Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 5/21/2002 7:34:13 AM EDT
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/21/gen.war.on.terror/index.html [/url] Wouldn't want that!! That'd be too dangerous [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 2:31:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 2:47:43 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 2:49:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2002 2:49:21 PM EDT by tatjana]
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 7:51:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2002 7:55:20 PM EDT by ckapsl]
Originally Posted By tatjana: What does it say about an administration that it would rather shoot down an aircraft with hundreds of its citizens aboard than give a highly trained and disciplined individual who is 75% certain to be ex-military a gunsafe with a revolver in it?
View Quote
That we should not trust their officials with the post of dog catcher? This decision pi**es me off. We need to start working on Congress to decisively override it. In the first bill, they gave the administration the option to allow armed pilots. No more.
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 7:56:50 PM EDT
LIBERALS
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 8:06:36 PM EDT
My opinion is that this is a mistake. Carrying firearms on board planes has worked for Israel...it could work for us. I worry that we have spinelss, mindless people dictating how we must live/end our lives.
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 8:28:52 PM EDT
Here is the letter I just sent. I see no reason why we shouldn't blast them with similar emails of indignation, cc'd in the thousands to Reps and Senators. I don't normally say this, but lets blast 'em. Her is their email address: gencouns@ntsb.gov To: Office of the General Counsel National Transportation Safety Board Dear General Counsel: I was dismayed to see your Undersecretary, John Magaw, giving false testimony before Congress regarding the arming of pilots in the cockpit. He stated that pilots couldn't use firearms to protect the cockpit from an intruder as they "have to concentrate on flying the plane". Several months ago a pilot used a fire axe to stop just such an intrusion while his co-pilot "concentrated on flying". The fact that they are issued fire axes and extinguishers is itself an admission that pilots may fly and chew gum at the same time if their safety and that of their aircraft are at stake. Do you now maintain that this brave pilot, who stopped the intrusion with swift counter-violence, should not have taken this action? It has been widely credited with saving the lives of everyone on the flight but now it is disregarded by Mr. Magaw. He has told Congress that locked cockpit doors solve the problem, but pilots acknowledge that they must use the bathroom from time to time. We are told that guns are "not the answer" in the hands of anyone but "trained sky marshalls". However, the same training does not allow pilots to responsibly wield firearms. Is this really the time for petty turf wars? Incongruously, stewardesses may be allowed to carry stun guns, though that is being "studied". If "non-lethal" weapons are the answer, then why do you continue to issue sky marshalls lethal weapons? Finally I understand that there is a new emergency number people should dial if they are hijacked, which will notify the "appropriate law enforcement authorities". Unfortunately for the caller, that will be in the form of an F-16, sent to blast them out of the sky instead of "risking" the same armed cockpits that have helped keep El Al hijack-free the last 30 years. I submit that you and your agency are irresponsibly endangering the American public and I ask you to immediately allow our pilots to use lethal force in defense of the cockpit. Sincerely, (Sim Jr), Indianapolis, IN 317-...-.... cc: Rep. Dan Burton, IN Sen. Richard Luger, IN Per this story: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020521/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cockpit_guns_5&printer=1 From which I quote: John Magaw, undersecretary for transportation security, said: . "Pilots need to concentrate on flying the plane," Magaw said later in the hearing. Specially trained air marshals should be the only armed officers on board, he added.
Link Posted: 5/21/2002 10:19:28 PM EDT
It makes me sick, but I am not surprised. The issue is not over yet though. The unions will fight for it, and I know I will fight for it for the rest of my days.
Link Posted: 5/22/2002 3:38:59 AM EDT
The utter stupidity in this decision is rediculous. They will allow armed Air Marshalls not only on the plane, but in the general population of the airplane, But giving two pilots arms in a LOCKED cockpit is too dangerous to be considered? I'm serious, hoplopobia and political correctness are going to destroy this country. If our government could collectively put together two friggin brain cells satan would need long underwear and an eddie bauer catalog. I am upset. BTW, I would trust a pilot with a firearm FAR more than I would trust an air marshall. They are underpaid, undertrained, government lackeys. Lastly, it is the responsibility of the PIC (Pilot in Command) to ensure and maintain the safety of his aircraft, flight, and passengers. You cannot take away their authority, or tools necessary to fulfill this responsibility. I hope the pilots union strikes, but I doubt they will. Mike
Link Posted: 5/22/2002 3:55:14 AM EDT
[size=6][b]BULLSHIT!!!!!![/b][/size=6]
Top Top