OK, what the hell has happened to the Brits?

Now the British airline pilots are considering refusingto fly if there is an
armed security guard on a flight, citing the danger of a gunshot in a
pressurized airliner.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukresponse...863275,00.html

What?

Are they using "Goldfinger" as a training film there now?

Or has hoplophobia just turned their minds to goo?

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

In article ,
Wdtabor wrote:
Now the British airline pilots are considering refusingto fly if there is an
armed security guard on a flight, citing the danger of a gunshot in a
pressurized airliner.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukresponse...863275,00.html

Are they using "Goldfinger" as a training film there now?
Or has hoplophobia just turned their minds to goo?

I think there are two issues in play. 1) No one is happy that the US
is basically issuing an order to other nations. 2) Most of the EU nations
(and people raises in them) are VERY anti-gun (to the point of being
afriad of guns, that is fear of the object itself).

In article ,
('Vejita' S. Cousin) writes:


I think there are two issues in play. 1) No one is happy that the US
is basically issuing an order to other nations.

The US is not issuing an order, it is making the use of our airspace
conditional on providing some degree of security to guarantee their airplane
not be commandeered and turned into a missile for use on our people. No one is
compelled to fly their airplanes in our airspace and we are making no
requirement regarding flights not entering our airspace.

2) Most of the EU nations
(and people raises in them) are VERY anti-gun (to the point of being
afriad of guns, that is fear of the object itself).


I see no reason for the US to cater to the mental diseases of Europeans. And
fear of an inanimate object carried by an officer of the law *is* delusional.

What the hell happened to the people who won the Battle of Britain?

Don


--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

Didnt you know? When a bullet punctures a window, it blows out and all the
people get sucked out - unless they hang on to a chair, in which case you
flap like a flag in the wind until your fingers give out...

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
Now the British airline pilots are considering refusingto fly if there is
an
armed security guard on a flight, citing the danger of a gunshot in a
pressurized airliner.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukresponse...863275,00.html

What?

Are they using "Goldfinger" as a training film there now?

Or has hoplophobia just turned their minds to goo?

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

Now the British airline pilots are considering refusingto fly if there is an
armed security guard on a flight, citing the danger of a gunshot in a
pressurized airliner.

I was driving home from Cannon Mountain yesterday afternoon, and
listening to NRP (National Partisan Radio) as I went. The subject of
air marshals came up. The Talking Head was a London-based security
consultant. He said in effect:

"You don't want guns on aircraft at 30,000 feet. The air marshals have
frangible bullets, of course. But what's to stop the terrorist from
getting into a shootout with the air marshal? The terrorist won't have
frangible bullets. Then you have the specter of a bullet piercing the
airplane's skin, explosion decompression and all that entails, even
unto passengers being sucked out of the aircraft."

The statement, of course, went unchallenged by the host.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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

ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote:

What the hell happened to the people who won the Battle of Britain?

Are you saying those who do not carry guns are afraid, and those
carrying guns brave? It seems the other way round to me.

On 30 Dec 2003 20:16:01 GMT, Wdtabor wrote:

2) Most of the EU nations
(and people raises in them) are VERY anti-gun (to the point of being
afriad of guns, that is fear of the object itself).


I see no reason for the US to cater to the mental diseases of Europeans. And

what is the mental disease here? I can't follow you there.
Or do you mean you are only sane when carrying a weapon?

fear of an inanimate object carried by an officer of the law *is* delusional.

I avoid everybody carrying a weapon. And as long as I can decide it (!)
nobody with a weapon is entering my house, my office or sitting in my car.
And I turn away from everybody carrying a weapon, I also avoid beeing too
close to cops carrying a weapon.

What the hell happened to the people who won the Battle of Britain?

they awakend?

#m
--
harsh regulations in North Korea (read below link after reading the story):
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/04/open-mikulan.php
oooops ... sorry ... it happened in the USA, ya know: the land of the free.

Cub Driver wrote:

I was driving home from Cannon Mountain yesterday afternoon, and
listening to NRP (National Partisan Radio) as I went. The subject of
air marshals came up. The Talking Head was a London-based security
consultant. He said in effect:

"You don't want guns on aircraft at 30,000 feet. The air marshals have
frangible bullets, of course. But what's to stop the terrorist from
getting into a shootout with the air marshal? The terrorist won't have
frangible bullets. Then you have the specter of a bullet piercing the
airplane's skin, explosion decompression and all that entails, even
unto passengers being sucked out of the aircraft."

The statement, of course, went unchallenged by the host.

What would you challenge? The fact that you don't want guns on board?
The possibility of explosive decompression?

I have seen it said that a bullet hole through the skin would not
cause explosive decompression. I can believe that is true if it is a
small hole, from relatively perpendicular to the skin. What if the
bullet was at a shallow angle to the skin however, as if it had been
fired along the cabin? Then I would imagine the hole would be more
like a long tear, and explosive decompression seems more likely. There
is a lot of pressure there, remember Comets, JAL, Aloha airlines etc.

I have seen it said that a bullet hole through the skin would not
cause explosive decompression. I can believe that is true if it is a
small hole, from relatively perpendicular to the skin. What if the
bullet was at a shallow angle to the skin however, as if it had been
fired along the cabin? Then I would imagine the hole would be more
like a long tear, and explosive decompression seems more likely.


If the bullet hits the s in at a shallow angle, there will be much less force
perpendicular to the skin, and it will be less likely to be punctured. The
bullet will just ricochet.

Jose





--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

ackatyu (Wdtabor) wrote
Now the British airline pilots are considering refusingto fly if there is an
armed security guard on a flight, citing the danger of a gunshot in a
pressurized airliner.

Would you, as PIC, be comfortable flying an airplane where a passenger
who is absolutely unknown to you is armed while you yourself are
unarmed?

Michael