Roy,

If you read the post after that, I realized that these things were not so.  I was repeating a myth about decompression that I thought was true.  So maybe you should read the thread, first, before the insults fly. I know when I'm wrong, do you?

I think someone just wants the word "militia" added to the lexicon of this situation.  I never said the armed citizens cannot help.  I merely pointed out that there are many areas where they aren't able to help.

You are right, I should have read entire thread...I did NOT insult you intentionally...should have thrown in a smiley and a wink...I was just kidding about promoting you to General.

Roy the point is, that you know and I know that there is absolutely no way in hell, given the current atmosphere, could anyone, ever pass legislation allowing armed citizens aboard planes. That's a political fact. Right or wrong, nothing will change that.

The "Sky Marshalls" are being put aboard armed.
That's happening.

Hmmmmmmmmmm..... Point taken.  I do tend to think of the militia in terms of organized bands and groups of people.  I tend to think in terms of "resistance" and "underground".  Spent too much time in the military evidently.  Either that or pounded on too long by the Demo's, socialists and media.

The individual does count, and each can contribute.  Even if it's only "keeping your eyes open" for suspicious activity, and having a cell phone.

I also tend to think of militia in terms of every able bodied citizen (nearly).  So in that context, those on the flight that fought back were militia and prevented the plane from reaching a target.  Those that pitched in to help at the WTC were militia, and anyone who phoned in a "tip" was militia.

Evidently, the militia has already contributed a great deal.

Wrong question.

Q. Know how many hijackings of Israeli aircraft have been attaempted?
A. Zero. Potential hijackers KNOW they will be greeted with a gun.

[rolleyes]




What is a "massive investigation directly supporting that "gun". ? ????

Never mind. I more wanted to address the "isreal knows this all too well" part.

I guess your ststement above is why school teachers, housewives, nearly every Israeli adult male is armed with full auto weapons. Because Israel knows full auto weapons are useless against terrorists. yeah, they just handed them out thru the kindness of their hearts.

Prevent terrorist acts from being planned?? Obviously, no. Prevent them from being carried out in their entirety, unopposed. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

Not really intersted in discussing furhter Major. just some ludicrous statements of yours I had to respond to.

Ok - here's a sensible statement I will address.

But what I hear "behind the scenes" is that civilians are INCAPABLE of doing the job as well as Federal gov't personnel.

Guns are GOING TO be on the plane. The problem with gov't personnel is that they have to do @&%! much paperwork, they never get a chance to practice with their firearms. And the gov't makes them supply their own ammo.

Frankly, I'd be willing to wager that I am a better shot than at least half of the non-special forces, Delta types that are in the military and in the PD's around the country.

There's a simple rule in play here - citizens can always handle social issues better than teh gov't can. Self-defense on an airplane is no exception.

Bingo baby!!!!!!!! You just scored the winning touchdown.

For the extra point, all you gotta do is realize that IF  the passengers had a firearm, very likely they would almost all be alive as well, and the majority of bodies taken off plane would have sported the name "Mohammed."

next up - Major Smurfy [}:D]

Kudos to both of you. America can no longer sit on a collective ass and wait for the Government to take care of us. As was sadly proven on 9/11, the Gov't can't!  No one is saying grab your rifle and extra mags and "patrol" the streets looking for "sleeper agents" to put against the wall but it is time for all Americans to start being more aware of what goes on around them, prepare for the unexpected and think about the unthinkable. Those men AND women of ACTION aboard that doomed flight who refused to sit back and wait for the "authorities" to handle things are exactly what the unorganized militia concept is all about. Our forefathers may be saddened by much of what this nation has become but as long as we have heroes like this than there IS hope for America!

Oh, I get it now.

No "massive investigation" would be necessary.

Armed citizens would arrive at the future crime scene BEFORE the terrorists got there.

No worries about gettin stuck in traffic.

Emergency response time? One second. BLAM. BLAM.  Dead terrorists.



Defending our nation will ALWAYS be doen better by civilians than by some gov't agency MILES away from the soon-to-be crime scene.

Armed citizens in themselves although a component of are not a militia, even when a mass uprising of armed citizens is considered a Levee in Masse.  In addition to arms to be considered a militia, you have some type of hierarchical command structure, notice all the southern Gents of old referring to themselves as Col, etc.  
The biggest problem with the notion that the "militia" can help is that, since this is an entirely voluntary militia, unlike the Swiss or the Israeli.  There is no way to ensure that men do their duty.  Hell in both countries that a citizen doing his duty is expect you still have quite a few that attempt to get out of it.  After a short period of time in the revolution on of the biggest problems were desertions and that was when they had a know enemy and when battles would occur.  Now when every ones’ passions are high, yes you might have enough to make up patrols and guards etc.  But in a few months, I don't think so. You will only have a few left willing to do it.  Not enough to take any slack off the professionals that can be compelled to do their duty.


So in the end I think armed citizens at serendipitous places could help, but a “militia” but a militia in itself isn’t the answer.

And as has been said here, the several states NEED to get back to their Constitutionally mandated duty, as named in the Second Amendment, and as explained further in the Militia Act of 1791, of establishing a "well regulated militia."

(regulated being defined as "trained, diciplined, organized and ordered" by teh several states)

Here is the problem, you could have the exact same effect with an armed citizenry without using the bugaboo term of the militia.   But to have the proper effect with either is impossible with the current PC nation.  Most would not do their duty, the school system and the media have brained washed them.  To force arms on the current untrained masses risk creating the very problem that doesn’t happen today because normally only those who want them get them.  But you give people who are not inclined to use them a weapon without the training and discipline that either comes from a desire to use them properly or the outside force of a controlling agency is somewhat asking for trouble.  

Israeli citizens are armed for a number of reasons. Ever been there? I have.
Those near the palestinians are in constant danger of being shot up by gun wielding palestinian thugs.  ("but they're terrorists too!"-not the type of threat that we face)We have armed thugs here also. That's why many of us have CCW.
They may carry the weapons to prevent the suicide bombers, but it hasn't worked yet. That's why they're so frustrated, and so pissed.

...and garandman, your condescending sarcasm is insufferable.

Men of honor know that to insult a man, or to question another man's honor, integrity or patriotism is to ask for a fight.  Why don't you seem to be aware of this?  To do this because someone merely disagrees with you reflects poorly on your character.  

What an ironic pairing of statements.

So, for me to question YOUR charachter is "insufferable."

But for you to question mine is fine. Ahhh, I get it now

Physician, heal thyself.

You don't get it, do you.

I said that your actions reflected poorly on your character.

I didn't characterize your character, I observed.  

"Men of honor know that to insult a man, or to question another man's honor, integrity or patriotism is to ask for a fight."

Those things you don't question, in the presence of a man, without expecting a fight.
To do so from behind a keyboard is cowardly.
I don't think you're a coward, I just think you're unaware of these codes of conduct that exist amongst and between certain men.

Maybe I assume too much to think that you live by this, too.
I know you're a better man than that.  I think that you're just passionate about this issue.
I disagree with you only on the execution of this issue.