Hog Feet said:
Honest law abiding citizens are supposed to be helpless on an airplane. This is the way the Federal government wants us.
If people thought they could take care of themselves they would know how little we really need the feds.
This is in no way meant as disrespect to those who do put their lives on the line. Federal officers are doing their jobs.
If law abiding citizens were allowed to be armed on planes 9/11 would have been very different.
P.S. what knives would you bring on a plane if you could?
Not to hijack this thread, but I felt like this required a response. Sorry folks.
Hog Feet said:
Honest law abiding citizens are supposed to be helpless on an airplane. This is the way the Federal government wants us.
Actually, they are not supposed to be helpless; they are supposed to stay out of the way so that law enforcement can address dangerous situations that require immediate action with the least risk to the public. In the absence of law enforcement, intervention by law abiding citizens
MAY be better than nothing at all, but that will certainly NOT be the case in all situations. You may not know this, but even armed law enforcement on board aircraft (including those from that agency empowered to investigate crimes aboard an aircraft -- the FBI) are told to NOT intervene in a situation unless specifically requested by the crew, or unless it is obviously something the crew cannot handle, such as a hijack.
Hog Feet said:
If people thought they could take care of themselves they would know how little we really need the feds.
The fact is that few people can take care of themselves in a situation like a airline hijacking, never mind trying to address the situation, and addressing it in such a way that is in concert with the way that everyone else is trying to address it. I would submit that even armed law enforcement who are trained in such matters over and over again may be ill prepared to deal with the situation. If the officer is out of shape, a poor shot (God forbid when it comes to that), overly tired, etc., then a situation may be way beyond what that officer is capable of dealing with. I don't think it is too far a reach to anticipate that your average citizen will likely be overwhelmed even more readily.
Hog Feet said:
If law abiding citizens were allowed to be armed on planes 9/11 would have been very different.
Armed with what? Everyone knows that hindsight is 20/20. Knives versus boxcutters? Yes, boxcutters will probably lose IF the knives are in the right hands. But if law abiding citizens were allowed to carry firearms on an airplane, then when it did hit the fan and there is law enforcement onboard, then chances are that some do-gooder is going to be hurt or worse. How is the officer to know that the guy in 29A reaching for that gun is or is not a hijacker??? Is 29A trained in the safe retention of a firearm, or it's use onboard a flying tube at 32,000 feet, or is 29A even aware enough and strong enough to hold on to that gun even if he is trained? Does 29A have good judgment? I could go on, but I venture to say that I have probably lost most readers' interest already.
When law enforcement gets on any plane armed, they all know each other. They have met and know where they each are sitting. They have all undergone training, most on an ongoing basis. And they all know what their jobs are and when to act. Only when all of these pieces are in play does law enforcement fly armed on aircraft. Start throwing in a bunch of good-meaning, but ill-informed and possibly ill-trained citizens and I think I'll opt for the "walking" option.
