Senators Overwhelmingly Pass Pilot Gun Bill

Reuters | 9/05/02 | Susan Cornwell

[Nephi]

So, you would rather have untrained people carrying guns around?

Its a volunteer program beginning with 2% of the pilots. Many pilots are military trained and for $900 million???

[Marine Inspector]

Many pilots are military trained

And the majority are not, I deal with and speak with hundreds of pilots each month, even with training, I would not want some of them armed.

$900 million in training, to arm 2% of the pilots, is cheaper then paying, training and having air marshals on 2% of the flights.

[Nephi]

And the majority are not, I deal with and speak with hundreds of pilots each month, even with training, I would not want some of them armed.

$900 million in training, to arm 2% of the pilots, is cheaper then paying, training and having air marshals on 2% of the flights.

You have lost all credibility with those statements.

[Marine Inspector]

You have lost all credibility with those statements.

Both of my statements are true. Care to explain your experience and knowledge in the field?

[Nephi]

I said: You have lost all credibility with those statements.

Your response: Both of my statements are true. Care to explain your experience and knowledge in the field?

Guns in the Cockpit: Why won't Norm Mineta let pilots defend themselves? OpinionJournal.com ^ | May 1, 2002 | House Editorial

Surveys show that about three-quarters of commercial pilots and a similar percentage of the public favor arming pilots. Some 70% of pilots have served in the military and are already familiar with the use of firearms.

Additionally, pilots were allowed to have guns in the cockpit until 1987...there wasn't a $900 million dollar training program then...apparently, pigs can fly, as in pork barrel spending.

As for my expertise, I am a snowboard instructor in Vail, Colorado. How does it feel to have your ass handed to you by a knuckledragger?

[Las Vegas Dave]

Anyone know who the -6- are?

[Ohioan]

It is about time. The pity is that there are still those who have so little understanding of the American tradition--which depends upon individual responsibility at every level of Societal interaction--that it took so long for people to begin to wake up.

It is enough to make the hair stand up on the back of one's neck, to realize that there were dysrons in the Administration, who actually would have imagined that it was less dangerous to have to depend upon an airforce jet shooting down a passenger jet, rather than allow a Flight Captain the ability to use ready at hand, lethal force, to thwart a takeover. While the original obstacle in the Bureaucracy has been removed, it appears that right up to the end, there were those who tried--and are still trying-- to compromise common sense.

For the issues and principles involved in the traditional policy of having a well armed citizenry, see The Right & Duty To Keep & Bear Arms.

William Flax

[agitator]

I'd like to think this was an example of common sense bubbling to the surface but it's much more likely that it's an example of "Do as I say, not as I do." Armed guards for flying politicians at taxpayer expense sounds surprisingly self-serving.