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

Skip to comments.

Philadelphia Airport soldiers' guns were unloaded
The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | May 26, 2002 | Marcia Gelbart

Posted on 05/26/2002 5:55:13 AM PDT by Jethro Tull

Philadelphia Airport soldiers' guns were unloaded

Airport soldiers' guns were unloaded
The Pa. guardsmen's presence was intended to reassure passengers. But they say their ability to handle an emergency was compromised.

By Marcia Gelbart

Inquirer Staff Writer

For seven months, more than 80 National Guard troops watched almost 12 million passengers walk through the gates and security checkpoints at Philadelphia International Airport.

Among the most visible responses to the war on terrorism, the soldiers stood ready, dressed in Army fatigues, their 9mm pistols strapped to their sides.

But the guns had no bullets.

Instead, the soldiers carried loaded magazines on their belts.

At 16 airports across Pennsylvania, National Guard troops were banned from patrolling with loaded weapons, according to some guardsmen stationed in Philadelphia.

"I don't mind being in harm's way, but let me react," said Staff Sgt. Bill Lawrence, 39, a Montgomery County mason who was stationed at the Philadelphia airport until the guardsmen left on May 10. With the seconds it would take to remove the magazine from their belt and insert it into the pistol, he said, "we couldn't protect ourselves."

-SNIP



TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: banglist; kill; liberalism; us; will
YO!!! TOM RIDGE!!!! FIX THIS!!!!

1 posted on 05/26/2002 5:55:13 AM PDT by Jethro Tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
Nothing new here.

If a PFC negligently discharges his weapon, his commanding officer's career is ruined.

The only way to fix this is to make the individual soldier the only person responsible for negligent discharge.

Then the officers will let the men load up. Not before.

2 posted on 05/26/2002 5:57:40 AM PDT by LibKill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
When I read an article about a pro-Palestinian activist being shot while acting as a human shield in the Mideast, I cracked up. The fool muttered, "I didn't know they would be using real bullets." Now I understand; she thought they were in the United States.
3 posted on 05/26/2002 6:03:14 AM PDT by Samwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
I remember this was reported at LAX two days after they re-opened commercial flights after 9-11. I'll use the same reply:
"Whatt're we supposed to use, man? Harsh Language?!"
LCPL Frost - 'Aliens'
4 posted on 05/26/2002 6:03:18 AM PDT by RandallFlagg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
This guarding policy has a precedent---the USS Cole.
5 posted on 05/26/2002 6:04:53 AM PDT by Born on the Storm King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
I would feel a whole lot safer if I knew than none of these people had a loaded gun.

Frankly, I don't think they should have bullets either. Or at least they should leave the bullets in their vehicles outside.

This whole charade is absolutely disgusting.

How many terrorists do you think the airlines catch every day because they ask everyone "Have you had your bags in your possession since packing them?" and "Has a stranger asked you to take anything on board the aircraft?"

The utter stupidity of all of this is beyond anything a sane person could dream up.

6 posted on 05/26/2002 6:44:41 AM PDT by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
A government which does not trust its own citizens is not to be trusted. If the governor, and commander of the state's National Guard, doesn't even trust his own military with guns, you know it's pretty bad. How many lives must be sacrificed on the alter of political correctness before cultural Marxism is rejected?
7 posted on 05/26/2002 7:40:26 AM PDT by AF68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pylot
It Sounds To Me That"Barney Fife"Is Alive And Well!If There Were An Emergency Situation,I Guess They Could Always Throw Their Empty Guns At??????????When Are People Going To Stop being Terrified Of Inanimate Objects(FireArms)?????????????The Founders Held FireArms In Very High Esteem!!!!!!!!!!!!
8 posted on 05/26/2002 7:59:05 AM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
If their weapons WERE loaded, the same newspapers would be griping about the "imminent threat to public safety." This is nitpicking, pure subterfuge.
9 posted on 05/26/2002 8:06:52 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
Having been in the National Guard, this makes me breathe better.

Those unfamiliar with guns might accidentally shoot someone.

One of my fondest memories of the NG was a wargames in the desert. Our medical battalion was wiped out BEFORE the games started, and two Green Berets with the help of two NG ex paratroopers infiltrated the camp and "killed" quite a few greenhorns. However, by the end of the two weeks, we learned quite a bit.

The only thing the NG in airports had going for them is that the terrorists are essentially cowards who know little about real war, and were probably scared away from airports by this "show of force"

10 posted on 05/26/2002 11:33:17 AM PDT by LadyDoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Born on the Storm King
This guarding policy has a precedent---the USS Cole.

...and the US Marine barracks in Beirut.

11 posted on 05/26/2002 12:00:05 PM PDT by 10mm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull

"You get one bullet, and it has to be carried in your belt."

12 posted on 05/26/2002 12:44:55 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
"Those unfamiliar with guns might accidentally shoot someone."

Well, if it's "Cigar Store Indians" you want to guard our airports, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

As for me, either properly train those stationed to protect us, or leave them home....

13 posted on 05/27/2002 4:19:52 AM PDT by Jethro Tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
#9: "If their weapons WERE loaded, the same newspapers would be griping about the "imminent threat to public safety." This is nitpicking, pure subterfuge."

The sad spectacle of our military patrolling airports with unloaded weapons isn't "nitpicking" or "subterfuge."

It's about politically correct, run amuck liberalism.

It's a sad sight...

14 posted on 05/27/2002 4:24:06 AM PDT by Jethro Tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
The point is, to the libs, this is a no-win situation. Bush would be damned if he ordered loaded weapons, and ridiculed if he insists on safety first.
15 posted on 05/27/2002 6:40:24 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LadyDoc,*bang_list
Having been in the National Guard, this makes me breathe better. Those unfamiliar with guns might accidentally shoot someone.

Unloaded weapons cost the Marines in the Beruit Barracks their lives.

The sentries at the entrance to the compound had sufficient time to shoot and kill or disable the driver of the truck bomb as it drove toward the building.

If you were part of a National Guard unit too poorly trained or insufficiently disciplined to be trusted with loaded weapons when they were assigned guard duty then the Commander of the Unit should be court martialed and the unit should be disbanded or retrained until they are competent to complete their assigned duties.

It is a grave mistake to underestimate the resolve of these homicide bombers or dismiss them as cowards.

Right now you can breathe easier because you are still protected by "rough men willing to do the work necessary to protect your liberty"

If you, or people with an outlook similiar to yours, hobble these men in the wrong way or for the wrong reason you will suffer consequences most people (currently) find unimaginable.

Any situation serious enough to require the presence of riflemen on patrol is serious enough to require those riflemen to carry their weapons fully loaded and ready to use.

Anyone who believes otherwise is a danger to themselves and to others.

Best regards,

16 posted on 05/30/2002 5:10:27 PM PDT by Copernicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jethro Tull
The funny part is that I, as a civilian with a PA carry license, could carry a loaded 9mm in the airport (as long as I don't try to pass the security gate), yet the NG could not.
17 posted on 05/30/2002 5:18:37 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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