On Jan 9, 10:50*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote :





On Jan 9, 10:23*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
news:9c147a38-17b3-4003-b879-

:

On Jan 9, 6:36*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Well, actually, the more immediate concerns are the likelyhood of
a pilot actually stopping a trained soldier with a gun.

Yea, I guess it seems different when you take the argument to the
ridicules extreme.

It isn't a ridiculous extreme. It's the likely scenario in the event
of an

organised hijacking.

So you believe that the ridiculous buffoons who hijacked the planes on
9/11/01 would not have been stopped by anything less than highly
trained military soldiers??

Nope.

*These guys had box cutters. The only way

they were able to succeed is because we guaranteed them an environment
in which they would encounter minimum resistance.

Yep, that's right. that was our training then. It was thought
appropriate for the safety of the aircaft.
We have different training now. It doesnt involve guns. The vast
majority of pilots realise they are not the answer.

But hey, why am I wasting time writing?

You can't read.

Gee, you caught me. I never learned to read. Its interesting how
someone like me can put together a reasonable, logical possition and
someone like you can read it and not be able to respond with logic or
reason and then believe you are in the right because you have more
emotional investment in the issue.

-Robert