Posted on 06/10/2002 4:16:50 AM PDT by ppaul
"Do you believe that a commercial airline pilot should be allowed to carry a gun in the cockpit? - 2566 respondents
Yes 82%
No - 18 %Do you believe that flight attendants should be able to carry nonlethal stun guns? - 2618 respondents
Yes 76%
No - 24 %"
Um, except for the fact that they wouldn't be there to do anything! I'm sure that well-trained cop back at LAX is going to do a lot of good at 36,000 feet over Arizona.
"Agreed. But remember, the poll is gonna run until 9/2002. Go back and continue to FReep, even after this thread is history."
Good point! I plan to FReep it daily!
Your article on arming the pilots seems to be worthless. The poll at the right of the article already says that the people want the pilots to be armed and that the flight attendents should carry non lethal weapons. In fact, I have never seem a poll that even comes close to claiming as you do that the people don't want the pilots to be armed. Your readership of 100 people claiming anything doesn't seem like the group I would pay attention to. If I wanted to know something about the subject, I would listen to the pilots and the attendents.
Where do these morons come from? Now if a plane is hijacked (due to these pathethic, pacifistic measures) the entire planeload of people will die thanks to a US fired missile at their 6. How encouraging - hundreds die because a pilot/passenger can't defend the plane. Now we all turn around and wait with bated breath a missile fired by our countrymen.
Personally, Id prefer to take my chances with a rapid decompression (which aint all that big a deal if the masks deploy and the guys up front can get it down to under 12K) than watch some madman take MY flight into a building or the ground at 500 mph. That was the final experience of 266 fellow humans on 9/11. I KNOW I like they wont survive that!
And pay VERY close attention to the "solutions" being offered by those in government: They are NOT talking about REMOVING the limitations they have ALREADY placed on us as individuals to DEFEND OURSELVES. They are beginning to talk about FURTHER RESTRICTIONS on our liberties and MORE GOVERNMENT! More GOVERNMENT? The same GOVERNMENT that failed so miserably in its obligation to protect citizens that 3,000 of them died like cattle in a slaughterhouse on September 11th?
The same government led by former BATF capo JOHN MAGAW! -- that now FIGHTS to keep pilots UNARMED because it -- ostensibly -- fears a few innocent passengers MIGHT be harmed -- but will order F-16s (often manned by OTHER commercial pilots serving as week-end warriors) to SHOOT DOWN THE AIRCRAFT, KILLING ALL ABOARD
THAT GOVERNMENT??
Mindful of Voltaire's caveat that "It is dangerous to be RIGHT when the state is WRONG," I am compelled to offer that one has to actually be IN government for ANY OF THIS to make ANY sense.
It should be pointed out that even a few bullet holes in the pressurized skin is not going to cause a problem. Even at 30K+ feet, those engine compressors are putting out excess pressurization air. And, that's right, the flying pilot (hopefully not the one shooting terrorists) would instinctively be getting the airplane down to the lower altitudes.
Gee, doesn't it make you feel safe to know that our cold-war policy is applied to airline safety?
Mutual Assured Destruction.
Yeah.
That's the ticket.
That'll really be an deterrent for suicidal Islamic serial murderers!
Uh, really?
And here I've been thinking it was George W. Bush all along.
Silly me.
In case you slept through Civics class, ALL members of an administration serve at the pleasure of -- and are essentially EXTENSIONS OF -- the guy in the Oval Office.
That INCLUDES Mineta the Mental Midget and Magaw the Man With the Plan at Waco.
Here endeth the lesson.
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.