In message ciHKb.302864$_M.1726899@attbi_s54, John R Weiss
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote...
No, Chad - I'm going from what I've read.

Maybe the proponents had got overheated, but they were quite genuinely
claiming that Unarmed Pilots = Certain Death while other measures were
useless and pointless.

I can only read what they wrote.

Who is the "they" and what did "they" write? Please copy for us "what they
wrote" and "what [you]'ve read."

+++++
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Date: 2001-09-25 19:09:36 PST
From: John R Weiss )
Subject: PIlots want to carry guns

If you take a look at the multitude of airplane models in service, and
the variations in the doors, and the [lack of] space available for
double doors or other auxiliary installations, you may decide that all
that engineering, certification, fabrication, and installation is NOT
cheaper than arming pilots...

From: Viper56-FW )
Subject: Divided passenger planes?
Newsgroups: alt.aviation.safety, rec.aviation.military,
rec.aviation.piloting, rec.travel.air
Date: 2001-09-20 08:36:38 PST

Let's consider the money involved in posibly a major structural change
that would only create a different problem(s).

+++++
Only Guns Can Stop Terrorists
By John R. Lott Jr. Mr. Lott is a resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of "More
Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2000).
....Strengthening cockpit doors is probably a good idea, but given
current airline design it may create dangerous differences in air
pressure between the cockpit and cabin.
+++++

From: Drew Johnson )
Subject: Divided passenger planes?
Newsgroups: alt.aviation.safety, rec.aviation.military,
rec.aviation.piloting, rec.travel.air
Date: 2001-09-21 15:04:03 PST

We have little confidence in any 'door solution' that the government and
airline executives might be able to come up with.

+++++
From: Drew Johnson )
Subject: Divided passenger planes?
Newsgroups: alt.aviation.safety, rec.aviation.military,
rec.aviation.piloting, rec.travel.air
Date: 2001-09-22 11:26:08 PST

If one secure door was important, it would have been done two decades
ago, my friend.

+++++

From: Drew Johnson )
Subject: Divided passenger planes?
Newsgroups: alt.aviation.safety, rec.aviation.military,
rec.aviation.piloting, rec.travel.air
Date: 2001-09-22 11:15:20 PST

I guess you just don't understand the mind-set of executive management.
You are talking about taking up "space" that a fare paying passenger
could be sitting. Or, on the other hand a MAJOR "reconfiguration" of
thousands of aircraft, which will cost airlines BILLIONS.

The reason we find ourselves in the position we are in today is that it
would "cost" more than the damn bean counters were willing to spend.
Whether it is/was in the form of actual cost or lost revenue.
+++++

From: Drew Johnson )
Subject: We Got Weapons !!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Date: 2001-10-16 13:35:05 PST

"In reality" . .This is the same, tired old "quick fix" mentality to
which the corporate bozos always revert -and is NOT going to thwart a
dedicated . . or strong individual from gaining access.

+++++
From: Garner Miller )
Subject: Trained Pilots Should Carry Firearms
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Date: 2002-05-03 20:21:33 PST

My point is that I don't care how impregnable you think you can make the
door, I guarantee there WILL be a way in. Another shoe bomber waiting
in line at the first-class lavatory while he casually slips his shoe off
is about all it would take.
++++++

I haven't seen anything from any of the proponents of armed pilots that that
single measure is either the panacea or a replacement for all other
measures (or
ANY other measures, for that matter)! All the credible posts I've read (and
you've been here long enough to know the "incredible" posters)
see arming pilots
as a means of last defense when all the other measures have failed, and better
than the other credible alternative when a terrorist gains access to
the cockpit
when airborne.

Whereas my concern remains that "arming the pilots" is a quick,
convenient and cheap (from the business' point of view) option, compared
to securing the cockpit from intrusion. After all, if you've got a belt,
do you _need_ an expensive pair of braces?

I'm not opposed to it as a last inner layer, just concerned that it not
be used to duck other measures.
--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk