pilots refuse to fly with gun loons onboard

" Bogart " wrote in message ws.com...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:02:54 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


Is that what you really got from what I wrote? At some point if the
SM is to take action he has to use some sort of force.

Agreed.

How do you
suggest he draw out a gun or other weapon and not be jumped by
passengers in the post 9/11 era without announcing he's the SM.

He simply acts. Quickly and decisively. Against the terrorists. It
won't take long for the passengers to figure it out once they regain
their senses from a handgun being fired in closed-in, close quarters.
However, there is a danger of the passengers jumping the air marshal
*before* shots are fired, and as the good guy's weapon is being
brought on target. This likelihood is directly proportional to the
stealth, speed and smoothness upon which the weapon is deployed. This
is done with training and practice. Lots of it.

At
that point he loses the advantage of surprise.

Not necessarily. If he makes his presence known a tad too
early...maybe. But see my above comments.

There hasn't been, to my knowledge, an incident involving a terrorist
attempt since 9/11 when a SM was on board. If ever there is, you have
the potential of having the SM attacked and subdued by the passengers
before he ever gets a chance to do anything.

There has been a case of a guy with a very weak bladder that decided
to try and rush the front restroom. Two air marshals deployed
unhindered and unmolested, cuffed the "offending person", and took him
into custody. The toilet remained safe and intact from any
"internally stored, biological fluids". Both officers perhaps
deployed early. One should have been able to handle the situation,
while the other remained incognito but alert. It was sort of an
embarrassment for all parties involved, but the officers actions were
not entirely unwarranted.

Perhaps, but very unlikely, since the people will know who the terrorists
are long before the SM takes action.

Really? You honestly think that now with SM's on board it hasn't
occurred to the hijackers to bring an extra man on for the purpose of
taking out the SM?

You don't think AMs know this? I don't know if they commonly travel
in pairs, but I do know that sometimes there is more than one on
board, and not necessarily sitting together. Also, some airlines
don't have a problem with law enforcement officers carrying while
enroute to their destinations. Where are *they* sitting?


So tell me, how often is an undercover officer jumped while trying to stop a
mugging? Seems people are pretty well able to tell who is the real threat,
and who is protecting everyone else.

You seem less than adept at figuring it out.

Sounds like empty emotional rhetoric to me.

Talk to a SM. There are whole lot of them who don't agree with you.

Cite please, that SMs feel they are more likely to be seen as a threat than
as an aid.

Let me guess, you're rap's resident nutcase? I didn't say SM's feel
they are more likely to be seen as a " threat than as an aid. ".
I'm telling you how they feel. It's from personal experience and
personal contact. Not every one is an amateur detective.

So what are you saying, then? That they feel like they are not needed
and feel like they aren't doing much good?

Teek

Feel free to argue your " theories " with someone else.