See... right there ... that's the difference culturally.
I look at the above-quoted scenario and think - why on EARTH would you not want a pistol in such a predicament?
P.J. O'Rourke had a great quote about this - something to this effect: a person who is against gun ownership has never held one in his hand when he is afraid for his life.....
I don't see any cultural differences... at all
I have been in the 'him or me' situation... and more than once I hasten to add. BUT I
still would not under any circumstance feel it appropriate to have any type of firearm onboard a civil flight, it is just asking for it really. The sheer thought that people feel it is even necessary disturbs me severely.
If the 'considered terror threat' in the US is really as bad as it is being made out to be by many posters on here... and with US having the manpower and resources it has... why in the hell isn't more being done to prevent aircraft from being subjected to these expected terror attacks? Completeley self contained Flight Decks... BETTER on ground security...? Why hasn't this or similar been done... money, sorry but its been a while now since 9/11? Or is the general feeling "Sod all that, too expensive, we'll just arm pilots, they're a skillful bunch, we can get them to shoot the terrorists instead, job done"?
Hey as a last line of defense why not just put a big red self destruct button right in the middle of the panel for when the sh*t really does it the fan!? Talk about letting the terrorist win...
You tell me what would be better?
1> Waiting with your single pistol... on the FD as a bunch of terrorists are throwing themselves at the door... trying to bust there way in?
2> Having no internal door to the FD for the terrorists to throw themselves at?