To: Robinson Winslow
"...'A small airplane weighing less than a large SUV and traveling at 120 mph just doesn't pose the same kind of threat or create as narrow a response window as a fully loaded airliner traveling at 400 mph,' Boyer explained...."
"Same" kind of threat, no, but a threat nonetheless. I wholeheartedly support aviation, including GA, but public safety and security must be paramount.
The window reopens following the event. A life lost to a nutbag in a light aircraft carrying [ fill in the blank ] is not so fortunate.
9 posted on
01/08/2005 4:06:08 PM PST by
Chummy
(Liberals -- the other Red meat.)
To: Chummy
I wholeheartedly support aviation, including GA, but public safety and security must be paramount.That's a very dangerous precedent you're allowing to be set.
"I wholeheartedly support (fill in the blank) but public safety and security must be paramount." Hunting? Shooting? Owning one's own vehicle?
107 posted on
01/08/2005 7:05:00 PM PST by
Chemist_Geek
("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
To: Chummy
Even the smallest plane weighs several thousand pounds and when flown by a terrorist at a high rate of speed into a dense crowd of civilians will certainly result in the deaths of at least hundreds of people.
This is just from the result of the kinetic energy of a small aircraft plowing through a crowd at 150 mph WITHOUT explosives. If you figure any incendiary device or other dispersal weapons the deaths could be in the thousands.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson