Go on strike pilots! You need guns!!!

[Saabslime]

It is better to have a gun and never need it than it is to need a gun and not have it.

Wow, that was deep. What if C - A - T really spelled dog??..................................

 

[gsrcrsx68]

simple and true.

C A T? yeah I read some crap like that in philosophy 111.

 

[AWACoff]

I think that everyone can agree with this point...no matter how good our security, no matter how much money we throw at it, the terrorists will always find a way. We can't stop them all. Saabslime... I hope distrust of your fellow pilots is not your reason for not wanting firearms on the flightdeck. On another point...if guns in aircraft are so inherently dangerous, why do we allow LEOs, Air Marshals, etc. to carry them? On top of that, apparently the Air Marshals are no longer being trained to the high standards we were told they would be. It seems readily apparent who on the board has grown up with firearms in the household and who hasn't. As pilots we must rely upon ourselves to ensure an "out". We need to increase our options and tools at our disposal. When was the last time anybody needed to pull the elevator or aileron disconnects? It doesn't happen that often but it sure is nice to have that last ditch option.
What do I know though...I'm stuck up in the northwoods talking with cows and trying to catch sheep. (hint- velcro gloves).

 

[350DRIVER]

Lanc-
Like it or not this is how it is going to be- NO guns on the flight deck.(ruling was made last week) <- OLD NEWS)That is the bottom line and you can attempt to debate this with your "gun" ho attitude till you are a tad more blue in the face if that is what is going to make you happy I am just very sorry that the majority of people in general as well as in DC did not agree with YOUR logic and feelings regarding "allowing" guns on the flight deck. Once again the ruling was made that NO guns are to be allowed on the flight deck IF you skipped the first part of this reply..

Law or no law, no crewmember is going to carry a firearm onboard my aircraft. Period. There are many other effective measures available to deal with a would-be highjacker. All this hype about pilots carrying guns is just as big of a knee jerk reaction on our part as what we (pilots) were accusing the government of in their reaction to security measures post 9/11.

Also all of your posts Lanc speak for themselves and I don't think it would do justice to go into them and disect them one by one however I did think a few were quite comical so IF you have the chance go back and read a few..

C H E E R S
3 5 0

 

[lancair1]

350,
You are just plain full of bologna. Your right that they did not approve guns in the cockpit.. Things can change.

If you felt that guns should not be allowed in homes, should my only comeback be that your effort is useless because the laws already protect my right to own a weapon?

You are left feeling that you must say things like "gi joe" "government hating" pilot who "wants to allow hijackers through ground security so they can be ambushed"

After claiming the statements above, do you feel confident and content about the picture your painting of yourself?

 

[gsrcrsx68]

Well don't confuse a vote for larger government with an anti gun vote. The vote in DC was a vote for more government, more pork, more federal agentsa and MORE, not less, GUNS.

With air marshalls randomly placed in the cabin, they should now bulletproof the cockpit. If someone is in back, shooting forward you need to protect the cockpit. If you are going to have the air marshalls sit up front in the same seats all the time, you might as well just give the guns to the pilots.

Once again, for you unrealistic peacenics...The vote was STILL FOR MORE GUNS!

And to the guy guy who said no guns, you just gave the safety of your aircraft to someone you have ZERO control over...good job.

 

[350DRIVER]

Lancair1-
Sorry that you are in the minority on this issue but get used to it since this issue is "dead"(sometimes you have to admit defeat whether you like it or not)- I will not debate this issue anymore with you since clearly your experience level and maturity level have alot to be desired to say the least (just read your posts and you should be able to come to this conclusion also)

If you felt that guns should not be allowed in homes, should my only comeback be that your effort is useless because the laws already protect my right to own a weapon?

Please show me where I have ever mentioned in ANY of my posts where I am against guns in the homes.?? (It is obvious since you clearly have nothing to else to "debate" you must "accuse" people of something that was never said- you are a class act I must say..... I could only imagine what your CFI has to go through in order to attempt to teach you something..

You got a way to go "kiddo"-

3 5 0

 

[lancair1]

350,
I concede that I should never use a parallel in attempt to make a point to you. Parallel: ie. analogy, ie. situation with certain similiarities in attempt to make a point. Now there's a "dead issue"

 

[350DRIVER]

Atleast we do agree that "changes" should be made-lol
right?

C H E E R S
3 5 0

my last $.02

 

[lancair1]

afirm