Airplanes & Guns: Myths and Reality

KeepAndBearArms.com ^ | sept 19, 2001 | Angel Shamaya

[mil-vet]

Roger the myths list! Myths is exactly what the gun control fools are all about.

FACT #1: I won't fly until I am allowed, as one trained to carry and (heaven forbid) use a handgun, to carry my weapon on my aircraft of choice!

FACT #2: 911 would never have happened if those passengers qualified to carry (police officers, military, folks with a valid license to carry, etc.), along with the flight crew, had been armed!

FACT #3: We're going entirely the wrong direction by totally disarming everyone who boarsds an aircraft; this just makes 'em easier, softer targets for hijackers! One or two "air marshalls" can be easily overcome by a few hijackers, but not half the passenger list!!

[sungod]

another note: I understand what you people are saying about decompression, but there are plenty of other faults in this line of logic. As far as I know, modern commercial airplane design does not incorporate steps for protecting electrical, computer, hydraulic, etc systems from bullets. I will say that I like the idea of specially trained civilians better than letting any CCW permit bring one on board, but as I said before, these terrorists would likely just get certified like you or I would, and you would end up with a shootout in the air.

[mil-vet]

Not smart. Decompression DOES occur, depending on the gun.

Total disarming of everyone boarding an aircraft is what is not smart - the myths list is valid!

If you're so concerned about depressurization, simply issue special "frangible" (right word?) ammo to every armed individual; have a variety of calibers, etc., available by prearrangement, something like ordering a special meal when you buy your ticket - I would be THRILLED to pay for one magazine's worth of the special 9mm HP load - add it to the price of my ticket!!

[Justin Thyme]

You studied logic and philosophy. What field do you go into with that degree?

Philosophy was my second major, Business and Finance was my first. Logic was one of the prerequisites.

I went into the Marine Corps after graduation, and was a helo pilot. These days I'm a network engineer for an international real estate company. Yeah, I know, no real connection! :)

The best part of studying philosophy was developing my writing skills....something that has proven to be very useful over the years. Now if I can just stop spelling mistakes!*G*

[FreeTally]

Some of these terrorists were everyday people. People who take your child's x-ray at the hospital, or work a set in with you on the Bench at the local Gym.

No, they were all known terrorists. The FBI had identified all of them within days. They were not every day people. I seriously doubt they would have slipped through a CCW check. Even if they did, then everyone else could have been armed too. They would have never dreamed this up if others would have been known to be armed.

[Justin Thyme]

is this one written better?

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel091401.shtml

Yes, it is much better written. First off, it acknowledges that errors and accidental deaths are possible, if unprobable. It offers verifyable facts, points out the possible negatives, and makes a reasonable arguement that the benefits can outweigh the risks.

Additionally, a point that I prefer, although it's opinion...is that it points out that it should not be a case of anyone and their deranged brother carrying a gun, but makes reasonable demands of the carrier (concealed permit or law enforcement officer, proper training, prior notification to flight crew who is carrying, etc.)

Like I said, overall I'm for the idea...if done right. The first article just was written too "gun friendly", and seemed to deny that negative effects were possible by stating that comparitively low risk consequences were "myths", and implying they were completely false.

Semper Fi!

[FreePaul]

we had a choice, try to disarm everyone,

The key word here is try. The result, as always, is disarming only the honest people.

[FreePaul]

...modern commercial airplane design does not incorporate steps for protecting electrical, computer, hydraulic, etc systems from bullets.

Surprise! The design doesn't "incorporate steps for protecting" the aircraft from crashing against buildings either. Given the two choices I'll take a chance on a stray bullet.

[RichardEdward]

marktwain, right on the money!

[RichardEdward]

on the money freepaul

[AKbear]

Rebuttals To Misguided Legislators Who Think Pilots Should Not Be Armed has some pretty good reasons why what you say is not true, including some links to a couple of aircraft engineers explaining it all.

[sungod]

Are we hiring "known terrorists" into our hospitals? Are we allowing "known terrorists" to X-ray us and our children? If so, then we have some SERIOUS problems. People should be asking why our government is allowing these people to work in positions where we are most vulnerable, LIKE HOSPITALS. What about the "known terrorists" that acquire HazMat truck driver licenses? Does this seem wise to you? I can't remember which of the 100's of interviews I watched where some goverment official said that the big surprise (and scary fact) in all this was that some of the terrorists were UNKNOWN, and therefor could not be tracked. This suggests to me that they were known as "everyday people", not "known terrorists".

[2nd amendment mama]

Here is the plane you are referring to in Hawaii:

Aloha Airlines

Injuries to Persons

Injuries	Crew	Passengers	Others	Total
------------	---------	-------------------	-------------	-----------
Fatal	1*	0	0	1*
Serious	1	7	0	8
Minor	0	57	0	57
None	3	25	1**	29
------------	---------	-------------------	-------------	-----------
Total	5	89	1	95

*Lost in flight; a sea search was unsuccessful.
**Air traffic controller seated in the observer seat in the cockpit.