Skip to comments.
Bush to OK Guns for Airline Pilots
AP via The NY Times ^
| 5 September 2002
| AP
Posted on 09/05/2002 4:06:17 PM PDT by SBeck
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-106 next last
Over and under is 1000, place your bets. Fire away.
1
posted on
09/05/2002 4:06:17 PM PDT
by
SBeck
To: SBeck
Cool. We CAN defeat the Gods of Political Correctness if we have a mind to. Now that the Administration has finally seen the light on armed pilots, let's keep at it and get them to drop this silly idea of needing to store guns in a lockbox and limiting arming pilots to an elite few.
To: SBeck
Mineta just lost on this issue......when will he go??
3
posted on
09/05/2002 4:12:37 PM PDT
by
Dog
To: goldstategop
Art Bell really likes the idea. End of world approaching.
To: Dog
Underperformin' Norman is a consistant appointee; let's grant him that.
To: Dog
As I said there is still some last minute resistance and we need to Borg the liberals: "Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. Prepare to accept an armed friendly skies now and forevermore!"
To: SBeck
In a letter to two senators, the White House recommended giving pilots lockboxes for the weapons so they won't be left in the cockpit. It also said only pilots who volunteer to carry weapons and receive extensive training should be armed. If we didn't have all the unconstitutional restrictions on carrying in public places, pilots could merely carry their weapon in their chart case, just like they probably did before the anal retentive gun grabbers got into the act. As for "extensive" training, I fail to see why any more training should be required for airline pilots than for concealed carry permit applicants in most states. Say 8-10 hour of combined classroom and range training and qualificatioin. They aren't going to be making any long distance pistol shots inside the cockpit, so making use of the original point and click (hopefully point and bang) interface shouldn't require much training. These are pilots after all, who have to meet moderately stringent physicial requirements just to begin their training, or maintain their rating. I don't think shooting some Jihadi at 3 or 4 feet should be a big technical or physical challenge. The "when to shoot" part would of course be covered in the classroom portion.
What makes this insistence on "extensive training" so ridiculous is the fact of the 15 minutes of weapons and bomb identification training handed out to the screeners when they were federalized.
The pilots are responsible for the safety of the aircraft, crew, and passengers. Allow them the tools to do the job. That would include a reasonable amount of training, but nothing more than the equivalent of 1 working day.
7
posted on
09/05/2002 4:18:17 PM PDT
by
El Gato
To: headsonpikes
Underperformin' Norman is a consistant appointee; let's grant him that.Yes. He and Fatso, Tom Ridge should be fired. Dumb and Dumber! They make Abbot and Costello look like rocket scientists running the Keystone Cops.
To: El Gato
Ever been in a close quarter combat situation? It's not the physical but mental training that takes time to develop. Hesitation always kills.
9
posted on
09/05/2002 4:20:35 PM PDT
by
SBeck
To: El Gato
More to the point, most commercial pilots are ex military types. They've been around guns and are familiar with handling and storing them. Its not like we need Norman Mineta's bureaucrats to teach them something they already know how to do.
To: SBeck
Its that split second decision that could mean the difference between life and death. Its too bad its taken exactly a year to do what should have been done at the outset but hey better late than never!!!
To: goldstategop; Long Cut
Most ex-military pilots who are commercial pilots flew high speed, low drag fast movers or multi-engine, large cargo planes. Therefore, they may be "familiar" with weapons but chances are they never engaged a hostile force with small arms. (Incidentally, 25% of the commercial pilot community attended my school).
12
posted on
09/05/2002 4:24:19 PM PDT
by
SBeck
To: SBeck
In a letter to two senators, the White House recommended giving pilots lockboxes for the weapons so they won't be left in the cockpit. Uh, ever heard of a "holster," George?
To: Carry_Okie
I hate that term "lockboxes" gives me flashbacks to Gore......:-)
14
posted on
09/05/2002 4:25:57 PM PDT
by
Dog
To: SBeck
"the White House recommended giving pilots lockboxes for the weapons" --Insert Al Gore joke here--
15
posted on
09/05/2002 4:29:12 PM PDT
by
GnL
To: El Gato
Diddo..
16
posted on
09/05/2002 4:29:21 PM PDT
by
tall_tex
To: Dog
OK, so now we've got the gun
into the cockpit but it's still under lock and key.
Well, we're half way there.
Reminds me of permitting people to own guns for home defense, but only if they are locked in an approved safe.
To: Carry_Okie
Lock boxes, will they be a ten number combination lock or a itty bitty lock box key. Shoulder holster best way to go, worn on the left side fore righties, right side for lefties.. Not sure the left for right or right for left is PC, but that is the best way to wear a shoulder holster. Tom
18
posted on
09/05/2002 4:34:54 PM PDT
by
tall_tex
To: SBeck
They got rid of Clinton hack John "No-Draw" Magaw, and look how easy that became.
To: SBeck
the White House recommended giving pilots lockboxes for the weapons so they won't be left in the cockpit.What is this obsession in Washgington with Lock Boxes?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-106 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson