[Torie]

Are you suggesting that armed pilots are a Bill of Rights issue, or is this just a rhetorical and irrelevant point?

[vbmoneyspender]

My point was that when something is right (and having armed pilots is undisputably the right thing to do), you shouldn't have to rely on the 'public square' (as you so quaintly put it) to justify having them as a last line of defense before the plane is shot down.

BTW, I don't think you are quite aware of the training and testing the passenger jets pilots have to undergo before they are given the keys to a multi-million dollar piece of equipment like a 747. That is the reason why no American passenger jet pilot has ever gone postal. Simply put, if you are against arming passenger pilots, logically you should have a problem with police being armed because alot more police have gone postal over than years, than have passenger jet pilots.

[Swordmaker]

"...Bill of Rights issue..."

DAMN RIGHT IT IS!!!

What part of "...shall not be infringed" do you fail to understand???

[spunkets]

The pilot is the captain of the ship. In his hands he is the boss. As far as the 2nd Amendment goes he's the only one it applies to, because it is a private plane. As long as the ships owners turn the ship over to him, he is the captain. He has the right to determine who is armed, and who is not. No one else has that right, including the govm't. A gun if he so chooses, is his last line of defense.

Cool heads and gun control result in disasters like that which occured on 9-11-01.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Imagine, if you will, being able to talk to a passenger, just one...on one of those fateful flights on 9-11. What do you think his/her reaction to this would be? I'd sorta bet that they'd say a gun was fine & dandy with them. Just a hunch on my part.