Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 7/10/2002 9:11:51 AM EDT
CNN poll: Would you feel safer flying if pilots were armed with handguns?

Currently Yes - 49%; No - 51%

[url=http://www.cnn.com/index.html]CNN[/url]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:13:41 AM EDT
[#1]
done.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:13:58 AM EDT
[#2]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:14:07 AM EDT
[#3]
50/50 now, come on people, let's get on this one.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:16:37 AM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:19:44 AM EDT
[#5]
Done..

Still 50/50
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:19:55 AM EDT
[#6]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:21:42 AM EDT
[#7]
Done.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:27:16 AM EDT
[#8]
.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:38:26 AM EDT
[#9]
We need to get to work:

49% Yes
51% No

BTT.

Merlin
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:40:17 AM EDT
[#10]
Would you feel safer flying if pilots were armed with handguns?  
Yes     49%  16905 votes  
No     51%  17304 votes  
Total:  34,209 votes  


I think it would be safer if everybody could carry.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:45:43 AM EDT
[#11]
Fire For Effect Over.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:48:14 AM EDT
[#12]
I think it would add a small deterrent measure to someone thinking of pulling something spur of the moment, but given some committed BGs, put yourself in the pilot's position:  A few or more "terrorists" want the cockpit, you say no.  They grab the nearest flight attendent and slit his or her throat, then grab the nearest kid and threaten the same.

What do you do?  I don't know what I would do, even if armed.  

No need for an answer, the question is posed to provoke thought.


Noah
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:48:48 AM EDT
[#13]
[-=(_)=-]   [-=(_)=-] [-=(_)=-]


[b]Follow up air strikes needed!!!!![/b]

Enemy is still ahead!!!
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:53:03 AM EDT
[#14]
They should reword that question to something like this:

In the event of a hijacking of the plane you're travelling on, which would you feel safer having:

A)An armed pilot that could stop the attacker(s)-or-

B)An F-16 with Sidewinder missiles ready to shoot your plane down.

Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:57:20 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
They should reword that question to something like this:

In the event of a hijacking of the plane you're travelling on, which would you feel safer having:

A)An armed pilot that could stop the attacker(s)-or-

B)An F-16 with Sidewinder missiles ready to shoot your plane down.

View Quote


Well, that answer is easy.  We all know that the Libs are ready to give their lives for other people, so I say B.

Personally, I would choose A.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 9:59:52 AM EDT
[#16]
50/50 now...
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:00:28 AM EDT
[#17]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:04:21 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
I think it would add a small deterrent measure to someone thinking of pulling something spur of the moment, but given some committed BGs, put yourself in the pilot's position:  A few or more "terrorists" want the cockpit, you say no.  They grab the nearest flight attendent and slit his or her throat, then grab the nearest kid and threaten the same.

What do you do?  I don't know what I would do, even if armed.  

Noah
View Quote


Pop the cabin depress valve, wait 90 seconds for anyone not under a mask to lose consciousness, then give the airplane to the copilot, exit the cockpit on a walk-around 02 bottle having the copilot lock the flight deck door behind you, and shoot the S.O.B.s.

Just off the top of my head.

QS
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:08:09 AM EDT
[#19]
Votes close:

50% yes  Total Votes: 22027
50% No   Total Votes: 22402

Total votes:44,429

keep voteing show the liberals that we want pilots armed.
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:13:25 AM EDT
[#20]
Done. Would feel better if everybody could carry. Just my .02 worth
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:14:23 AM EDT
[#21]
Done.

49% Yes
51% No
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:19:46 AM EDT
[#22]
My personal preference would be to arm the pilots and provide at least two plainclothed Sky Marshals.  You'd know about the pilots, but the SMs would be the wild cards.  

Ideally, the SMs would be trained to stay quiet and innocuous, and not be ID'd to the crew, yet somehow be assigned an aisle seat.  They'd have to not look as if they just graduated from Parris Island.  Any big-headed macho types running their mouths to impress female (or male, hey, I can be open-minded) flight attendants would be disciplined.  

If I were plotting something using an airliner, the pilots being armed could be dealt with, but I would be put off by the one to three "wild cards" riding mixed in with the passengers.

Several of us were discussing the threats Al Queida made this past weekend against US and Jewish targets.  We were thinking that the next attacks will be different; maybe on municipal water supplies with bio agents, or explosive-laden private planes crashed into nuclear power plants, or synchronized explosions on multiple subway trains in the same city.  Taking out 20 subway or Metro trains at once would not be as dramatic as the WTC, but would have the terror effect.  

Hope no BGs are reading.


Noah

Link Posted: 7/10/2002 10:33:31 AM EDT
[#23]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 11:11:08 AM EDT
[#24]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 12:32:46 PM EDT
[#25]
[url]http://www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/topic.html?id=131275[/url]
Link Posted: 7/10/2002 12:36:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Done 50/50
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top