Flashermac Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 True ... but what else might happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Hmmm, yes, allowing people with arms on planes is a bit dum...maybe this guy is just saying what he thinks others want to hear...Americans love the strong arm approach, 'how the west was won'...he's pandering to those by such statements. And what is it with these fucks and their anti-abortion stances...i really dislike 'don' Giuliani, as to me he is nothing more than a criminal (would make a perfect president then...) but he is pro-abortion. Damnit, what a poor choice of candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Heard on thr radio today that Ron Paul believes disarming people, especially those boarding airplanes, is a disjudice. If people were allowed to protect themselves, 9/11 might never have happened. I never said Ron Paul was perfect....just a bit different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 "Hmmm, yes, allowing people with arms on planes is a bit dum...maybe this guy is just saying what he thinks others want to hear...Americans love the strong arm approach, 'how the west was won'...he's pandering to those by such statements." When people used to be able to take guns on planes, none of the shit of 9/11 ever occurred. I bet some of the people who rode the ride into the World Trade Centers wished they had guns. A disarmed populace is a captive populace. And contrary to popular myth, guns do not kill. It is people who kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Here we go again. Bullets also make holes in pressurized airplanes. This is where you tell us all armed passengers would undergo a rigorous training course and promise not to panic when the plane goes into a dive and the stewardess gets her throat cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 whatever your collective opinions are on guns on planes by citizens I don't think Paul's position is pandering. That part of the constitution is sacrosanct to libertarians and his position would reflect that I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 Air marshals have special ammunition that will not penetrate an aircraft's hull. Instead, it takes out the target with massive tissue damage. Ordinary proles can't buy such ammunition. p.s. Can't remember a time it was allowed to carry weapons on board a civilian plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 The air marshals use to carry .44 magnum snub-nosed revolvers which generally were loaded with such stuff as the Glaser round, which is made up of buckshot pellets. Short barrel meant a lower velocity. The bullet could main a person but rarely could kill. Now, I think they have heavy loads. Remember the Jehovah Witness missionary just back from South America who panicked after boarding a plane in Florida. He panicked and fled the plane and was shot down dead by Air Marshals. A bullet will not down a plane. There is talk of allowing pilots to be armed, stewardness to be armed, and those with concealed carry permits. I guess some pilots are already armed and active police are allowed to carry a live weapon aboard a plane. As for a gun taking down an airplane, that is just pure myth shit. What always bug the shit out of me is that the first person killed, according to the 9/11 Commision report, probably was killed by a gun. I always felt that some if not all the highjackers were armed with guns. Easy to acquire after going thru security. Remember the shithead just a little while ago who got 15 guns aboard the cabin of an airplane. One of the guns was an assult gun. The shithead was an airport employee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 Is it a Glock model that is made entirely of plastic or fiber glass? Almost nothing for a metal detector to react to. I've also seen the knives carried by Navy SEALs - no metal at all in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 This article is pro-gun and deals with guns on planes... http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-lott090203.asp It seems to be saying that it might make sense for the pilots to have guns. Shooting the hijackers before they take control of the aircraft would be an option for an armed sky marshal if he can get a shot in before they get to the cockpit. Of course a pilot with a gun to his head will generally do what he's told. The idea of the general population being allowed to bring their Saturday night specials on the plane isn't discussed. Probably because it's too easy to imagine some paranoid clown shooting any guy with a beard who stays too long in the washroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.