Skip to comments.
Ridge says arming pilots "doesn't make a lot of sense"
USA Today newspaper ^
| March 4, 2002
| Judy Keen
Posted on 03/04/2002 3:35:35 AM PST by johnandrhonda
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 next last
To: johnandrhonda
We know the pilots have a need to be able to defend the cockpit. Recently, an axe was good enough to repel an unarmed attacker (poll: how many were laughing when you heard that news story?). Will an axe be good enough for an armed one? Multiple attackers?
Ridge was a purely political appointee who wasn't good enough to get picked up in the first round of executive appointments, and just got lucky Bush created another one. One wonders what the federal government would be like if the President picked his people the way Jesse Ventura did (best person for the job, blind to race, gender and political affiliation).
41
posted on
03/04/2002 5:14:24 AM PST
by
Quila
To: johnandrhonda
"Where do you stop?" Ridge replied. If pilots carry guns, he said, railroad engineers and bus drivers could ask to do the same.
Yeah, and there will will we stop? With each and every citizen being armed to protect themselves from attack? My God man, do you realize what that would mean? Why, why, why...we'd be following the spirit of the 2nd Amendment! And goodness knows we can't have that. Otherwise, people might start to suspect that they don't need government solutions to every single problem in their life! Where do you stop?
Yeah, he's real friggin' concerned with security, sure, right.
To: johnandrhonda
Now, let's see. Most of the pilots who fly American commercial jets were trained in the US military. They were trained in the handling of a variety of weapons from nuclear bombs down to .45 automatics. Until 1962, pilots who chose to, routinely carried their service .45s into the cockpit with them in their briefcases. There was al least one instance when a hijacker (domestic variety) entered a cockpit and was shot dead. But in 1962, the FAA ordered all pilots not to bring their weapons on board, any more.
The first of many successful hijackings of American planes took place in 1964. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Ridge is a moron. He needs to be removed in favor of someone who thinks in terms of maximum security, as fast as possible, at minimum cost. Sure sounds to me like a gun in the cockpit meets all three conditions.
Airlines that don't agree are welcome to post signs saying "No guns in our cockpits." Which airline would terrorists choose to fly? Which airline would passengers choose to fly? Is this a trick question?
Congressman Billybob
New column: "The Un-Music Man." Y'all will like this one.
To: putupon
Think about what you've just said. A "wacko" pilot or co-pilot can destroy any plane at any time, WITHOUT a weapon, just by using the controls to put the plane into a full power dive toward the ground or ocean, as the case may be. Do the words "Egypt Air" ring any bells with you? The problem on American airlines is not "wacko" pilots. We vet our pilots extremely well. The problem is "wackos" in the passenger cabin. Therefore, armed pilots does nothing to increase the danger, and a great deal to decrease it.
Also, I agree with the prior poster who pointed out that a stun gun's elecrical charge could fry the brains of the airplane's controls. Remember the line from Apollo 13. "It's like trying to fly a toaster through a car wash."?
Congressman Billybob
New column: "The Un-Music Man." Y'all will like this one.
To: hopespringseternal
I couldn't agree more with your post #29. Government's sole purpose is to protect its existence. The statements of Ridge and Ashcroft over the past six months only prove that more.
To: johnandrhonda
46
posted on
03/04/2002 6:05:29 AM PST
by
WIMom
To: Badray; bloodmeridian; GEC
Here'e our boy Rocky Ridge making a fool of himself once again.
47
posted on
03/04/2002 6:32:50 AM PST
by
Dukie
To: johnandrhonda
" Ridge's and Mineta's opposition makes it unlikely that the Bush administration will permit guns in cockpits."
Well, if these two liberals think it is a bad idea, then it must be a good one that should immediately be implemented.
48
posted on
03/04/2002 6:34:24 AM PST
by
Badray
To: wita
To: B Knotts
""Where do you stop?" Ridge replied. If pilots carry guns, he said, railroad engineers and bus drivers could ask to do the same."
We should have applied the same reasoning when he was shipped to VietNam and sent him without a firearm.
50
posted on
03/04/2002 6:41:41 AM PST
by
Badray
To: Jeff Head; harpseal; Sabertooth; Travis McGee; Squantos
The voters of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, naively elevated this individual to a position of high state office. He now displays his illogic and foolishness to all the nation in imperiling still more lives.
On behalf of the Keystone state, I apologize.
51
posted on
03/04/2002 6:42:56 AM PST
by
Dukie
Comment #52 Removed by Moderator
To: nmh
#12 -
Yuppers!! There's a different adgenda operating in Washingtoon......FRegards
53
posted on
03/04/2002 6:51:33 AM PST
by
gonzo
To: Dukie
" On behalf of the Keystone state, I apologize."
Hey dukie. Don't blame me. I voted for Luksik. I knew tomridge was no good from the git-go. For that matter, name me more than one pro - death politician that follows the Constitution or cares about Liberty. (I can't think of any. There may be one, but are there two?)
54
posted on
03/04/2002 6:53:10 AM PST
by
Badray
To: johnandrhonda
Interesting. I wonder if they actually considered facts in arriving at this position, or did they merely base there finding on the suppostion that "it doenst make sense"? Where is the beef? Where are there facts in support of their preconcieved opionions?
To: Badray
I voted for LuksikMe to, Ray. No blame attributed. Just sorry to have any association with the ex gov.
56
posted on
03/04/2002 6:58:59 AM PST
by
Dukie
To: Congressman Billybob
yes, a wacko pilot could destroy an airplane w/out a stun gun, but doesn't it make sense to you that it a wacko pilot would have no resistance from a normal co-pilot were he to to stun him before attempting to take over full control? this could be the difference between merely crashing the plane and crashing the plane into a building. think about it.
57
posted on
03/04/2002 7:17:02 AM PST
by
putupon
To: johnandrhonda
"Where do you stop?" Ridge repliedWhy stop? And I'm not a gun owner.
To: harpseal,Travis McGee,Squantos,Chapita
If arming pilots(private citizens) were to stop hijacking, then what would become of the arguements for banning handguns?
To: hopespringseternal
>My dad worked for the railroad for thirty years, and he was (illegaly) armed the whole time.
Same here. What did your Dad do? Mine was a rural station agent/telegrapher.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson