THE KILLING ZONE...WHEREVER GUNS ARE PROHIBITED

The Federal Observer ^ | May 20, 2002 | William A. Shields

[tarawa]

ping

[phasma proeliator]

Ping

[DCBryan1]

Ping

BANG!

[Shooter 2.5]

Bang!

[umgud]

The areas with the most gun control are also the same areas that have the poorest performing schools, the highest pollution, the greratest number of union workers (dems), the most amount of welfare recipients and generally the greater amount of social ills. These areas are the same blue sectors that we saw in the red v. blue 2000 election maps.

THESE ARE THE SAME AREAS THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS!

[LurkedLongEnough]

Code Red!

[enotheisen]

I seem to recall that a man by the name of Goetz shot some perpetrators of a crime on the New York subway several years ago. He was the one who went to jail.

[Hodar]

I have to agree up to a point. However, having every yahoo onboard a commercial flight packing a pistol is a bit un-nerving. Should one gun misfire, everyone onboard dies. I have no problem with arming the pilots (in fact, am a strong proponent of that), and have no problem with guns in an airport. But, I would like to see guns collected upon boarding the aircraft (exept for the airline crew).

[verity]

Obviously, guns are prohibited in Afghanistan!

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"All of the people killed in the 9-11 tragedy died as a result of gun control."

Fantastic line. And absolutely, tragically true.

Our response? Eliminate anything that could possibly be a weapon on an airplane.

I'm surprised we haven't required passengers' feet be shackled. After all, that would prevent someone from busting the cabin door open. So what if it would also prevent a Todd Beamer from charging a hijacker? The logic fits everything else we've done.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Should one gun misfire, everyone onboard dies."

Absolutely false. It made for a wonderful scene in "Goldfinger", but that's not what happens. Please don't perpetuate that nonsense.

[Phantom Lord]

Bernie Goetz didnt go to jail. He was aquited.

[coloradan]

Should one gun misfire, everyone onboard dies.

You may recall a Aloha Airlines jet that lost a 9 foot section of fuselage roof and one flight attendant, that landed safely. If ripping out an apartment-room-sized chunk of siding doesn't bring a plane down, then it's pretty absurd to claim that a 9 mm hole will.

Here's a photo to jog your memory:

[toddst]

Here's the story on Bernie Goetz:

"Goetz, who did not testify during the trial, was acquitted of attempted murder charges. He was convicted on a weapons charge and served 8-1/2 months in jail."

[Redcloak]

I don't mean to sound like I'm slamming you, but, you don't understand how firearms would work on an airliner. A reasonable restriction would be on the ammo type. "Frangible" ammo would not pierce an airliner's fusilage. But even if non-frangible ammo were allowed on a plane, a single bullet hole would not endanger the aircraft. You are also failing to see the "big picture". Little bullet holes cause less damage to a plane than large buildings do.

[Hodar]

OK .. I'll concede that the airliner will survive ... but you still have the Billy-Bob idiots who play with their guns. I mean, sitting in a chair for hours gets boring. Now, he has 30 some people sitting directly in front of him, so when the idiot (and we all know the world is full of idiots who should never, ever be allowed to purchase a firearm, for their own safety) finally discharge a weapon, how many people will be hurt? In an aircraft, you can't get away from an idiot, there's no where to hide. I still say that arming the flight crew is a good idea ... I just want to draw the line at allowing every passenger (unless we can screen the inept out) to pack is a bit much. Off duty officers and military personell would be able to pack, but I would prefer to see the 'Billy-Bobs' check their weapons at the door.

[Redcloak]

I trust "Billy-Bob" with a gun far more than I do "Achmed" with a box cutter.

[Taxman]

Good find. Mr. Shields is right on the mark.

I have been saying since September 11, 2001 that "For the want of 19 bullets and four handguns, over 3,000 people died."

I am not fond of saying it, but it is true.

There is no question in my mind that if the same rules were in effect today with respect to airline travel that were in effect in the immediate post-World War II and Korean War era, this tragedy would never have happened.

In those days (prior to roughly 1963 or so), people could legally carry concealed weapons on airplanes, and there were no hijackings. The hijackings began after the passengers were disarmed (when the "security checks" were implemented). BTW, a lot of airline pilots carried handguns in their "Jepp chart" cases in those days, too.

Consider the history of citizen disarmament: Each society in history which has been disarmed by its own government has experienced increasing violence and crime, or genocide, often both.

Why should we expect America in the 21st Century to be any different?

BTW, the Second Amendment is the only CCW any of us needs -- and all it does is reaffirm a God given right.

[Eagle Eye]

Should one gun misfire, everyone onboard dies.

Please explain your thoughts on this.