I fly several times a month. Just after 9/11 I mentioned to some friends, who also fly a lot, that if I had been onboard with my machete I might have been able to stop the hijackers. My friends said, "Good plan. You don't want to use a gun and accidentally put a hole through the plane and loose air pressure."
Just a modest proposal.
#46899 Shiner
Moderator: Marduk
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
I mentioned the loss of air pressure as a possibility already, but thanks for reinforcing it.vorpal blade wrote:I fly several times a month. Just after 9/11 I mentioned to some friends, who also fly a lot, that if I had been onboard with my machete I might have been able to stop the hijackers. My friends said, "Good plan. You don't want to use a gun and accidentally put a hole through the plane and loose air pressure."
Just a modest proposal.
This site, and the opinions and statements contained herein do not necessarily reflect on my sanity, or lack thereof.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=26481
http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today ... c=y&page=2
http://www.gunowners.org/fs0104.htm
and the list goes on and on....
If you're too lazy to read... Not even multiple bullets would be cause for concern even at altitudes about 30,000 feet. At worst, it would require a slow descent to altitudes below 20,000 feet. Explosive decompression would not even be an issue if the plane's door blew off.
The only concern at these altitudes is that you would be unable to breath enough oxygen to maintain consciousness... But that's why you have oxygen masks...
Edit: Even MythBusters busted this one.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBuster ... ompression
http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today ... c=y&page=2
http://www.gunowners.org/fs0104.htm
and the list goes on and on....
If you're too lazy to read... Not even multiple bullets would be cause for concern even at altitudes about 30,000 feet. At worst, it would require a slow descent to altitudes below 20,000 feet. Explosive decompression would not even be an issue if the plane's door blew off.
The only concern at these altitudes is that you would be unable to breath enough oxygen to maintain consciousness... But that's why you have oxygen masks...
Edit: Even MythBusters busted this one.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBuster ... ompression
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
But there is a greater possibility of striking innocent bystanders by stray bullets.
And an even rarer highly unlikely possibility of a bullet hitting the fuel tank and causing a midair explosion
And an even rarer highly unlikely possibility of a bullet hitting the fuel tank and causing a midair explosion
This site, and the opinions and statements contained herein do not necessarily reflect on my sanity, or lack thereof.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 732AABIdUj
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBuster ... g_Gas_Tank
Mythbusters did this one too...
And hitting the tank is terribly unlikely. The wings of most jets sit below the passenger cabin meaning you would have to be in the extreme rear or front of the jet to even hit the tank without being ricocheted off the wing first.
And not only would you have to hit the gas tank... it would also have to find an ignition source.
I suppose you might make the argument that the plane's own engine could be the ignition source...
But that's only if the gas tank is sitting right on top of the engine... Which I don't think any are... Most engineers are smart enough to realize that sticking a bunch of gas right next to a jet engine is a bad idea. Even car's have the engine and tank separated as much as possible.
There are emergency cutoff valves to the gas lines... So at most you might take out an engine, but almost all jets can fly on a single engine.... and even if you lose all of them you can still glide.
And innocent bystanders? Please... you have just as many on a bus or in a mall or any other public setting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBuster ... g_Gas_Tank
Mythbusters did this one too...
And hitting the tank is terribly unlikely. The wings of most jets sit below the passenger cabin meaning you would have to be in the extreme rear or front of the jet to even hit the tank without being ricocheted off the wing first.
And not only would you have to hit the gas tank... it would also have to find an ignition source.
I suppose you might make the argument that the plane's own engine could be the ignition source...
But that's only if the gas tank is sitting right on top of the engine... Which I don't think any are... Most engineers are smart enough to realize that sticking a bunch of gas right next to a jet engine is a bad idea. Even car's have the engine and tank separated as much as possible.
There are emergency cutoff valves to the gas lines... So at most you might take out an engine, but almost all jets can fly on a single engine.... and even if you lose all of them you can still glide.
And innocent bystanders? Please... you have just as many on a bus or in a mall or any other public setting.
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
So? They're still there. If we allow people on a plan with guns, and hijackers try and take over the plane, you'd have the hijackers, the sky marshals, the normal citizens with guns and those without. The armed citizens will be shooting at the hijackers, and possibly themselves or undercover sky marshals depending on the confusion, and the hijackers will be shooting at any resistance. There are bound to be innocent lives taken, especially since the sky marshals won't have any backup coming, so it'd be the few agents there by themselves, and they won't know for sure who is a hijacker and who is normal citizen.orb360 wrote: And innocent bystanders? Please... you have just as many on a bus or in a mall or any other public setting.
It'd sort of be like the game of mafia. Sure the citizens and officers aren't completely blind, but only the hijackers know who are among their numbers.
So I think letting armed citizens on board would make situations even more dangerous and would cost more lives than if they weren't there in the first place.
This site, and the opinions and statements contained herein do not necessarily reflect on my sanity, or lack thereof.
-
Fredjikrang
- Never Coming Back?
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:59 am
- Location: Provo, UT
- Contact:
But put simply... That situation is not unique to an aircraft scenario. That situation could happen anywhere.
In a mall, you have the innocents, the security, the bad guys, and the armed citizens.
It's the same difference... so you can't really use that to argue whether the situation would be better or worse since they are equivalent.
When people flip they rarely walk into a gun store to start killing. They don't go to the police department. They even avoid malls or public streets.
They go where they KNOW they will be the only ones armed. Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc... You know that you will be the only person with a gun and the reaction time that security has is slow enough that dozens can die before they can respond. And even after they respond now you have a hostage situation.
In a mall, you have the innocents, the security, the bad guys, and the armed citizens.
It's the same difference... so you can't really use that to argue whether the situation would be better or worse since they are equivalent.
When people flip they rarely walk into a gun store to start killing. They don't go to the police department. They even avoid malls or public streets.
They go where they KNOW they will be the only ones armed. Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc... You know that you will be the only person with a gun and the reaction time that security has is slow enough that dozens can die before they can respond. And even after they respond now you have a hostage situation.
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
That's true too.
But even so, just to get armed citizens onto planes, we'd have to develop a system to know which citizens are carrying guns, and some regulation for them, and have it be efficient so that we don't let armed hijackers onto the plane with permission as well.
I agree that they go to where people won't be armed, but unfortunately malls are included in recent shootings.
But even so, just to get armed citizens onto planes, we'd have to develop a system to know which citizens are carrying guns, and some regulation for them, and have it be efficient so that we don't let armed hijackers onto the plane with permission as well.
I agree that they go to where people won't be armed, but unfortunately malls are included in recent shootings.
This site, and the opinions and statements contained herein do not necessarily reflect on my sanity, or lack thereof.
and orb, your school examples were flawed. the columbine shooters went there for SPECIFIC people. the VT shooter went to school there and knew the campus. i don't know if it was ever confirmed that the first girl he killed was someone he had been rejected by, but those shooters had specific knowledge of the places that had nothing to do with knowing people didn't carry guns.
they're letting teachers in a northern district in texas carry guns now. i'm terrified one will get trigger happy and kill a student. i'm all for guns as protection in your home, but in such a public place? a place where misunderstandings can easily happen? it's impossible for me to misunderstand someone breaking into my house. but i'll bet some of those teachers will FREAK OUT and pull a gun on a kid. it doesn't bode well.
they're letting teachers in a northern district in texas carry guns now. i'm terrified one will get trigger happy and kill a student. i'm all for guns as protection in your home, but in such a public place? a place where misunderstandings can easily happen? it's impossible for me to misunderstand someone breaking into my house. but i'll bet some of those teachers will FREAK OUT and pull a gun on a kid. it doesn't bode well.
beautiful, dirty, rich
Ok... When you find an NRA meeting massacre... A shooting range massacre... a Police station massacre... A gun store massacre. let me know. And I'm not talking just a shooting... 1-2 people before the attacker gets shot doesn't cut it... It has to be at least 7+.Imogen wrote:and orb, your school examples were flawed.
Fact is... The places where everyone is armed have far less shootings. The places where guns are banned and enforcement is low, such as schools, have far more... and more casualties.
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.
Oh yes... Be terrified of the responsible adults carrying weapons to protect children...Imogen wrote:i'm terrified one will get trigger happy and kill a student.
But the one screw off who goes postal... Let's just pretend that will never happen. If it does, the 20 people who get killed while the police are on their way won't mind.
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
-
vorpal blade
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
- Location: New Jersey
Orb360. Do you really care whether I use a gun or a machete? I mean, I'm relieved to know the plane isn't going to fall out of the sky if the sky Marshall or the pilot shoots his gun and the bullet goes outside of the plane.
Of course neither a gun or a machete would do much good if the terrorist just wanted to blow up the plane.
Of course neither a gun or a machete would do much good if the terrorist just wanted to blow up the plane.
-
Texas Ranger
-
Nanti-SARRMM
- Posts: 1958
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:02 pm
- Location: Beyond the Mountains of the Copper Miners into the Desert of Absolute Boredom
- Contact:
Walker Texas RangerTexas Ranger wrote:Whoa Whoa Whoa....Nanti-SARRMM wrote:They're Texas school teachers. How much more irresponsible can you get?orb360 wrote: Oh yes... Be terrified of the responsible adults carrying weapons to protect children...
What's wrong with Texas???
Everything below the line of coherence may be safely ignored.