Air Travel CCW but the requirements would be so stringent that only a top 25 per cent IDPA or IPSC shooter could achieve one.
Qualifying would be free, but no training would be provided.
Present and former Navy Seals and Delta force members would be given their CCW and ten years after service would have to requalify.
The type of ammunition would be strictly regulated.

After licensing, a CCW holder would get a discount on air fare and liability insurance would be provided.

113 posted on 09/13/2001 4:32:00 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
The pilots can have a high capacity pistol with extra mags but under no circumstances are they allowed to open the door.

Better supply those pilots with Depends, because there ain't no room for a porta-potty in some of the smaller aircraft cockpits!

114 posted on 09/13/2001 5:39:47 PM PDT by Skibane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
Sensible. I can live with those caveats. Thanks for the insightful post.
115 posted on 09/14/2001 5:27:20 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
This will never happen, nor should it. Sky Marshalls will be what we are going to have.
116 posted on 09/14/2001 5:29:04 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
"This will never happen, nor should it."

Why not..........and why not? I'm curious about your reasons, and also wondering if you've read all the responses above (admittedly, there are a LOT, but it's worth it.).

117 posted on 09/14/2001 5:33:27 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
Regretfully, some who read this are of the opinion that only "law enforcement personnel" are qualified to carry and only they should be allowed to carry. This is a sad and ignorant position.

Had a citizen with a concealed carry license and a loaded handgun been on those hijacked aircraft earlier this week, then this entire catastrophe could have been avoided.

The hijackers would be dead and our nation would not be in turmoil.

When are we going to learn that guns are not "bad" and that an armed society is a polite society.

118 posted on 09/14/2001 5:57:09 PM PDT by ASTM366
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ASTM366
Amen...........and bump to ya.
119 posted on 09/14/2001 6:01:17 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
At first glance, and in light of recent events, a 5-star idea. I'm sure someone will think of potential problems with it, but speaking as a passenger on an airline, I want to sit next to one of THESE guys you just described. :)
120 posted on 09/14/2001 6:16:48 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-147 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson