pilots refuse to fly with gun loons onboard

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 23:45:03 GMT, AH#49 "Asshole™#49"@ your.net
wrote:

Bogart wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 17:35:31 GMT, AH#49 "Asshole™#49"@ your.net
wrote:

Bogart wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:01:43 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:

Yep, and that's what happened on the 4th plane. What I want to know is how
having a sky marshal on board would have made matters worse. Would those
passengers have died twice?

How would having a SM on board have helped?

Possibly by making sure that the Sky Marshall sits in first class, and
gets to shoot the first person he sees that attempts to enter the
Cockpit by force or without the "secret knock."

Sitting in first class just makes it easier for the hijackers. They'll
slaughter all the first class passengers first.


Let them try then.
I know for a fact that I can dispatch a **** stain with a knife a lot
faster then he can me, being armed with a gun.
After all, THEY don't know who is the Sky Marshall!

You and every other able bodied passenger are going to handle the
situation as the passengers on three planes have done since 9/11.

Regardless, all the more reason for the pilots to be armed as well,
just in case.

I have no objections, as long as they're trained to handle the gun
they're issued.

The 4th plane didn't know
their fate and the fate of the other planes until long after the
terrorists had taken over the cockpit and killed the pilots. What
does the SM add that would have changed their final outcome?

He would be armed and would have (I hope) shot the ****ers dead trying
to get inside.
After all, who but somebody that was incredibly stupid would try to
enter the cockpit besides flight personnel?

You're forgetting the mindset of before 9/11. Without the knowledge
of the fate of the other hijacked planes, the 4 hijackers had total
control of that plane with box cutters. One hijacker said he had a
bomb strapped to himself.

Like terrorists are trustworthy?
Don't make me laugh laugh laugh.

Again, prior to learning about the other three planes, why would those
on the Pennsylvania flight doubt they had a bomb on board? Why would
think they were not returning to the airport? Remember, prior to 9/11
domestic hijackings ended up in Cuba, passengers and plain unharmed.
No one knew they were on a suicide mission on 9/11.

Does the SM take the chance and shoot? I
don't know.

Exactly.
Until such an attempt happens again, we will never know.
I say we arm the people to the teeth.

Well, I'd like to make sure those armed are qualified to carry, but I
really don't think we need everyone armed to the teeth on airliners.

And no, a bullet that pierces the hull of a plane will not suck all the
passengers out through it like Bond, James Bond said it would in
"Goldfinger" when he was chatting to Pussy Galore.

I don't believe I implied as such. There is ammunition you can shoot
inside a plane which will not even penetrate the outside of the
fuselage.

I am sure there is.
But as long as it penetrates the skull and or any other body part of
the mad men that wish to steer a plane into the masses or a nuke power
plant below, so be it!
The flight is doomed or survivable.
I say have people aboard that can shoot the ****ers that hijacked
while in it, VS blow it out of the sky as a last resort.

I think one way or another there will never be another domestic
hijacking where the passengers will just sit there like sheep,
regardless of what the hijackers are armed with for weapons. If you
know you're probably going to die if you don't act, then you take the
necessary steps to either prevent the hijackers from executing their
plan where you'll die anyway, or you all die trying.