In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Let's Arm the Pilots - To Protect us from Governme
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Let's Arm the Pilots - To Protect us from Government
By J.J. Johnson
Published 07. 11. 02 at 0:46 Sierra Time
xxx It is said that when the people demand things get done, it always starts in the House of Representatives. On Wednesday, they did just that, voting in favor of a bill to arm commercial airline pilots. Of course, the celebration is short lived, because we know that it will have 'trouble' in the Senate. Again, when I listen to the reasoning from the other side of this issue, get so mad I almost turn white.
Perhaps there is something in the Potomac River water supply. The legislation, approved by a vote of 310-113, would allow guns for more than 70,000 pilots if they agreed to undergo training. Lawmakers stripped out provisions that would have limited the program to some 1,400 pilots, about 2 percent of those flying. However, our benevolent protectors in the U.S. Senate seem to have a problem with this. Besides the White House, those opposing it include Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat who heads the Senate Commerce Committee
Sen. Richard Shelby, (D-AL) says he's concerned that the pilots won't be careful and may harm passengers. He, like the rest of the new rave of government expansionism, thinks 'air marshals, "that are well armed and trained should be available to deal with any problems." All the opposition will give the mantra of, "Don't worry, if there is a problem, we'll just send some F-15's, and you folks can all rest easy."
Forgive me for seeming a bit out of touch, but I don't think I'd feel 'safer' looking out my window to see F-15's getting ready to * out of the sky. But what do I know? I'm just a FORMER air traveler.
Yes - former. I'm sure many airline executives (some of whom may be reading this) are aware of this growing culture of business travelers. The new phenomenon of "thanks, but I'll drive instead" began shortly after the new 'enhanced' security took over at our nation's airports. But we'll get to that later.
Here's the question for those all-knowing Senators:
If you're willing to let an F-15 pilot carry weapons to kill a plane load of passengers, why not let a commercial pilot carry smaller firepower to save those same passengers?
Yes, I know. I shouldn't confuse the debate with common sense. So as long as we're throwing it all on the table, permit me to be blunt and graphic:
No Need to Defend Yourselves
Trust Your Government
- Photo by Jeff Hemp
Take a look at this photo. Take a good look at something that has been seared into the memory of millions for a lifetime. Let's make it personal. This was the final resting place for Captain Victor J. Saracini, and First Officer Michael R. Horrocks. Two good men who were probably focusing on flying that plane - just like our Senators want.
No, don't call me insensitive - I wasn't the one that made the edict in July of 2001 barring pilots from carrying guns. And no matter which agency missed what, there is NO argument that armed pilots could have at least minimized the damage of September 11. But it seems that all the common sense solutions to preventing similar attacks (eliminating those crazy foreign visas, considering hostile countries as the enemy, and arming pilots) are the issues this government wants to avoid.
Pushing the envelope? I'm just getting warmed up.
California National Guard Patroling LAX
- Oct 2001 - Note the lack of an ammo clip
Unarmed - Perhaps why they might have chosen this airport? LA Times Photo
While our new Transportation Security Chief, James McGaw (former ATF chief), is completely against arming the awful pilots, he wasted no time announcing that more armed folks will be placed in the airport - to make us 'feel' safer. This was after Al Jihad decided to go shooting folks at an airline terminal. This after the government ordered those 'armed' National Guardsmen out of the airport ticket areas about a month earlier (California not withstanding).
So, why was the National Guard there in the first place?
Again, I shouldn't confuse the debate with common sense.
Perhaps this might explain to the Airline executives, and government officials why you can't seem to get those business travelers back on your aircraft. You see, despite your political expedience, our lives are NOT expendable - neither is our dignity. The new security procedures went into effect, and ticket reservations dropped. Not only do the books show that, but I had the pleasure of talking with fellow air travelers that weekend - folks that kept repeating, "I think I'll drive next time - this is just too much".
So, why not go ahead and hire your 50,000 baggage screeners, 50,000 air marshals, and just for sport, 50,000 folks to roam around the airports armed - just itching to shoot someone for reaching for their identification, or strip searching another grandma.
And of course, those F-15's, just waiting for orders to give us an air-to-air enema. Sure, I can't wait to get in one of those planes again.
Oh, please don't tell me we're at war, and we have to make some adjustments. We all KNOW that. The issue here is government not listening to or having any respect for the folks who'll be the first victims of another aircraft-turned-cruise-missile operation.
No doubt the pilots association will be allowed to lobby and even testify before the Senate on why common sense should be applied to over 60,000 pilots with previous military experience. It would be more fitting if those pilots lobbied Senators to find 50,000 government employees to fly the planes if they choose not to pass the bill. Why not? Doctors and Nurses are quitting in droves - In my opinion, commercial pilots should join them - en masse.
As much as the House of Representatives should be praised for the overwhelming passage of the bill, it remains shameful there is even an ongoing debate over this. If the Senate votes to deny the pilots the last line of defense, the next pilot hijacked should memorize these words when his plane is en route to Washington, D.C. - in case they're his last:
".If you're aiming for the capitol, be respectful, and remember not to kill the government officials that gave you this opportunity ."
http://www.sierratimes.com/02/07/11/jjjohnson.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By J.J. Johnson
Published 07. 11. 02 at 0:46 Sierra Time
xxx It is said that when the people demand things get done, it always starts in the House of Representatives. On Wednesday, they did just that, voting in favor of a bill to arm commercial airline pilots. Of course, the celebration is short lived, because we know that it will have 'trouble' in the Senate. Again, when I listen to the reasoning from the other side of this issue, get so mad I almost turn white.
Perhaps there is something in the Potomac River water supply. The legislation, approved by a vote of 310-113, would allow guns for more than 70,000 pilots if they agreed to undergo training. Lawmakers stripped out provisions that would have limited the program to some 1,400 pilots, about 2 percent of those flying. However, our benevolent protectors in the U.S. Senate seem to have a problem with this. Besides the White House, those opposing it include Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat who heads the Senate Commerce Committee
Sen. Richard Shelby, (D-AL) says he's concerned that the pilots won't be careful and may harm passengers. He, like the rest of the new rave of government expansionism, thinks 'air marshals, "that are well armed and trained should be available to deal with any problems." All the opposition will give the mantra of, "Don't worry, if there is a problem, we'll just send some F-15's, and you folks can all rest easy."
Forgive me for seeming a bit out of touch, but I don't think I'd feel 'safer' looking out my window to see F-15's getting ready to * out of the sky. But what do I know? I'm just a FORMER air traveler.
Yes - former. I'm sure many airline executives (some of whom may be reading this) are aware of this growing culture of business travelers. The new phenomenon of "thanks, but I'll drive instead" began shortly after the new 'enhanced' security took over at our nation's airports. But we'll get to that later.
Here's the question for those all-knowing Senators:
If you're willing to let an F-15 pilot carry weapons to kill a plane load of passengers, why not let a commercial pilot carry smaller firepower to save those same passengers?
Yes, I know. I shouldn't confuse the debate with common sense. So as long as we're throwing it all on the table, permit me to be blunt and graphic:
No Need to Defend Yourselves
Trust Your Government
- Photo by Jeff Hemp
Take a look at this photo. Take a good look at something that has been seared into the memory of millions for a lifetime. Let's make it personal. This was the final resting place for Captain Victor J. Saracini, and First Officer Michael R. Horrocks. Two good men who were probably focusing on flying that plane - just like our Senators want.
No, don't call me insensitive - I wasn't the one that made the edict in July of 2001 barring pilots from carrying guns. And no matter which agency missed what, there is NO argument that armed pilots could have at least minimized the damage of September 11. But it seems that all the common sense solutions to preventing similar attacks (eliminating those crazy foreign visas, considering hostile countries as the enemy, and arming pilots) are the issues this government wants to avoid.
Pushing the envelope? I'm just getting warmed up.
California National Guard Patroling LAX
- Oct 2001 - Note the lack of an ammo clip
Unarmed - Perhaps why they might have chosen this airport? LA Times Photo
While our new Transportation Security Chief, James McGaw (former ATF chief), is completely against arming the awful pilots, he wasted no time announcing that more armed folks will be placed in the airport - to make us 'feel' safer. This was after Al Jihad decided to go shooting folks at an airline terminal. This after the government ordered those 'armed' National Guardsmen out of the airport ticket areas about a month earlier (California not withstanding).
So, why was the National Guard there in the first place?
Again, I shouldn't confuse the debate with common sense.
Perhaps this might explain to the Airline executives, and government officials why you can't seem to get those business travelers back on your aircraft. You see, despite your political expedience, our lives are NOT expendable - neither is our dignity. The new security procedures went into effect, and ticket reservations dropped. Not only do the books show that, but I had the pleasure of talking with fellow air travelers that weekend - folks that kept repeating, "I think I'll drive next time - this is just too much".
So, why not go ahead and hire your 50,000 baggage screeners, 50,000 air marshals, and just for sport, 50,000 folks to roam around the airports armed - just itching to shoot someone for reaching for their identification, or strip searching another grandma.
And of course, those F-15's, just waiting for orders to give us an air-to-air enema. Sure, I can't wait to get in one of those planes again.
Oh, please don't tell me we're at war, and we have to make some adjustments. We all KNOW that. The issue here is government not listening to or having any respect for the folks who'll be the first victims of another aircraft-turned-cruise-missile operation.
No doubt the pilots association will be allowed to lobby and even testify before the Senate on why common sense should be applied to over 60,000 pilots with previous military experience. It would be more fitting if those pilots lobbied Senators to find 50,000 government employees to fly the planes if they choose not to pass the bill. Why not? Doctors and Nurses are quitting in droves - In my opinion, commercial pilots should join them - en masse.
As much as the House of Representatives should be praised for the overwhelming passage of the bill, it remains shameful there is even an ongoing debate over this. If the Senate votes to deny the pilots the last line of defense, the next pilot hijacked should memorize these words when his plane is en route to Washington, D.C. - in case they're his last:
".If you're aiming for the capitol, be respectful, and remember not to kill the government officials that gave you this opportunity ."
http://www.sierratimes.com/02/07/11/jjjohnson.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878