Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
| The Rules | Discord Server | The Staff
Who told you about this place?

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ron Paul wants to make killing airline passengers easier for terrorists.
Topic Started: Wednesday Nov 17 2010, 09:32 PM (793 Views)
Frattracide's ghost
Member Avatar
Baby Giraffe
[ *  * ]
H8sMikeMoore
Wednesday Nov 17 2010, 11:32 PM


perhaps a well maintained gun doesnt malfunction much, but theres always the human element to consider, people dont always do their jobs right.
Airlines could send pilots to a pistol training course. It is really not that hard to become proficient in the use of a pistol.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jandurin
Member Avatar
Monstrous Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
really we trust pilots with our lives anyway, you think them having a gun is that big a deal?

shoot, they could just CRASH THEIR PLANES as they, well, did
Photobucket? More like fotophuckit
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
Frattracide's ghost
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 09:42 AM
H8sMikeMoore
Wednesday Nov 17 2010, 11:32 PM


perhaps a well maintained gun doesnt malfunction much, but theres always the human element to consider, people dont always do their jobs right.
Airlines could send pilots to a pistol training course. It is really not that hard to become proficient in the use of a pistol.

thats a possibility.

I need to make it clear that im actually in favor of having a pilot, or someone carrying a gun on board. Hence the "Ron paul actually made a good argument" part of my original post.

I was merely pointing out that there are flaws in it that could probably be pointed out but then i said whatever, indicating that i dont see them as likely.

I do however, think a security team would be more efficient at dealing with the problem.

But at no time in any of my posts did I indicate that a pilot cannot be the one who does it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coke Von Cola
Member Avatar
Some kinda somethin
[ *  *  *  * ]
But pilots are the ones going craaaaazyy
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frattracide's ghost
Member Avatar
Baby Giraffe
[ *  * ]
H8sMikeMoore
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 01:49 PM
Frattracide's ghost
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 09:42 AM
H8sMikeMoore
Wednesday Nov 17 2010, 11:32 PM


perhaps a well maintained gun doesnt malfunction much, but theres always the human element to consider, people dont always do their jobs right.
Airlines could send pilots to a pistol training course. It is really not that hard to become proficient in the use of a pistol.

thats a possibility.

I need to make it clear that im actually in favor of having a pilot, or someone carrying a gun on board. Hence the "Ron paul actually made a good argument" part of my original post.

I was merely pointing out that there are flaws in it that could probably be pointed out but then i said whatever, indicating that i dont see them as likely.

I do however, think a security team would be more efficient at dealing with the problem.

But at no time in any of my posts did I indicate that a pilot cannot be the one who does it.
The FAA actually tried this idea out a few years ago.

IIRC there was an executive order to begin a trial program for armed pilot certification. The FAA didn't like the idea of armed pilots but the Bush administration told them to shut up and color. So in retaliation, the FAA would cause undue hardship and generally harass any pilots that applied for the program which caused the trial to fail.

I like the idea, it is not really fiscally practical to put a security group on board every flight in the US, but pilots are already there. Arm them and give them some training, and you've got yourself a practical countermeasure against the sort of terrorism that took place on 9/11.

The idea has other benefits too. For instance, it is a subtle response as opposed to a security team sitting in the cabin and freaking out every time a passenger gets up to take a piss.

And it beats the hell out of being molested by some neanderthal TSA agent that couldn't find his own dick with two hands and directions.


Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
Coke Von Cola
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 02:32 PM
But pilots are the ones going craaaaazyy
http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

You're welcome.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
Frattracide's ghost
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 02:43 PM
H8sMikeMoore
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 01:49 PM
Frattracide's ghost
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 09:42 AM
H8sMikeMoore
Wednesday Nov 17 2010, 11:32 PM


perhaps a well maintained gun doesnt malfunction much, but theres always the human element to consider, people dont always do their jobs right.
Airlines could send pilots to a pistol training course. It is really not that hard to become proficient in the use of a pistol.

thats a possibility.

I need to make it clear that im actually in favor of having a pilot, or someone carrying a gun on board. Hence the "Ron paul actually made a good argument" part of my original post.

I was merely pointing out that there are flaws in it that could probably be pointed out but then i said whatever, indicating that i dont see them as likely.

I do however, think a security team would be more efficient at dealing with the problem.

But at no time in any of my posts did I indicate that a pilot cannot be the one who does it.
The FAA actually tried this idea out a few years ago.

IIRC there was an executive order to begin a trial program for armed pilot certification. The FAA didn't like the idea of armed pilots but the Bush administration told them to shut up and color. So in retaliation, the FAA would cause undue hardship and generally harass any pilots that applied for the program which caused the trial to fail.

I like the idea, it is not really fiscally practical to put a security group on board every flight in the US, but pilots are already there. Arm them and give them some training, and you've got yourself a practical countermeasure against the sort of terrorism that took place on 9/11.

The idea has other benefits too. For instance, it is a subtle response as opposed to a security team sitting in the cabin and freaking out every time a passenger gets up to take a piss.

And it beats the hell out of being molested by some neanderthal TSA agent that couldn't find his own dick with two hands and directions.


I didnt know they tried anything like that before.

The reason I suggested the security team (despite the fact that it wouldnt be cheap like you said) is because I envisioned terrorists grabbing other people as hostages, and with the pilot possibly not having enough time to react to the situation(hes behind the door paying attention to flying the plane), he may be in a spot where he or she has to answer to demands. Grabbing hostages and making demands is fairly commonplace with these sorts of things, so I imagined it would be one of the first things they try.

I wasnt trying to suggest that its the absolute best way to tackle the problem, I dont know what is, nor if there can even be a really good solution.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coke Von Cola
Member Avatar
Some kinda somethin
[ *  *  *  * ]
I know, let people be people. The pilot and US air marshal will take care of it.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
NFunspoiler
Member Avatar
Fire to fungi
[ *  *  *  * ]
I like the pilots with pistols solution. I have a hard time believing in the hostage situation considering that terrorists are generally surrounded on all sides and have no way to escape. The minute they lose their hostage their ass it grass.

However, one question to bring up is, how would firing a gun affect the integrity of the aircraft? Would it cause major damage to the plane? It would probably be able to go through the walls easy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coke Von Cola
Member Avatar
Some kinda somethin
[ *  *  *  * ]
Mythbusters shot a bullet through a window of a pressurized craft and nothing happened. I dunno about it getting into electrical shit and what not though.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
Coke Von Cola
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 05:39 PM
Mythbusters shot a bullet through a window of a pressurized craft and nothing happened. I dunno about it getting into electrical shit and what not though.


goto 1:30 for information about that
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Slayer706
Member Avatar
The best of the best of The Board.
[ *  *  * ]
A bullet hole isn't big enough to explosively decompress a plane. It takes a pretty big hole to do that. Even knocking out one of the passenger windows wouldn't do it.

Real life is not like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfOuCWdXrWE#t=7m59s
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
I didnt say a bullet hole is big enough, I also didnt say it wasnt.

nor did I imply in anyway that I think real life is like the video posted.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Slayer706
Member Avatar
The best of the best of The Board.
[ *  *  * ]
H8sMikeMoore
Thursday Nov 18 2010, 06:12 PM
I didnt say a bullet hole is big enough, I also didnt say it wasnt.

nor did I imply in anyway that I think real life is like the video posted.

Why do you keep posting shit if you aren't really saying anything?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Slayer706
Member Avatar
The best of the best of The Board.
[ *  *  * ]
Oh, and I did not say that you did or did not say that a bullet hole was or wasn't big enough to explosively decompress a plane. I also did not say that you implied that you thought real life was like the movie U.S. Marshals.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Necrotrophic
Member Avatar
change molds name back in 2011
[ *  *  *  * ]
I did say something, he mentioned something about mythbusters disproving things, and I thought it would be a good idea to post something about how mythbusters isnt very scientific because they dont test things enough times. They do come to conclusions that are true, but like he said himself, they have been wrong before.

So in short, mythbusters isnt a source to cite.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coke Von Cola
Member Avatar
Some kinda somethin
[ *  *  *  * ]
I never said mythbusters was a credible source to cite.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Slayer706
Member Avatar
The best of the best of The Board.
[ *  *  * ]
None of us have ever said anything. All of these combined thousands of posts have absolutely no content in them at all. We might as well just be using spaces, tabs, and line breaks instead of the English alphabet.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jandurin
Member Avatar
Monstrous Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
.
Photobucket? More like fotophuckit
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jandurin
Member Avatar
Monstrous Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I actually watched the video.

Lol

What an idiot.
Photobucket? More like fotophuckit
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The Board · Next Topic »
Add Reply