guns

island1fox

Well-Known Member
so island, find any independent source corroborating the young man's story?


bbsam,

Whether the reported incident is true or not --seems this would NOT be a part of your all encompassing solution you claim to be seeking.

When armed sky-Marshalls were put on Planes and Pilots were encouraged to get carry permits ---what has happened ?

If the planes were "gun free zones " The box cutter boys would still be in business.:sick:
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
bbsam,

Whether the reported incident is true or not --seems this would NOT be a part of your all encompassing solution you claim to be seeking.

When armed sky-Marshalls were put on Planes and Pilots were encouraged to get carry permits ---what has happened ?

If the planes were "gun free zones " The box cutter boys would still be in business.:sick:
I'm actually interested. Maybe it is part of the solution. But if armed civilians are afraid of hitting innocent bystanders, how do we account for that possibility? Who has culpability and to what extent? I'm not sure I have an all encompassing solution, but for the conversation to nose dive into gun rights vs gun laws is just the same old crap that solves nothing.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
I'm actually interested. Maybe it is part of the solution. But if armed civilians are afraid of hitting innocent bystanders, how do we account for that possibility? Who has culpability and to what extent? I'm not sure I have an all encompassing solution, but for the conversation to nose dive into gun rights vs gun laws is just the same old crap that solves nothing.

bbsam,

You make some good points and I am also not sure if the politicians that always have alterior self interests motives --if we ever will get a good solution.

On the question of an armed civilian possibly hitting an innocent during these mass murders--good point --the school Principal lunged at the shooter only to loose her life ----Not a good situation ---I also hate what ifs --but what if the principal had a gun ---fired and hit a student or teacher --but also stopped the jerk before the massacre. Just makes you think. One life or multiple lives ---I would bet many of the parents that lost little angels that day --would consider that trade-off. I know --I know ---terrible thing to say and think --but as we know reality can be very cruel.:peaceful:
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
bbsam,

Whether the reported incident is true or not --seems this would NOT be a part of your all encompassing solution you claim to be seeking.

When armed sky-Marshalls were put on Planes and Pilots were encouraged to get carry permits ---what has happened ?

If the planes were "gun free zones " The box cutter boys would still be in business.:sick:

So, if i am to understand you correctly, you are attributing the NON hijacking of planes to armed sky marshalls?? What about the LOCKED CABIN DOORS that have been re inforced and cannot be penetrated like prior to 9/11?

Do you think this has more to do with safety of aircraft, then armed sky marshalls?

Peace

TOS
 

BigUnionGuy

Got the T-Shirt
It's kind of ironic....

The people most upset, about all tragedies involving the misuse of legally owned firearms....

Are adamant supporters of abortion rights.
 

Babagounj

Strength through joy
So tos, you believe that all NRA card carrying members are nuts and at some point in their lives will turn into mass murderers .
So given your conclusions , would you be so kind as list all of the past NRA members who have already committed these acts .
I'm sure you have all those records readily compiled .
 

DS

Fenderbender
Pickup you are such a maroon...he says selectively :)
The Queen is on our currency out of respect.
The crown has zero influence on our policies.
I might have to send Captain Canuck down there
to give you a royal kick in the bum.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
So, if i am to understand you correctly, you are attributing the NON hijacking of planes to armed sky marshalls?? What about the LOCKED CABIN DOORS that have been re inforced and cannot be penetrated like prior to 9/11?

Do you think this has more to do with safety of aircraft, then armed sky marshalls?

Peace

TOS


Tos,
l


I do not speak for bbsam but I would venture a guess that he would Agee that all mentioned actions were part of a comprehensive solution.
Do you have proof that armed marshals and Pilots are not part of the solution??

I think not.
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
Tos,
l


I do not speak for bbsam but I would venture a guess that he would Agee that all mentioned actions were part of a comprehensive solution.
Do you have proof that armed marshals and Pilots are not part of the solution??

I think not.

What I think is that you will exaggerate the value of a gun on board an aircraft to suit your argument. The LOCKED and FORTIFIED cabin doors have made it virtually impossible to take over a USA commercial aircraft.

The sky marshals couldnt fire their weapons in mid flight even if they wanted to. Stun guns would work just as well without bringing the aircraft down with decompression.

You make it sound like the armed marshalls are the reason air safety is better since 9/11, but the reality is, that plays a very small part.

peace

TOS
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
Tos,
l


I do not speak for bbsam but I would venture a guess that he would Agee that all mentioned actions were part of a comprehensive solution.
Do you have proof that armed marshals and Pilots are not part of the solution??

I think not.

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying the government regulation and increased government intervention is necessary for our safety? Would that apply to firearm regulation as well?

Funny how that works.
 
P

pickup

Guest
Pickup you are such a maroon...he says selectively :)
The Queen is on our currency out of respect.
The crown has zero influence on our policies.
I might have to send Captain Canuck down there
to give you a royal kick in the bum.

The first two paragraphs of the link I provided in my post says it all. Perhaps you and your fellow Canuck should spend less time focusing on our 2nd amendment and more time figuring out how your government really works.

Just in case you haven't read that link, here are the first two paragraphs.:

The monarchy of Canada is the core of both Canada's federalism and its Westminster-style parliamentary democracy,being the foundation of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Canadian government and each provincial government. The monarchy has been headed since 6 February 1952 by Queen Elizabeth II, who as sovereign is shared equally with fifteen other countries within the Commonwealth of Nations, all being independent and the monarchy of each legally distinct. For Canada, the current monarch is officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada), and she, her consort, and other members of the Canadian Royal Family undertake various public and private functions across the country and on its behalf abroad. However, the Queen is the only member of the Royal Family with any constitutional role. While several powers are the sovereign's alone, because she lives predominantly in the United Kingdom, most of the royal governmental and ceremonial duties in Canada are carried out by the Queen's representative, the governor general. In each of Canada's provinces, the monarch is represented by a lieutenant governor, while the territories are not sovereign and thus do not have a viceroy.
Per the Canadian constitution, the responsibilities of the sovereign and/or governor general include summoning and dismissing parliament, calling elections, and appointing governments. Further, Royal Assent and the royal sign-manual are required to enact laws, letters patent, and orders in council. But the authority for these acts stems from the Canadian populace and,within the conventional stipulations of constitutional monarchy, the sovereign's direct participation in any of these areas of governance is limited, with most related powers entrusted for exercise by the elected and appointed parliamentarians, the ministers of the Crown generally drawn from amongst them, and the judges and justices of the peace. The Crown today primarily functions as a guarantor of continuous and stable governance and a nonpartisan safeguard against the abuse of power, the sovereign acting as a custodian of the Crown's democratic powers and a representation of the "power of the people above government and political parties."
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
124280_600.jpg
 

Nimnim

The Nim
What I think is that you will exaggerate the value of a gun on board an aircraft to suit your argument. The LOCKED and FORTIFIED cabin doors have made it virtually impossible to take over a USA commercial aircraft.

The sky marshals couldnt fire their weapons in mid flight even if they wanted to. Stun guns would work just as well without bringing the aircraft down with decompression.

You make it sound like the armed marshalls are the reason air safety is better since 9/11, but the reality is, that plays a very small part.

peace

TOS

I'm going to link this article, hey it's not news based at call, go on and say I'm right/left wing for this.

HowStuffWorks "What if someone shot a gun on an airplane?"


Basically this article says unless you hit a vital piece of equipment, impossible with the reinforced cockpit doors you mention, or blowing out a window well a gunshot or two aboard a plane pretty much is negligible. Of course you still don't want gunshots on a plane but as you say a sky marshal couldn't fire their gun, well that's just plain make believe.

Good luck with your next assertion Midnight Rider.
 
Top