In article ,
Cub Driver wrote:

It just does not work to make even more people carry guns in order to
protect them from potential terrorists.
What kind of logic is that?

There's only one kind of logic, and arming the police when the
criminals are armed certainly fits the framework.

Note that no one is "making" more people carry guns. The European
airlines can always detour around the continental U.S. It is up to
them whether they want to follow American regulations or not.

Do you also believe that if sky marshals had been a regular thing on
American airliners in 2001 that the 9/11 terrorists would have still
have tried to hijack those planes?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

I believe that the airlines' (and FAA's) policy of acquiescense to
hijackers' demands lies at the root of the 9/11 problem.

If there had been a policy of active resistance to hijackers, 9/11 would
never have happened, as the goons would never have gotten to the cockpit.

The first one who came through the door would have gotten a splitting
headache (via fire axe) and that would have been the end of that.