pilots refuse to fly with gun loons onboard

Ah, I love the smell of mature, educated debate in the morning!!

Shawn :-)
"Yardpilot" wrote in message
news:zevIb.18963$xX.69546@attbi_s02...

"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:44:42 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns Chris Morton wrote:

In article , nick
says...

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots'
union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

Pizza loving anti-Semite points out that British pilots would rather
fly
into
buildings than have armed POLICE on board.

They're as big a bunch of netwits as Jew hater Nick.

We should put the British Airline Pilots' Association on notice that
any flight WITHOUT armed sky marshals on board will be shot down as a
precautionary measure.

And you honestly wonder why the rest of the world has such a low
opinion of America?

It's no wonder America holds so much of the world in contempt.

And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered Brits
who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?

I love that phrase "**** whiskers". I'll have to make a note of it for
later use...which brings us on to another point- there is a fear that
shooting in a plane might accidently depressurize the plane. The fact
that the 7000 series aluminium alloys modern planes are made of have a
tensile strength similar to mild steel does not count. I don't think
the marshalls will be firing armour peircing rounds in the plane; most
likely they will be using those JHP ones that flatten when they hit
something.

Kind of reminds me of one of those stupid Hollywood movies where a 747
gets depressurized and for some reason, plummets out of the sky, as if
letting the pressure out of a plane had the same affect as letting the
pressure out of a hot air balloon.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:25:21 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said: "Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances are received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

No, I meant guys carrying Stanley Knifes, but I didn't want to
advertise the number one carpet cutting tool in the UK

You use box cutters to cut your carpeting? Rather thin carpets then?

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:00:25 GMT, "Morton Davis"
wrote:


"Shaun" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots'
union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the
British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said: "Our
advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances are
received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are
carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly
trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

No, I meant guys carrying Stanley Knifes, but I didn't want to
advertise the number one carpet cutting tool in the UK

Stanley knives? Made by Stanley Tools, of the USA? I think you'll find the
box cutters used on 9-11 to be about 1/1o the overall size. A box cutter is
about 5" long, by 1" wide, by 1/8" thick. Closed, it looks like a big stick
of chewing gum, but it holds a single-edged razorblade that is used as the
cutting blade. Box cutters are the weapon of choice for some teen gang
members. They're a nasty slashing weapon that can create nasty, gaping
wounds that are all the way to the bone.

Shaun doesn't understand box cutters are not very useful at cutting
carpeting. One of two cuts and the blade goes dull.

-*MORT*-

-*MORT*-

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:28:59 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:28:34 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns (Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:44:42 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns Chris Morton wrote:

In article , nick says...

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

Pizza loving anti-Semite points out that British pilots would rather fly into
buildings than have armed POLICE on board.

They're as big a bunch of netwits as Jew hater Nick.

We should put the British Airline Pilots' Association on notice that
any flight WITHOUT armed sky marshals on board will be shot down as a
precautionary measure.

And you honestly wonder why the rest of the world has such a low
opinion of America?

And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered Brits
who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?

You should, Decades of proper airline security has proved stunningly
effective at stopping planes being hijacked

Prior to 9/11 when was the last time a US airliner was hijacked in the
US? And what ultimately stopped the domestic hijacking?

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:30:23 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:44:42 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

We should put the British Airline Pilots' Association on notice that
any flight WITHOUT armed sky marshals on board will be shot down as a
precautionary measure.

That could only happen with the permision of the President.

And?

Will he be too busy reading about the goat this time ?

You think _every time_ the military fires a missile they stop to ask
for the President's permission? Bwahaha...etc.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:43:53 GMT, Eddy_Down
wrote:



Mongo Jones wrote:
In talk.politics.guns "nick" wrote:


"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said: "Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances are received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm


Cool! Euro-trash can stay the **** home, then.


Who wants to go to your thirld world country anyway?

Hopefully people who can spell better than you, Jude Girl.
Spell checker not working or did you mistype during another nasty
rogering?

On 31 Dec 2003 07:39:33 -0800, (J. Hall) wrote:

And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered Brits
who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?

I love that phrase "**** whiskers". I'll have to make a note of it for
later use...which brings us on to another point- there is a fear that
shooting in a plane might accidently depressurize the plane. The fact
that the 7000 series aluminium alloys modern planes are made of have a
tensile strength similar to mild steel does not count. I don't think
the marshalls will be firing armour peircing rounds in the plane; most
likely they will be using those JHP ones that flatten when they hit
something.
Kind of reminds me of one of those stupid Hollywood movies where a 747
gets depressurized and for some reason, plummets out of the sky, as if
letting the pressure out of a plane had the same affect as letting the
pressure out of a hot air balloon.

Who are you, and why are you interjecting facts into this
conversation?

Teacherjh wrote:


The one with security will have a bunch of unarmed passengers eating
squeeze food with plastic utensils, who are used to being told what to do
and when to
do it, and expect somebody else to dispense security for them. The
terrorist of course will be fully armed, because he (or she) knows how to
get stuff on an
airplane. Granted an unarmed angry mob is nothing to sneeze at, but if I
were the terrorist, this is still the plane I'd pick to be on.

There's another relevant point. If we assume that security would prevent
boarding with weapons (not a safe assumption at all, but let's go with it
for the moment), then what's a terrorist to do? Why, just identify and
overpower the lone armed officer on the aircraft.

Even an armed officer can be overpowered if it's done quickly and from close
range (and perhaps involving multiple attackers).

Thus, by putting weapons aboard, we're providing another attack vector for
terrorists.

Keeping the officer's identity secret is an obvious attempt to address this.
In the computing business, we call this "security through obscurity". It
doesn't work against any but the most casual of attackers.

- Andrew

you deserve to be isolated from the civilized world as long as you
thing
and speak like that.

we have a freedom of speech that tends to prevent that from happening.

I am not so sure about that.


well, lets say it works for a liberal. If you want to see our first
amendment thrown out the window, have a conservative start talking in a
group of liberals. "freedom of speech" tends to go down the tubes and the
conservative is labeled an ignorant bigot.