|
Download your free copy of the award winning ForPilots LogBook program today! |
Stephan Rothstein wrote: > > "ve1eo@rac.ca" wrote: > > > > Bob > > > > >In article <3cafca69.37923562@198.164.200.20>, "Gord Beaman" (ve1eo@rac.ca) > > >says... > > >> RD Thompson > > >> > > >> >"Gord Beaman" (ve1eo@rac.ca) wrote in > > >> > > >> >> Nor can I...so why not take the obvious path and abolish the need > > >> >> to?...Physically Prevent Uninvited Cockpit Entry...so simple...so > > >> >> sensible...so inexpensive...so smart...gollee...rocket science!. > > >> > > > >> >True, rather than have a pilot be able to protect the cockpit by perhaps > > >> >shooting one or more of the terrorists, it would be so much better to use > > >> >the backup plan of having an F16 shoot the whole fucking plane down killing > > >> >everone on board. Now that makes so much better sense......... > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> ?!? Say what ? > > > > > >Gord, > > > > > >What do you think is the purpose of airliners being escorted by military > > >aircraft? It sure isnt to protect the people on board. > > > > > >Bob > > > > > > > Gee...whats going on here?...you both make no sense to me, am I > > cracking up?... > > > > I suggest physically keeping uninvited people out of the cockpit > > and you two make answers that have no bearing on that, besides > > making no sense on their own hook...why dont you try rereading > > the post, heres a hint PPUCE. > > I believe, and I may be wrong, that the other two gentlemen are trying > to point out to you that what you are asking for is physically > impossible. If the flight deck is to be accessible to the flight crew, > then there is no way to keep the flight deck from being accessed by a > hijacker/terrorist. You might slow him down some, but you cannot stop a > determined person in a case like that. This is especially true if none > of the passengers, or flight crew in the passenger area, have any > weapons to use to stop the hijacker/terrorist. By allowing the pilots to > be armed (and I personally support allowing everyone on board the plane > to be armed), you have added a layer of defense for when the physical > barrier does fail. Of course, adding the passenger compartment having > armed people may stop the hijacker/terrorist from gaining access to the > flight deck. > > They are also pointing out to you that the national guard and air force > planes which have been escorting various flights, especially any with > trouble calls, have a primary job of shooting down the airliner to stop > it from ramming other buildings or being used as a weapon. This means > that the President has determined that it may be necessary to sacrifice > a few hundred lives on board the airplane to save possible thousands on > the ground. This decision makes no sense when a better way would be to > save the lives of the people on board the plane and the people on the > ground by simply allowing the passengers and crew to arm themselves if > they decide to. Well though out and well written, Steve. Some will no doubt have a kitten over the "I personally support allowing everyone on board the plane to be armed" part, but some people just naturally seem prone to delivering litters. The concepts of individual liberty and personal responsibility escape them. -- But for my children, I would have them keep their distance from the thickening center; corruption never has been compulsory. When the cities lie at the monsters feet there are left the mountains. --Robinson Jeffers |
| [BACK] | Return to the ForPilots.com archive page |