U.S. pilots allowed to carry guns.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Giving a pilot a gun is not the answer. Guns in the hands on amateurs just cause more problems.
There's no way anyone is going to keep a suicidal nutter of an aeroplane, and allowing pilots to carry hand guns will just add to the problems...more innocent people will die as a result.... I'd rather have a couple of special forces, trained in use of firearms, sat at the front of each cabin, in uniform and body armour protecting the cockpit door if need be. But allowing a pilot to have a gun is a big mistake. His / her job is to fly the aeroplane, not act like Rambo. Leave that job to someone who's trained how to do it, and I don't mean some $30000 per year, straight off the street guy whos had 1 weeks training in the use of firearms.
The visible deterent of a couple of jugheads in body armour should be enough to deter a many of these nutters from trying anything, and if not then these guys are trained to deal with the situation.
There's no way anyone is going to keep a suicidal nutter of an aeroplane, and allowing pilots to carry hand guns will just add to the problems...more innocent people will die as a result.... I'd rather have a couple of special forces, trained in use of firearms, sat at the front of each cabin, in uniform and body armour protecting the cockpit door if need be. But allowing a pilot to have a gun is a big mistake. His / her job is to fly the aeroplane, not act like Rambo. Leave that job to someone who's trained how to do it, and I don't mean some $30000 per year, straight off the street guy whos had 1 weeks training in the use of firearms.
The visible deterent of a couple of jugheads in body armour should be enough to deter a many of these nutters from trying anything, and if not then these guys are trained to deal with the situation.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuckles: Good Info. Your point is well made and easily understood. There is no doubt that America is a rogue superpower. But every other country, big and small, has its own little "dirty business" department. Politics is a global phenomena, and politicians, like dogs, can smell each other a mile apart. There's power, greed, corruption and influence in all governments. But for now "Pax Americana" has replaced "Pax Romana" as the World's dominant power. Even though I don't own a gun, I'm thankful to be a citizen of the World's most powerful country. 
Moderator
Quote from Dick Moser:
Dick,
The first rule of aviation is FLY THE AIRPLANE! The whole idea of arming pilots is to insure that the pilots are able to continue to FLY THE AIRPLANE! The only flaw in your "FLY THE AIRPLANE" logic is that once Abdul gets in the cockpit, it will be HIM that flys the plane. Unless there is a reliable way of preventing him from taking it, the airplane is his. There is no such thing as an impregnable cockpit in any current airliner. As far as quelling disturbances in the cabin, that's not the job of the pilots. You are kidding about arming flight attendants, aren't you?
Chuck,
You SURE you're not "anti American"?
Guns in the cockpit? Pilots carrying guns? Nonsense! Any professional pilot who subscribes to this notion has forgotten the first rule of being an aviator ... FLY THE AIRPLANE. Pilots have no business leaving their post to quell an uprising in the cabin. Better to make the cockpit impregnable so the pilots can carry out their primary responsibility ... FLY THE AIRPLANE.
Here is a better plan. Let's train the flight attendents to carry out a sky marshal's job. Let the flight attendents carry guns. Train flight attendents to use firearms.
Here is a better plan. Let's train the flight attendents to carry out a sky marshal's job. Let the flight attendents carry guns. Train flight attendents to use firearms.
The first rule of aviation is FLY THE AIRPLANE! The whole idea of arming pilots is to insure that the pilots are able to continue to FLY THE AIRPLANE! The only flaw in your "FLY THE AIRPLANE" logic is that once Abdul gets in the cockpit, it will be HIM that flys the plane. Unless there is a reliable way of preventing him from taking it, the airplane is his. There is no such thing as an impregnable cockpit in any current airliner. As far as quelling disturbances in the cabin, that's not the job of the pilots. You are kidding about arming flight attendants, aren't you?
Chuck,
You SURE you're not "anti American"?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ft, Lauderdale,FL
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck.
Your post was well written and thought out. I know of the camps you are talking about, and I also know of plenty of operations where CIA has engaged in terrorism to further it's aims. Toppling Alliende of Chile comes to mind, The Bay of Pigs as well, but all of this has to be taken in the context of the times. The U.S government was profoundly afraid of Soviet expansion within the hemesphere and took, in retrospect, very questionable steps to thwart that. We all know about this. It is well documented.
I would, however, be careful using the word "rogue superpower". For all it's faults I think everyone here knows, in particular the Europeans, what the U.S. has done for the world in the last century. I shudder to think what the world would be like if Hitler had prevailed, or if the Soviet model had come out victorious at the end of the cold war. If we had to "choose" a superpower I doubt we could do better.
As for Guns. I am a pilot in the U.S. I fly domestic. I have flown over the smoldering hole in Manhattan doing the Hudson visual into LGA. I am deeply concerned about security, but I don't think guns in the cockpit is the answer. I have read posts from both sides of the fence and agree with most of them, but I just can't get used to the idea. one thing is for sure, this will be debated for a long time to come.
Your post was well written and thought out. I know of the camps you are talking about, and I also know of plenty of operations where CIA has engaged in terrorism to further it's aims. Toppling Alliende of Chile comes to mind, The Bay of Pigs as well, but all of this has to be taken in the context of the times. The U.S government was profoundly afraid of Soviet expansion within the hemesphere and took, in retrospect, very questionable steps to thwart that. We all know about this. It is well documented.
I would, however, be careful using the word "rogue superpower". For all it's faults I think everyone here knows, in particular the Europeans, what the U.S. has done for the world in the last century. I shudder to think what the world would be like if Hitler had prevailed, or if the Soviet model had come out victorious at the end of the cold war. If we had to "choose" a superpower I doubt we could do better.
As for Guns. I am a pilot in the U.S. I fly domestic. I have flown over the smoldering hole in Manhattan doing the Hudson visual into LGA. I am deeply concerned about security, but I don't think guns in the cockpit is the answer. I have read posts from both sides of the fence and agree with most of them, but I just can't get used to the idea. one thing is for sure, this will be debated for a long time to come.
Left Seat 747
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Malaysia
Age: 80
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tripower 455 - You are right, in everything you said.
For those who don't feel they have the skill, experience, training, judgement required YOU WILL NOT BE OBLIGATED TO CARRY A FIREARM!
If this is actually enacted (I doub't it unfortunately) it will be an option to carry or not to carry. The bad guys then know they run the risk of running into Tripower 455 or Flying Guy when they bash in the cockpit door. Bashers will be greeted with a face full of pistol. I WILL immediately pull the trigger. Not too tough a snap decision for me.
For those who don't feel they have the skill, experience, training, judgement required YOU WILL NOT BE OBLIGATED TO CARRY A FIREARM!
If this is actually enacted (I doub't it unfortunately) it will be an option to carry or not to carry. The bad guys then know they run the risk of running into Tripower 455 or Flying Guy when they bash in the cockpit door. Bashers will be greeted with a face full of pistol. I WILL immediately pull the trigger. Not too tough a snap decision for me.
Grandpa Aerotart
Tripower455,
Yes I'm absolutely certain. Dont mistake healthy debate for anti American! You're probably a parent, ever heard the expression 'tough love'.
Raas767,
Twas not I how used the expression 'Rogue Superpower', and believe it is rather stonger than I would have chosen.
Yes the world owes the US a debt of gratitude for it's help during the period 1941-1945. Yes things like the Berlin Airlift would not have been as successful without the help of the US. Yes reconstruction of Europe and Japan would not have been as successful without the US. Yes SOME of what the US did in the 50s, 60s and 70s needs to be judged in the context of the times, to suggest that by the 80s the American Govt didn't know the USSR was a castle of cards is to insult their security and Intelligence organisations.
Yes Saddam is a C**T and needed to be stopped.
However I fear the US is now reaping what it has sowed in the Middle East and other parts of the world. You just can't remain the school bully for ever without someone coming up and giving you a bloody nose sooner or later.
If the US and UN can't see that, rightly or wrongly, there are issues that caused 911 then we are in for a torrid 21st century. Despite what MANY American Citizens seem to believe 911 was NOT a strike out of the blue, merely a terrible escalation of an on-going war against people who will use religion to give some credibility to their horrific actions.
Like I said you're fighting the last war, which ended on 911, there are myriad ways of achieving the aims of the Bin Ladens of this world, perhaps removing some of their 'cause celeb' will do more in the medium term than a re run of 'The Green Berrets'.
On the other hand, if his 'cause' is the conversion of the entire world to his version of Islam then find me something that flies and carries $hitloads of things that go 'BANG'!!
Chuck.
Yes I'm absolutely certain. Dont mistake healthy debate for anti American! You're probably a parent, ever heard the expression 'tough love'.
Raas767,
Twas not I how used the expression 'Rogue Superpower', and believe it is rather stonger than I would have chosen.
Yes the world owes the US a debt of gratitude for it's help during the period 1941-1945. Yes things like the Berlin Airlift would not have been as successful without the help of the US. Yes reconstruction of Europe and Japan would not have been as successful without the US. Yes SOME of what the US did in the 50s, 60s and 70s needs to be judged in the context of the times, to suggest that by the 80s the American Govt didn't know the USSR was a castle of cards is to insult their security and Intelligence organisations.
Yes Saddam is a C**T and needed to be stopped.
However I fear the US is now reaping what it has sowed in the Middle East and other parts of the world. You just can't remain the school bully for ever without someone coming up and giving you a bloody nose sooner or later.
If the US and UN can't see that, rightly or wrongly, there are issues that caused 911 then we are in for a torrid 21st century. Despite what MANY American Citizens seem to believe 911 was NOT a strike out of the blue, merely a terrible escalation of an on-going war against people who will use religion to give some credibility to their horrific actions.
Like I said you're fighting the last war, which ended on 911, there are myriad ways of achieving the aims of the Bin Ladens of this world, perhaps removing some of their 'cause celeb' will do more in the medium term than a re run of 'The Green Berrets'.
On the other hand, if his 'cause' is the conversion of the entire world to his version of Islam then find me something that flies and carries $hitloads of things that go 'BANG'!!
Chuck.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still dont think Tripower and Flyinguy will need a firearm as if someone manages to get in flightdeck by taking a specially constucted steel door out then the methods they use are either going to:
a) Take the crew out with it anyway!
b) Knock them so senseless from the blast that Uncle Binnys men are going to have no problem overpowering them anyway.
As was said earlier, FLY THE PLANE and dont try and turn yourself into some sort of aviation Rambo - leave it to the professionls! And yes I know some of you pilots are ex-military but a lot are not, they have come through the usual degree/flight school route. Also you aren't military now, you are a civvy - if you want to play with guns in confined spaces join up again.
I thought Chucks article was very well written as well, the website and the associated Anti-WHISC sites make interesting reading, as do the couple of manuals they have declassified. As he said, just because you have a pop at the USs policies DOES NOT make you anti-American, Christ if that was the case we could assume that Bush is anti-rest-of-the-world which such atitudes as he has had to the Kyoto Agreement!!!!
Julian.
a) Take the crew out with it anyway!
b) Knock them so senseless from the blast that Uncle Binnys men are going to have no problem overpowering them anyway.
As was said earlier, FLY THE PLANE and dont try and turn yourself into some sort of aviation Rambo - leave it to the professionls! And yes I know some of you pilots are ex-military but a lot are not, they have come through the usual degree/flight school route. Also you aren't military now, you are a civvy - if you want to play with guns in confined spaces join up again.
I thought Chucks article was very well written as well, the website and the associated Anti-WHISC sites make interesting reading, as do the couple of manuals they have declassified. As he said, just because you have a pop at the USs policies DOES NOT make you anti-American, Christ if that was the case we could assume that Bush is anti-rest-of-the-world which such atitudes as he has had to the Kyoto Agreement!!!!
Julian.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In da north country
Age: 62
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tri-Power 455 is right on with his postings,
I'm not sure what experience the anti gun folks have with handguns, but if you were to get together with Sir Tri-power(please let it be a 1011)or any of the other folks who have some experience with handguns,or me, I think we could convince you through the few hours of popping off several hundred rounds of ammunition, that shooting a hand gun and being proficient with it , is not all that difficult! So, to then be put through some official training program, you would be more than capable of being proficient at using a hand gun! How many hours, or how many V-1 cuts did it take you to be proficient at making that decision? Times up dude! what was it? What was the decision?
The decisions we have to make every day,(IMHO) are far more difficult than being able to know when we must use our weapon
This has been a most enjoyable discussion, albeit,split from both sides of the ocean!
Tri-Power, I would love to go shooting with you sometime! Are you ever in Idaho?
I'm not sure what experience the anti gun folks have with handguns, but if you were to get together with Sir Tri-power(please let it be a 1011)or any of the other folks who have some experience with handguns,or me, I think we could convince you through the few hours of popping off several hundred rounds of ammunition, that shooting a hand gun and being proficient with it , is not all that difficult! So, to then be put through some official training program, you would be more than capable of being proficient at using a hand gun! How many hours, or how many V-1 cuts did it take you to be proficient at making that decision? Times up dude! what was it? What was the decision?
The decisions we have to make every day,(IMHO) are far more difficult than being able to know when we must use our weapon
This has been a most enjoyable discussion, albeit,split from both sides of the ocean!
Tri-Power, I would love to go shooting with you sometime! Are you ever in Idaho?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Buckinhamshire
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This connversation worries me. In Britain it is illegal to own handguns and the Plt's weapon would be an extra one to be used by a hijacker. Discharging a weapon is likely to cause a breach and depressurisation so who would be stupid enough to take that risk unless they have a death wish? If I was a terrorist I would just start killing passengers until said gun was handed over. I would be very reluctant to get on a passenger aircraft where I new the crew carried guns!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see by his profile that Zoe claims he is an RAF Officer. He must run the sewage plant then, given his knowledge of aircraft pressurization. I'll bet Tornados, Jags, or Nimrods don't crash or explode if the aircraft skin gets a 1/2" hole it it.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a good idea. If they know that there are guns in the cockpit than those in the cockpit are most probably the first to die..And what about the aircraft and passengers than?
Security should start 1 mile outside the airport, like in Israel and the change that you will ever get a hijacker in the cockpit should be reduced to zero or at least bare the same risk as a triple engine failure on a 747.
I talked to a guy who trains anti-terroris teams. He said : do you really think that you have any change with weapons or pepper spray with a guy who has been training for the last two years in any dirty trick in the book? That guy doesn't need his eyes to kill you...
Lets learn the lessons from El Al. Apart from that: I was hired to be a pilot and not a soldier.
Security should start 1 mile outside the airport, like in Israel and the change that you will ever get a hijacker in the cockpit should be reduced to zero or at least bare the same risk as a triple engine failure on a 747.
I talked to a guy who trains anti-terroris teams. He said : do you really think that you have any change with weapons or pepper spray with a guy who has been training for the last two years in any dirty trick in the book? That guy doesn't need his eyes to kill you...
Lets learn the lessons from El Al. Apart from that: I was hired to be a pilot and not a soldier.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point is to retain command of the aircraft so you CAN fly it, instead of a suicidal islamic militant bent on killing the maximum amount of infidels as possible. Lethal cockpit defense is for last ditch defense after a breach of the cockpit door. If you can't maintain command of the aircraft, then you've probably enabled the killing of thousands.
At least you can take comfort in those last few seconds of your life that you didn't have any of those evil guns on board.
At least you can take comfort in those last few seconds of your life that you didn't have any of those evil guns on board.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DFW, Tx - USA
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chimbu chuckles -
You said in your first post . . . .
Beg to differ with you! Plenty of US Supreme Court case law on the "right to bear arms". I have a couple right now and will continue to have them as long as our Constitution isn't changed. Also licensed for "concealed carry" in the State of Texas.
Interesting Chimbu that you and I can agree on at least one thing - that little "school" in Georgia is a BAD THING, was in the past and still is today.
Now back to disagreeing with you: That Georgia school does NOT, IMHO, mean that the USA is a terrorist state.
I see that our learned debater Julian still hasn't figured out how to "control" an explosive device. He has never heard of "shaped" charges, etc. He postulates that the crew would take great damage from any explosion strong enough to take out the door. But it doesn't necessarily have to be the door that gets taken out to gain access to the cockpit on most Boeing configured a/c. I'm not going to say more than that. Those who do fly can "look and think" for themselves.
Some posts ago one someone said that this debate has gone into an "us/them" kind of thing. "us" being mostly American and "them" being mostly European with the exception of stator vane and maybe swashplate. Yep - it is the American "gun culture" thing.
Several American poster make the point that the cabin is the "last line of defense", and I agree. That is why I, and other American posters, want the cockpit to at least have the option to arm themselves. As an SLF, I would feel safer if I knew there was the possibility that the cockpit had a pistol in it. NO - I do not believe that this would scare Mom/Pop AMERICAN Tourist (shellsuit) away from flying.
I, for one, hope that the cockpit never has to use a gun since I believe/hope that the pax would have taken on the bad guys before it got to that stage. I usually fly in seat-4B and I am now watching each person that heads to the fwd bathroom (loo) very closely.
But I do not think it would take a bad guy more than 7-10 seconds to access the cockpit and I am not always that alert. Plan for the worst and hope for the best.
Chimbu - this is not the "last war" merely it is ANOTHER war. And you are also right - "you are either for us or agin us". That is what my thread of last Oct was titled.
Safe flying forever -
dAAvid -
You said in your first post . . . .
with this myth that their constitution guarantees them the ‘right’ to ‘bear arms’, it does not!
Interesting Chimbu that you and I can agree on at least one thing - that little "school" in Georgia is a BAD THING, was in the past and still is today.
Now back to disagreeing with you: That Georgia school does NOT, IMHO, mean that the USA is a terrorist state.
I see that our learned debater Julian still hasn't figured out how to "control" an explosive device. He has never heard of "shaped" charges, etc. He postulates that the crew would take great damage from any explosion strong enough to take out the door. But it doesn't necessarily have to be the door that gets taken out to gain access to the cockpit on most Boeing configured a/c. I'm not going to say more than that. Those who do fly can "look and think" for themselves.
Some posts ago one someone said that this debate has gone into an "us/them" kind of thing. "us" being mostly American and "them" being mostly European with the exception of stator vane and maybe swashplate. Yep - it is the American "gun culture" thing.
Several American poster make the point that the cabin is the "last line of defense", and I agree. That is why I, and other American posters, want the cockpit to at least have the option to arm themselves. As an SLF, I would feel safer if I knew there was the possibility that the cockpit had a pistol in it. NO - I do not believe that this would scare Mom/Pop AMERICAN Tourist (shellsuit) away from flying.
I, for one, hope that the cockpit never has to use a gun since I believe/hope that the pax would have taken on the bad guys before it got to that stage. I usually fly in seat-4B and I am now watching each person that heads to the fwd bathroom (loo) very closely.
But I do not think it would take a bad guy more than 7-10 seconds to access the cockpit and I am not always that alert. Plan for the worst and hope for the best.
Chimbu - this is not the "last war" merely it is ANOTHER war. And you are also right - "you are either for us or agin us". That is what my thread of last Oct was titled.
Safe flying forever -
dAAvid -
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Canada
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hasn't anyone mentioned that in Aeroflot, the captain has to carry a pistol with his licence, medical cetificate, maps,...etc?
You get a blood pressure check and an equipment check every time you go on duty.
You get a blood pressure check and an equipment check every time you go on duty.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA, yes I do about shaped charges thanks for your concern - also the shaped charged would direct the blast inwards. If you re-read my post I also said it that they would knock senseless, i.e. it could incapacitate not just kill the crew, giving the terrorist time to move in and take over - much the same effect as a 'Flashbang' would.
Further more I also stated, if you go back and look, that you would have to do something about the bulkhead wall as well - not just the door.
Yep, at least we agree on the school. Maybe they need to relook at it again, rather than just change its name - make syou wonder if any of the guys we are up against now are grads????
Over to you my learned gun debater...
Further more I also stated, if you go back and look, that you would have to do something about the bulkhead wall as well - not just the door.
Yep, at least we agree on the school. Maybe they need to relook at it again, rather than just change its name - make syou wonder if any of the guys we are up against now are grads????
Over to you my learned gun debater...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Chimbu,
I am sick and tired of hearing that the USA is the reason for all evil in the world. We have done more for this planet than all other nations combined. Yes, we have our faults and we are not always right, but at least we try to get people to get along. We may stumble across the globe, fat dumb and happy, but we are making an effort. Perhaps this article from our neighbor to the North will shed a little light on the subject. a little dated, but still relevant.
America: The Good Neighbor
Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordan Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:
"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.
Germany, Japan, and to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the depris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debt. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.
When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.
When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.
The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now the newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans.
I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country it the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the DouglasDC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes?
Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German techncracy and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times and safely home again.
You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everyone to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are pursued and hounded. They are on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American Dollars from Ma and Pa at home to spend here.
When the railways of France, Germany, and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.
I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.
Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."
Stand Proud, America!
I am sick and tired of hearing that the USA is the reason for all evil in the world. We have done more for this planet than all other nations combined. Yes, we have our faults and we are not always right, but at least we try to get people to get along. We may stumble across the globe, fat dumb and happy, but we are making an effort. Perhaps this article from our neighbor to the North will shed a little light on the subject. a little dated, but still relevant.
America: The Good Neighbor
Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordan Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:
"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.
Germany, Japan, and to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the depris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debt. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.
When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.
When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.
The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now the newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans.
I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country it the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the DouglasDC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes?
Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German techncracy and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times and safely home again.
You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everyone to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are pursued and hounded. They are on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American Dollars from Ma and Pa at home to spend here.
When the railways of France, Germany, and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.
I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.
Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."
Stand Proud, America!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in the neck,but holding short
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA SLF you denounced Julian's arguement that pilots would be taken out by a blast at the cockpit door.
While this may be true, there is little doubt that trained committed terrorists armed with the element of surprise would have little difficulty in overpowering a crew after such a blast. By the time any pilot had recovered their wits, identified the situation, located the gun, turned found and disabled the targets it would be long over.
In this scenario the terrorists would now also have a gun.
I think preventive medicine is the best route here:
1 We should look at all possible ways of preventing weapons/explosive devices getting on board.
2 International intelligence organisations should be co-operating with the airlines in monitoring the movement of all known or suspected terrorists. ( E.G. any flight showing 2 or more such characters should be grounded pending investigation )
3 All crews and groundstaff ( including security ) should recieved improved training to ensure increased vigilance.
4 All airports should have security hotlines where any staff or pax can report a percieved breach of security or suggest possible improvements.
I'm sure every single ppruner can add to the above list.
Incidently AA SLF why do you think it would take over 7 seconds to open any cockpit door. I could do it in 1!
While this may be true, there is little doubt that trained committed terrorists armed with the element of surprise would have little difficulty in overpowering a crew after such a blast. By the time any pilot had recovered their wits, identified the situation, located the gun, turned found and disabled the targets it would be long over.
In this scenario the terrorists would now also have a gun.
I think preventive medicine is the best route here:
1 We should look at all possible ways of preventing weapons/explosive devices getting on board.
2 International intelligence organisations should be co-operating with the airlines in monitoring the movement of all known or suspected terrorists. ( E.G. any flight showing 2 or more such characters should be grounded pending investigation )
3 All crews and groundstaff ( including security ) should recieved improved training to ensure increased vigilance.
4 All airports should have security hotlines where any staff or pax can report a percieved breach of security or suggest possible improvements.
I'm sure every single ppruner can add to the above list.
Incidently AA SLF why do you think it would take over 7 seconds to open any cockpit door. I could do it in 1!
Grandpa Aerotart
AA SLF I think you will find if you read the relevant ammendment(2nd?) to your constitution you will find that it guarantees the right to bear arms within a well ordered Militia. The NRA, and others, find it helps their cause to leave the last bit off any reference to that ammendment.
The framers of the constitution wrote it that way because they didn't want any formal armed forces that a future Govt could use against the people, so they preferred a large reserve of 'trained' armed citizens they could call up at times of crisis.
Hardly needed now when you have the Army, Marines, Navy, Airforce and National gaurd to protect you! Like I said your Constitution does not guarantee your right to bear arms, as a blanket statement, it has qualifications that many seem to ignore!
Irondriver,
Yes the US has done many wonderful things for a great many people of the world, as I stated in my pevious post, BUT, don't try and confuse the issue! The aircraft on the 911 wern't flown by Japanese, French, Germans or Indians....they were flown, mostly, by Saudia Arabians and some other Middle Eastern ethnic groups.
The US Govt crapped all over South America, Africa, South East Asia and the Middle East for most of the last half of the 20th Century, do you really think they give a toss about how nice the US was to Europe or Japan, after they nuked it anyway? And before you start to squeel, yes nuking Japan was easily then justifiable!
IF THE US AND UN DON'T CONFRONT THE REASONS/JUSTIFICATION FOR A LOT OF THE TERRORISM THEN IT WILL NOT BE STOPPED IN OUR LIFE TIME, OR THAT OF OUR CHILDREN PROBABLY!
Chuck.
[ 26 November 2001: Message edited by: Chimbu chuckles ]
The framers of the constitution wrote it that way because they didn't want any formal armed forces that a future Govt could use against the people, so they preferred a large reserve of 'trained' armed citizens they could call up at times of crisis.
Hardly needed now when you have the Army, Marines, Navy, Airforce and National gaurd to protect you! Like I said your Constitution does not guarantee your right to bear arms, as a blanket statement, it has qualifications that many seem to ignore!
Irondriver,
Yes the US has done many wonderful things for a great many people of the world, as I stated in my pevious post, BUT, don't try and confuse the issue! The aircraft on the 911 wern't flown by Japanese, French, Germans or Indians....they were flown, mostly, by Saudia Arabians and some other Middle Eastern ethnic groups.
The US Govt crapped all over South America, Africa, South East Asia and the Middle East for most of the last half of the 20th Century, do you really think they give a toss about how nice the US was to Europe or Japan, after they nuked it anyway? And before you start to squeel, yes nuking Japan was easily then justifiable!
IF THE US AND UN DON'T CONFRONT THE REASONS/JUSTIFICATION FOR A LOT OF THE TERRORISM THEN IT WILL NOT BE STOPPED IN OUR LIFE TIME, OR THAT OF OUR CHILDREN PROBABLY!
Chuck.
[ 26 November 2001: Message edited by: Chimbu chuckles ]
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The arming of pilots is in addition to skymarshalls..pilots will remain pilots but they will have the means to defend themselves,their crew and passengers.No one is saying that they would leave the cockpit and do battle.Skymarshalls will be the front line of defense.
Julian,
Your comments are typical of someone who is totally detached from the problem,and quite frankly naive.When it rains more than just H2O in Berkshire,then you might be in the correct mindset to suggest something that makes sense.The only solution is to do what it takes to stop this thing happening again,however draconian.
Julian,
Your comments are typical of someone who is totally detached from the problem,and quite frankly naive.When it rains more than just H2O in Berkshire,then you might be in the correct mindset to suggest something that makes sense.The only solution is to do what it takes to stop this thing happening again,however draconian.