Replies

You said: "One thing though, everyone talks about the box cutters and leaves out the alleged bomb that one terrorist had. That changes the parameters to some extent, if the passengers aren't aware of any building-crashing schemes. One would have to be fairly certain that the hijacker doesn't just want to land at a different locale. One could kill an entire plane-load of people if the motive is misjudged."

"One" would assume that if a person were to take a bomb on board an aircraft, said person is not trustworthy enough to take their word that they "are not going to hurt anyone." "One" would NOT be responsible if a hijacker blew up the airplane. The HIJACKER WITH THE BOMB would be responsible. If you think that complying with a hi-jackers demands is acceptable, REGARDLESS of what he SAYS he is going to do, just stand aside and let those that actually are willing to defend themselves take care of business.

Many have complained about the paranoia of the government over nail files and box cutters. I see the same paranoia in assuming that a bomb is always real, that all hijackers will be heading for a building full of people and that everyone on the plane is expendable should panic-striken gung-ho passengers decide that it's better to crash the plane immediately without at least wondering about the other possiblities, including what's going to be beneath the plane when it hits the ground. All this is assuming that one of the hijackers is in control of the cockpit and said gung-ho passengers also want to jump him, even if no one else knows how to fly and land the plane.

The point is that the courage on Flt. 93 was bolstered by the absolute knowledge of what their hijackers were going to do with the plane and that they were going to die anyway. I admire their actions and hope that I would do what I could under the same circumstances. But next time, the goals of the hijackers may be different and all aboard could be killed in vain. I realize that it will be a gamble and that it's best to err on the side of saving those who can be saved on the ground. I'm just concerned that a lot of people could end up needlessly dead, if hijackers, using a fake bomb, just want to relocate to Cuba.

With my reservations now aired and awaiting further flaming by those far braver than I, I'd just like to add that it seems as though the antique mirrors and nail clippers could be consigned to the customers' checked baggage and that babies could wear Pampers, leaving those dastardly diaper pins at home. No carry-ons and a walk through the metal detectors would relieve the security from destroying nail files and priceless heirlooms for the most part. That might only leave plastic explosives and chemical weapons to worry about.

I appreciate the discussion. I just wanted to see if anyone else had any concerns in this area. It appears no one else does. Although I have a few questions about other factors, please don't assume I wouldn't be swinging my purse or throwing my bulk at the hijacker (both the purse and I weigh enough to impair, I assure you) and trying to help however I am able.