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

Skip to comments.

Criminals use knives to hijack planes--let's ban handguns!
The Sierra Times ^ | 10.04.01 | Robert A. Waters

Posted on 10/04/2001 6:14:50 AM PDT by Enemy Of The State

Criminals use knives to hijack planes--
let's ban handguns!

By
Robert A. Waters 10.04.01



It was as predictable as Ted Kennedy's bouts with the bottle and Barney Frank's bouts with his latest live-in lover.

As soon as the World Trade Center towers went down in flames and the Pentagon went up in smoke, the anti-gunners began looking for ways to link the crimes to guns. But since the skyjackers used knives to subdue the crews and passengers of the doomed planes, they knew it would be a hard sell.

Those of us who believe in gun rights, however, figured they'd find a way. Thomas Oliphant of the Boston Globe didn't disappoint.

The real problem, according to Oliphant, is the evil gun show.

These shows are the "ideal shopping mall for criminals in general and terrorists in particular." It doesn't matter that none of the knives used by the skyjackers were bought at gun shows--instead, they were almost certainly purchased at hardware stores. It doesn't matter that none of the uniforms they used to infiltrate the cockpits were bought at gun shows (there is evidence that they may have been stolen from foreign and domestic airports). In fact, there seems to be nothing to link the criminals who murdered thousands of innocent people to guns or gun shows.

But that's just an inconvenient detail.

According to Oliphant, people who oppose closing the so-called gun show "loopholes" are, like Attorney General John Ashcroft, "fanatics." (Note that the terrorists are also fanatics.)

Meanwhile, the Air Line Pilots Association has demanded that pilots be allowed to carry guns on airplanes. Union spokesman John Mazor explained that the strategy before September 11 had been to "accomodate, negotiate, and do not escalate. But that was before. The cockpit has to be defended at all costs."

The howls of rage from shocked gun-banners quickly muffled the call to arm pilots. According to anti-gun activists, bullets shot from a gun inside an airplane will blast through walls and windows, thereby decompressing the plane and causing it to crash. Captain Duane Woerth, union president, addressed that issue. The bullets supplied to the pilots would "basically come apart on first impact," he said. "They're very destructive to human tissue but it's very unlkely they would do serious damage to the fuselage."

A bevy of police officers quickly weighed in as well. Allow us to carry our weapons aboard, they said, and we won't hesitate to use them if confronted by skyjackers. Again, safety seemed to be secondary to the antis, who quickly squelched that idea, too.

Carrying guns on airplanes is nothing new. Armed sky marshals successfully ended a wave of skyjackings in the 1970s. But after the perceived threat vanished, so did the marshals. David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, estimated that now only a couple dozen remain. President Bush, lukewarm on arming pilots and on letting cops carry guns on airplanes, enthusiastically embraced the "air marshal" approach, the one deterrent sure to cost milions of taxpayer dollars.

So on the one hand you have anti-gunners calling for more restrictions on guns to foil future skyjackers (who rarely use guns). On the other hand, the pilot's union is demanding that their members be allowed to carry firearms so they'll have a fighting chance to save themselves and their passengers.

What's the general public to think?

They would do well to remember that the biggest massacre of innocent civilians was caused not by guns but by criminals using boxcutter knives. That the largest school massacre in history was caused by someone using dynamite (Andrew Kehoe, Bath, Michigan, on May 18, 1927), not guns. That even more recently, a Greyhound bus carrying more than thirty passengers was wrecked by a man carrying a knife--at least six people were killed in the ensuing crash after the man attacked the driver.

And they might do well to remember that guns save many more lives than they take.

But those who oppose guns will continue to ignore the facts. In their rush to incrementally restrict law-abiding citizens' access to self-protection, they will continue to try to close the fantasy gun show loophole. (In fact, buyers and sellers at gun shows are bound by the same laws as everyone else).

Shame on those who would try to use the tragedy of September 11 to further their anti-gun agenda.

Let me repeat, guns weren't used by the terrorists.

It was knives.

So when are we gonna close that hardware store loophole?



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: Enemy Of The State
How many times have you heard of passengers getting irate and going ballistic on a flight?

As a caveat, how many times have you heard of people with CCW permits going ballistic? Another: How many times have you heard of people getting irate and going ballistic at a gun-show?

21 posted on 10/04/2001 8:34:38 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
Actually, the real reason airlines will not agree to armed passengers is economic. They would have to stop selling alcohol on flights. They wnat to $4 of profit from each of those little bottles.
22 posted on 10/04/2001 8:35:33 AM PDT by Gunner9mm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
Hal.009 has the one reason I can see for not allowing free CCW... just get 8 or 10 on the same plane. OTOH, setting up a system whereby background checks are done for a Air Carry permit seems reasonable.
23 posted on 10/04/2001 8:36:35 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
My fear is that while pursuing our 'nice guy' lifestyles, we've appeared weak to our adversaries who will jump on it as an opportunity to take advantage. Bin Laden is like Rodney King, and too many (liberals) have been conditioned to simply giving him a ticket(prosecuting) and sending him on his way, rather than yanking him out of the car and doing the pinata-baton dance on his head (taking it to his country so all of his friends and relatives can enjoy a retaliatory strike).

I share your concern about any 'Joe' armed and untrained on a plane, but then that should worry the terriorist as well. Of course, these guys don't care about the outcome, so whatever happens is going to be messy and some innocents may be involved. With suicidal terriorists, about the best you can hope for is the least loss of life when taking them down.

24 posted on 10/04/2001 8:37:00 AM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
Oh but that wouldnt happen if civilians were allowed to carry their weapons on the plane would it? no, we could all pull out our sidearm and just pop one in his damn head huh?

The threat of such keeps down public mass murderers in places where firearms are freely carried. Even suiciders tend to want to actually accomplish something.

not to mention ripping a damn hole in the side of the plane or the fuselauge.

Minor consideration. Planes leak anyway. The biggest problem is the fogging up as the air pressure changes causing the passengers to freak out. No, the biggest problem is missing and hitting the pilot and/or controls. A couple of hours of training can solve that problem.

25 posted on 10/04/2001 8:40:34 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
Hypothetical: You're sitting in the livingroom and hear your kid screaming outside. Your neighbor is beating the crap out of him. Do you A) call 911, or B) grab the nearest baseball bat and pulverize the sonofab!tch!!? "

What if the baseball bat, and the police are ten miles away...straight down.

26 posted on 10/04/2001 8:41:49 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Enemy Of The State
>Myself, I dont agree with letting civilian citizens to carry guns on the airlines but I do support the Idea of all police and military personel being authorized to do so when traveling.

And you are probably aware that those that have CCWs must have a cleaner background and have undergone a full FBI background check and police don't?

I feel safer knowing a cop can be an ex-felon and a citizen with a CCW can't have any felony arrests.

And a sky marshall with three days training and a federal pension is going to save us all.

Sometimes head in sand is best.

snooker

27 posted on 10/04/2001 8:42:45 AM PDT by snooker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: snooker
And a sky marshall with three days training and a federal pension is going to save us all.

Actually they were talking about 36 weeks.

28 posted on 10/04/2001 8:44:24 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Enemy Of The State
The last thing I want on an airplane that Im flying on is some Joe Smith losing his head and deciding that he wants to be a hero. Thanks but I'll pass. Just because people have the right to carry guns (which I support) doesnt mean that all of them have the mental capacity to handle such a situation. How many times have you heard of passengers getting irate and going ballistic on a flight? Well just imagine how that situation could turn out if they were allowed to carry a gun on them while being on that plane.

Gee...you sound just like Sarah Brady talking about concealed carry in general.

What are you afraid of? "Explosive depressurization?" That's a crock, and that objection has been refuted many times on this site alone, several times by me.

30 posted on 10/04/2001 9:04:29 AM PDT by Barak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 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.

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