Posted on 09/18/2004 8:45:20 AM PDT by Founding Father
No. She probably shoved a case of condoms at them and then told them to shut up.
BTTT
Bump for the passage of the laws, and the Boy Scouts of America, where I, and my son, received my first gun training.
This is a very valid point, and on a packed airliner there would have been persons like that. A gun among the passengers might have found its way to the right person, particularly in the case of the forth airplane. Likewise, a gun, or likely guns) in the school in Breslan or Columbine mmay have resulted in far fewer deaths, by the earlier death of the perpatrators.
We need to move in the direction of a gun knowledgable society once more. A few years back, talk show host Melanie Morgan, (SF) was given the opportunity to learn about firearms, and moved from a scared mom to a knowledgable supporter of 2nd ammendment rights.
Expertise was not the issue at all; just mindset.
The people on those planes expected to be held hostage and hoped to recover their freedom. They had an image of an outcome where few died.
As soon as the hijackers' intentions were known, action was taken and resulted in the deaths of the hijackers. Since all aboard were killed, there is no chance that people unskilled in the use of firearms would have had a poorer outcome.
Virtually every courier carrying cash to load ATMs is armed and prepared to use that firearm to protect the cash. People everywhere, including on airlines, deserve the same protection.
My point was that one gun among the passengers was not enough. There needed to be ten or twenty or thirty for the odds to be in their favor of taking out the terrorists.
Everyone comes to the realization that death is imminent, and action is necessary, at different points.
Someone who is confident in their ability to change the situation will take action a lot sooner than someone who can't remember where the safety is on the weapon they have in their holster or purse.
Middle school Eddie Eagle programs on gun safety were violently opposed by the NEA and the rest of the Left. They, however, were all too happy to start teaching sex ed to elementary schools.
Being a gun nut, I talk to people about guns nearly every day.
I meet a lot of people who say they don't like guns.
I never let that slide. I find out "Why?".
Invariably, I discover they have no good reason except that they are completely unfamiliar with guns.
They're ugly, they make a loud noise, and they have the ability to kill.
I always invite them to one of our shoots.
I guarantee them that by the time they leave, they will have a much better appreciation of guns and the enjoyment of shooting.
I was thinking the same thing. They want to teach 12 year olds about safe sex but the idea of safe gun handling is out of the question because after all, guns are bad, bad, bad.
Mistake number one: Teddy didn't warn Steve whether the gun was loaded or not
"MISTAKE" NUMBER ONE = COMMITTING BURGLARY.
"MISTAKE" NUMBER TWO = STEALING A GUN.
The question is, if we want to save the lives of the Teddy Niziol's of America, how can we ensure that necessary information and training is given them? So that when they inevitably do come in contact with a firearm, they'll know enough to forgo accidentally shooting someone.
Who the hell says I want, or should want, to save the lives of stupid, vicious, fumble-fingered apprentice felons?
Even if I did, why would I want to teach them to be more competent with a weapon the writer doesn't want me to have or to use for self defense against them?
There is also the inconvenience of the Second Amendment, which has been recognized as a guaranty of an individual right to keep and bear firearms, both in federal court and by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Bush Administration in 2002.
And by the Founding Fathers who wrote it, if he cared to read their commentaries and debates.
This SOB is a bleeding heart gun-grabber masquerading as a "reasonable" perplexed person "searching" for answers, and setting up straw arguments intended to propagandize exactly the opposite of what he appears to be saying.
Note also the "It's Bush's fault!" buried in there.
These are the snakes in the Liberal, gun-grabbing jungle that are much harder to spot, and hence more dangerous, than the shrilly open Brady-B*tch types.
I understand what you are saying.
But remember that there were four hijackers with box-cutters, perhaps each with the cutter at the throat of an innocent.
Against one person with a 17 round magazine in a Glock, they would have to mount a suicidal charge at the person with the gun. With even a small advantage of surprise, the odds shift to the armed passenger. If just two of the four hijackers failed to mount an immediate charge of the armed passenger, then the odds shift dramatically, I think. If the passenger ambushes at least one hijacker with a surprise head shot at close range, then there are only three men with box-cutters to fight.
If given the choice between being a single person with 17 rounds to fire versus two people with box-cutters, I choose the gun. There are circumstances where the man with the gun can lose, but there are also many dozens of passengers who can take advantage of the confusion to get in their licks.
Yes, this is exactly what happened to Melanie. She is the co-host of the KSFO morning show and Lee, (the lead dog) told her she was a good conservative except for her absolute insistance that things would somehow be better if there were no guns. She went to a range and reported her experiences on the air. She liked it, lost her fear, and may even be a gun owner now, (I don't recall her saying it or not, but she definitely supports the good guys on this issue too.) Incidently, she was one of the leaders in the recall effort to remove Grey Davis from office. Arnold was in, but he is not much of a gun enthusiast. (I moved from California when I could, to a much more friendly state. AL). Last week my son went with friends to a nearby range I did not know about. I think I will go over there and give it a try. Its been too long since I had the hardware out now that you mention it.
I envy you.
If I weren't working, I'd be at the range today.
Terrorists will never again find docile passengers.
BTTT
Yes. And due to increasingly popular "shall issue" concealed carry licenses, there is an improved chance that a terrorist might be stopped dead by an armed American.
Unfortunately, our schools remain "gun free zones", for the most part, and there is little reason to believe that terrorists could not storm a school, collect the students and staff in a single location, and arrange an outcome little different from what happened in Russia.
Our teachers have a duty to arm themselves with assault rifles or invite armed citizens into their classrooms in order to repel an attack immediately.
I can't hardly make myself fly anymore.
I'd rather drive for twelve hours than fly for three.
I agree that all pilots should be armed and trained in the use of those arms.
This is a very complex issue.
Remembering some of my grade school teachers, I'd rather see a gun in the hands of a five year old!
I don't know the proper approach to a situation like Beslan, but I do know it can't become a standoff.
Something must be done immediately.
It took time for the terrorists to become organized and arm the bombs. That time should not have been allowed.
Better to repeal legislation authorizing government schools.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.