View Poll Results: Should Airline Pilots Have The Option to Arm Themselves?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. As a passenger I like getting to where I'm going.

    33 84.62%
  • No. I've always wanted the chance for a real fast visit to a national landmark

    6 15.38%
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 89

Thread: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

  1. #51
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Bergslagstroll View Post
    Well it can be very important to understand the changes that have happened since 9/11. First of all security door that makes it much more difficult to get into the cock pit. Second the attitude of the passenger and flight crew have changed. Before 9/11 the goal of a hijack was not to crash into a building, instead it was about to accomplish political or economical goals, and the passengers and flight crew had a change to survive.

    If a plan is hijack today people will believe that they will die either by crashing into a building or by being shot down. Therefor will it be almost impossible for any terrorist to take over a plan, because people will fight back to the last breath and the terrorist will probably not even get to the reinforced security door.
    All of this is true.
    But, none of it negates the idea that, as a final line of defense, the pilots should be able to effectively project deadly force.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-24-09 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    If more guns = more crime, why then, as the number of gus more than doubled since then, the current level of gun crime, in raw numbers, is comparable to that of the late 60s?
    Precisely because a raw number isn't comparable to a rate. You'd have to consider additional data sets and multiple factors to determine a conclusive answer on ownership rates rather than raw numbers, since it's necessary to consider population increases.

  3. #53
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Precisely because a raw number isn't comparable to a rate.
    If more guns = more crime, then doubling the number of guns should increase crime.

    If the number of guns doubles and the number of crimes stays the same, then more guns /=/ more crime.

  4. #54
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,475

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Precisely because a raw number isn't comparable to a rate. You'd have to consider additional data sets and multiple factors to determine a conclusive answer on ownership rates rather than raw numbers, since it's necessary to consider population increases.
    Statistics can be manipulated to come out how you want them. Like I said, cooking the books.

    You think some pro-gun orgs are publishing slanted stats to support their positions...maybe so. It makes a counterweight to the way antigunners slant the stats their way.

    For example, I have my doubts about the "2.5 million defensive uses per year" figure some espouse, seems high. For contrast, as I posted earlier, there were two government studies that said 60,000 and 90,000 defenses uses (of private firearms) annually, most of the time with no shots fired. Since this exceeds the total number of firearm deaths (half of which are suicides) by a factor of 1.5 or 2, to 1, clearly guns are used for lawful self defense far more often than illegal reasons, even taking these much lower figures as given. The truth probably lies somewhere between, since the vast majority of times that no shots are fired, most people probably don't call the police for fear of persecution.

    You can it any way you want, though, crime isn't the chief issue. The chief issue is that it's a Constitutionally protected natural right, just like freedom of speech and religion...the Founders were very clear on that.

    G.

  5. #55
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    See above.
    Also, I presume this means you also oppose armed air marshalls?
    I'm not crazy about the idea, no. Although it's not as asinine as the idea of allowing passengers to carry weapons on board.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman
    By the time you steal it, it will be empty...
    ...IF the pilot decides to use it. And is able to use it.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #56
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    That may have been the case pre-9/11. Not now.
    Then the whole subject is a moot point. If they can't get into the cockpit anyway, then there is no need to arm the pilots. Next?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #57
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm not crazy about the idea, no. Although it's not as asinine as the idea of allowing passengers to carry weapons on board.
    Air marshalls can't land the plane, right?
    Why have them as the only people on the plane with a gun?

    IF the pilot decides to use it. And is able to use it.
    Why would he NOT?

  8. #58
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Then the whole subject is a moot point.
    Hardly. You never, exer, rely solely on passive defenses or on the idea that the passengers will do something.

  9. #59
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:08 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    21,968

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    This policy has been in place for several years, tens of thousands of flights (if not hundreds of thousands), and the only remotely negative consequence I've been able to find is one flight when a pilot's gun discharged accidentally; no one was injured and there was no danger to the aircraft.

    It doesn't HURT. It may HELP. The pilots appear to favor it overwhelmingly.

    Why would you possibly want to end it?

    The only reason I can think of is an irrational fear or dislike of guns. That's it.
    2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
    2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
    2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.

  10. #60
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Anti-Gun Extremists Seek to End Federal Flight Deck Officers Program

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Air marshalls can't land the plane, right?
    Why have them as the only people on the plane with a gun?
    You have yet to hear me argue in favor of allowing ANYONE to have a gun on a plane. I'm just saying that I don't have as big of a problem with air marshals or pilots having them as I do with Gomer Pyle being allowed to bring them on the plane just because he has a CCW.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman
    Why would he NOT?
    Because he's a pussy? Or because he thinks he's more likely to survive if he doesn't resist? Or because he can't get to the gun for whatever reason? Or because he sucks at aiming? There are lots of reasons why an average person might be unwilling or unable to kill another human being.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 03-20-09 at 02:48 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •