TSA going too far?

[19dabeast85]

A "higher level" concealed weapons permit, extra expense paid by the gun carrier, that had more intense screening, interview, and situational training offered to citizens to allow only these special carriers to carry on airplanes would all but eliminate anybody trying to make a bomb out of an airplane, their goal is 99% sure not to happen.


Give calculated liberties to good citizens and create more liberties for all as well as increased REAL security for travel. Every 5 years one of these guys would go rogue and do something crazy but there'll be other carriers on that plane that'll get him, hopefully. That and allow all airline personnel the right to carry, at least on any domestic flights, laws with other countries would get touchy.

[foamypirate]

I'm not sure putting a bullet through an airplane at 35,000 is a good idea...very likely to happen, depending on the type of ammunition used.

[19dabeast85]

I'm not sure putting a bullet through an airplane at 35,000 is a good idea...very likely to happen, depending on the type of ammunition used.

Very unlikely to happen with someone who has training and appreciation for as well as a personal interest for his well-being in where the bullet is placed. I always hit what I shoot at, otherwise why shoot? Only an idiot carries a handgun with jacketed solid point bullets, they go through things doing less damage to the target and more collateral damage behind the target. A hollow point, granted it hits its target, will rarely exit the targeted body.

Like I said, a harder concealed weapons permit including personal interview screening, a stressful-environment accuracy test, and a short course in tactical theory. All paid for by the person getting the license, training instructors are abundant. I'd be willing to pay $500 for that permit if I could carry on a plane and have some personal insurance, otherwise you just sit in your seat doing nothing, wasted potential IMO.

BTW, if it's a terrorist attack, the plane is going down no matter what so why worry about a bullet going through the shell? Also, don't believe movies in which a bullet through the side makes half the plane blow off, it would take a LONG time to loose pressure through a tiny bullet hole.......ever drained a large air compressor down?

[PakaloloHonda]

I'm sure that you know your ballistcs well, still, you're entering uncharted waters!
There are far more risks involved with a concealed weapon on an air-liner .. far more!
For one, you're not only jepordizing the enitre list of passengers, but you're jepordizing yourself.
What if someone next to you freaks when they see you pull your weapon? What about someone a few seats over? You can get closer?
Fine .. you stand up, they tell you to sit right the fuck back down, or the fat lady gets it!
Or, the dude you "hit", doesn't die, and he's holding the trigger device. Wonderful!

Too many varibles, too much that can go wrong. You couldn't get close enough to any of them because they wouldn't let you.
And if they did discover you had a weapon before you used it, you'd be dead!

I'd just as soon stick with regulated protocol by the airline industry.
Afterall, they've done far to much research on all of this, and I'm sure they're doing it as best they can.
You may not think so. But they do, and that's all that matters.

Very unlikely to happen with someone who has training and appreciation for as well as a personal interest for his well-being in where the bullet is placed. I always hit what I shoot at, otherwise why shoot? Only an idiot carries a handgun with jacketed solid point bullets, they go through things doing less damage to the target and more collateral damage behind the target. A hollow point, granted it hits its target, will rarely exit the targeted body.

Like I said, a harder concealed weapons permit including personal interview screening, a stressful-environment accuracy test, and a short course in tactical theory. All paid for by the person getting the license, training instructors are abundant. I'd be willing to pay $500 for that permit if I could carry on a plane and have some personal insurance, otherwise you just sit in your seat doing nothing, wasted potential IMO.

BTW, if it's a terrorist attack, the plane is going down no matter what so why worry about a bullet going through the shell? Also, don't believe movies in which a bullet through the side makes half the plane blow off, it would take a LONG time to loose pressure through a tiny bullet hole.......ever drained a large air compressor down?

[19dabeast85]

I'm sure that you know your ballistcs well, still, you're entering uncharted waters!
There are far more risks involved with a concealed weapon on an air-liner .. far more!
For one, you're not only jepordizing the enitre list of passengers, but you're jepordizing yourself.
What if someone next to you freaks when they see you pull your weapon? What about someone a few seats over? You can get closer?
Fine .. you stand up, they tell you to sit right the fuck back down, or the fat lady gets it!
Or, the dude you "hit", doesn't die, and he's holding the trigger device. Wonderful!

Too many varibles, too much that can go wrong. You couldn't get close enough to any of them because they wouldn't let you.
And if they did discover you had a weapon before you used it, you'd be dead!

I'd just as soon stick with regulated protocol by the airline industry.
Afterall, they've done far to much research on all of this, and I'm sure they're doing it as best they can.
You may not think so. But they do, and that's all that matters.

Trust me, when somebody stands up to take over and or threaten the plane with a bomb, every passenger on there is HOPING somebody onboard will take action, they will be just fine with you pulling out a tool to neutralize a threat to everyone. Ok, what if the bad guy takes out one person before you get him? That really sucks for him and his family but at least everyone on board and who knows how many on land will be spared.

And another point.......you're a terrorist. You know that the USA allows its good citizens to carry guns on the airplane. You've seen movies of crazy freakin Americans taking EVERYBODY out who tries to harm them and their family. You hear and see stories in the news of an American defending himself against a carjacking or home invasion and not even being taken to jail. Are you really going to get on a plane and try to hijack it?

What makes planes prime picking is the fact that terrorists can know for a fact that nobody else on board has a weapon to fight them with. An experiment was performed in the 1990's in some city in Georgia that was experiencing really high armed robberies and homicides. The city authorities passed a law requiring every resident to just own a weapon. Crime dropped like a rock overnight. It was not publicized because that idea is not what our government wants its citizens to think. They keep taking away our freedoms a very tiny bit at a time and they are heading towards an Australian-like gun band, watch. THAT is why gun control is such a huge issue. After all the gun control that has been passed, weapons outlawed all around the country, crime has not been significantly impacted at all. I gotta go to bed and cool off, I get mad at all the things I'm not "allowed" to do or have. We're still more free than most countries but we're heading downhill fast towards massive government control over everything.

I hope everyone will get out and vote this November, we need to replace every democrat and republican that has been in office more than 4 years. They get too corrupt after being in office too long and let the power go to their head passing laws that don't apply to them while enjoying their positions in congress with free health care, guaranteed retirement, and no social security payments, bastards.

[owequitit]

A "higher level" concealed weapons permit, extra expense paid by the gun carrier, that had more intense screening, interview, and situational training offered to citizens to allow only these special carriers to carry on airplanes would all but eliminate anybody trying to make a bomb out of an airplane, their goal is 99% sure not to happen.


Give calculated liberties to good citizens and create more liberties for all as well as increased REAL security for travel. Every 5 years one of these guys would go rogue and do something crazy but there'll be other carriers on that plane that'll get him, hopefully. That and allow all airline personnel the right to carry, at least on any domestic flights, laws with other countries would get touchy.

Here is the problem, and don't take offensively, I mean it completely constructively.

1) You are not a qualified expert on what works on airplanes and what doesn't. Therefore, you are conjecturing and speculating. However, the people actually making the decisions aren't. For instance, one of my specific sources of information who worked for the TSA from their earliest days is a former airline security chief, and has been a Federal Sky Marshall. He has access to information and experience neither of us can imagine.

Now, here is the problem. Bullets travel at high velocity with a lot of energy, and a lot of destructive force. In an enclosed place, 1 bullet could injure or kill quite a few people.

It also isn't as easy as taking over the plane. You have very little room and no leverage. The odds of one guy with a gun saving the day is far less than you imagine. It works great on TV, but in reality, it isn't that easy. The people who are actually trained in the protection of an airplane are trained primarily in close combat, defensive and death techniques. They absolutely do not discharge a firearm unless there is no other alternative.

Also, don't forget that your deterrent theory is wrong. Those people boarding the airplanes with bombs are already dead. As far as they are concerned, they are going to die for their cause. How do you deter someone who is already willing to pay the ultimate price? You don't. If they aren't deterred by the screening, the potential for death, and the potential for mission failure, then they aren't going to be deterred by a gun. They are ultimately there to accomplish the same goal, and thus it is ineffective.

Besides, there are already armed people on board who are far more trained than you or anyone else off the street with a non-specific permit, specifically in relation to aircraft, tight spaces, and civilians. It is also not uncommon to have Federal Flight Deck Officers on board, which are basically pilots trained under a classified program on cockpit defense. Yes, they are armed, yes, they are specifically trained, and yes they have a lot of limitations on what they can do. The only people with free roam are the Federal Air Marshalls, because that is their specific job. And you will never know they are there.

The point is that it is really easy to sit there and assume that you know what is best, when the reality is that you don't have nearly enough total information to make any sort of informed decision about the big picture. The realities of the situation are a lot different than you assume.

2) Contrary to popular folk lore, a bullet hole will not bring down an airplane. A pressurized airplane is essentially an aluminum balloon comprised of riveted plates. They leak. A lot. A bullet hole would be so insignificant it isn't funny. Aircraft has popped whole windows before and been just fine. It was loud and unpleasant, but it didn't decompress. On the other hand, a pound of explosive will easily rupture the structure enough to bring the plane down, especially if it is strategically located.

Now, here is another perspective on this whole matter that I considered yesterday while looking at photos of a bomb investigation, and while going over accident investigation stuff today, in regards to screening.

When you travel, or recieve ANY sort of professional service, be it from a doctor, a lawyer, or a pilot, you want the utmost in screening, training, maintenance and professionalism.

You don't want to get onto a rickety old airplane, with no maintenance, no safety features, and a pilot who wouldn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Do you? I didn't think so.

Now, look at it from MY perspective. I don't want to get onto a brand new airplane, after having spent many years and thousands of hours in time and money so that I could get blown up by some fuckstick who had a bad day. So why is it reasonable for YOU to expect to have maintenance oversight, pilot oversight, ATC oversight, and then if something DOES go wrong, for people to expect lawsuits, firings, and possible criminal action, but it is not reasonable fore ME to want as reasonable amount of assurance that YOU aren't going to kill me?

Not only do the pilots also have to be screened (you would be surprised how many people try to make it through security dressed as pilots), but they also get to have their every control input recorded, their voice recorded, and their Air Traffic Control transmissions recoreded just in case.

In the grand scheme of things, people have a right to a reasonable expectation of safety. They have no problem fining the airline for maintenance, or the pilots for mistakes, and yet, they aren't willing to give up 8 seconds of their life to do their part in the process? I don't think so.

[owequitit]

Trust me, when somebody stands up to take over and or threaten the plane with a bomb, every passenger on there is HOPING somebody onboard will take action, they will be just fine with you pulling out a tool to neutralize a threat to everyone. Ok, what if the bad guy takes out one person before you get him? That really sucks for him and his family but at least everyone on board and who knows how many on land will be spared.

And another point.......you're a terrorist. You know that the USA allows its good citizens to carry guns on the airplane. You've seen movies of crazy freakin Americans taking EVERYBODY out who tries to harm them and their family. You hear and see stories in the news of an American defending himself against a carjacking or home invasion and not even being taken to jail. Are you really going to get on a plane and try to hijack it?

What makes planes prime picking is the fact that terrorists can know for a fact that nobody else on board has a weapon to fight them with. An experiment was performed in the 1990's in some city in Georgia that was experiencing really high armed robberies and homicides. The city authorities passed a law requiring every resident to just own a weapon. Crime dropped like a rock overnight. It was not publicized because that idea is not what our government wants its citizens to think. They keep taking away our freedoms a very tiny bit at a time and they are heading towards an Australian-like gun band, watch. THAT is why gun control is such a huge issue. After all the gun control that has been passed, weapons outlawed all around the country, crime has not been significantly impacted at all. I gotta go to bed and cool off, I get mad at all the things I'm not "allowed" to do or have. We're still more free than most countries but we're heading downhill fast towards massive government control over everything.

I hope everyone will get out and vote this November, we need to replace every democrat and republican that has been in office more than 4 years. They get too corrupt after being in office too long and let the power go to their head passing laws that don't apply to them while enjoying their positions in congress with free health care, guaranteed retirement, and no social security payments, bastards.

You are incorrect in 100% of your assertions.

[PakaloloHonda]

And another point.......you're a terrorist. You know that the USA allows its good citizens to carry guns on the airplane. You've seen movies of crazy freakin Americans taking EVERYBODY out who tries to harm them and their family. You hear and see stories in the news of an American defending himself against a carjacking or home invasion and not even being taken to jail. Are you really going to get on a plane and try to hijack it?

Please let me know when you're flying, what airline, and where to.
Cuz I wanna make damn sure that I'm not on that phuckin plane lol!
You're either really young, or you're not very bright at all! Perhaps both!

And for your information, Autralia has a great government .. one of the best!
Ever been there? Know anyone from Australia? I didn't think so .........

[19dabeast85]

Please let me know when you're flying, what airline, and where to.
Cuz I wanna make damn sure that I'm not on that phuckin plane lol!
You're either really young, or you're not very bright at all! Perhaps both!

And for your information, Autralia has a great government .. one of the best!
Ever been there? Know anyone from Australia? I didn't think so .........

No need to personally attack me. I know people from Australia and it's extremely difficult to own a weapon there, they also have really high crime rates. Any government that restricts the basic freedoms of its citizens is NOT a good or even great government and EVERY, EVERY, EVERY (get the picture) government in history that has done so has fallen from power when its citizens had enough.

The government is supposed to work for the citizens and do what the citizens want, after all, the citizens fund them. Instead these big governments take too much tax dollars and use it in nonproductive ways and pass laws restricting citizen freedoms so controls can be put in place little by little until essentially a slave-like poverty class is the majority.

Lets talk about the U.S.A for a moment, why do you think the poverty levels have grown in this nation continuously over the last decades no matter whether the reds or blues were "in charge"???? Explain why the extremely intelligent leaders of our country haven't figured out how to control poverty? Is it possible they know how and don't want to? After all, every past president or congress leader is financially protected for life by the government, it's in their best interest to make government as powerful as possible while they are in office and screw the "little people". Bush did it, Clinton did it, Obama is trying his best. All very different people externally with different perceived agendas but all contributing to greater poverty, higher deficit, and more government control. Why? Why have all three essentially led to the same results?

Here's one answer as to why: When you increase poverty and then create underfunded, temporary government programs to "help" those in poverty you make them dependent on gov't. They begin to enjoy getting payouts without having to work, they rely on Gov't grants so they search for more and more handouts and are willing to continuously give up small freedoms one at a time to get more handouts.....eventually this leads to a poverty class that is completely dependent on the Gov't. This IS where the U.S. is headed and it's only 10% to blame on Obama's administration and the rest to blame on most of the previous administrations.

My point is, read history, look at what has made countries powerful and look at what has made them fail. THEN go and judge a country's governmental strength or weakness.

[19dabeast85]

You are incorrect in 100% of your assertions.

How? If I'm a terrorist and I believe that my fortune and 40 virgins in heaven is dependent on me succeeding in my suicide mission. I would be much less likely to hijack an airplane knowing there's a high probability of aware, armed citizens on board that will kill me before my mission is accomplished. If I die before I accomplish my mission I have failed and don't deserve the treats in heaven......that IS what motivates these extremists.

Now explain to my why the above reasoning isn't true instead of just saying I'm 100% incorrect. I'm just trying to respectfully offer alternatives to a broken system that obviously isn't perfect. My alternative is low cost, effective, it gets the picture across. The current system works pretty well to keep out terrorists, but it comes at a great cost to travelers realized in lengthy boarding times, effectively zero privacy, and occasionally damaged personal items from non-professional security staff.

[PakaloloHonda]

No need to personally attack me. I know people from Australia and it's extremely difficult to own a weapon there, they also have really high crime rates.

O brother .. you should really research before you talk.
Out of 62 countries, America ranks 24rth in crime rate (murders) .. Australia? 43rd ..
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita
So errr, which country has a higher crime rate again?
I also know a shitload of people from Australia, they love they're government and love their leaders!
Life is "good" in Australia .. in as much as I've been told and read!

America is one of (if not the last) country on this GLOBE to still allow it's citizens to own guns.
Gun control? You wanna talk gun control?
America ranks 7th out of 32 countries!!! Australia? They rank 21rst out of 32!!
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...cides-firearms
Here's another stat for you .. how about MURDERS with a gun ..??
America ranks 4rth out of 46 countries .. Australia ranks 25th!! Out of 46 countries!!
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...-with-firearms
Just for giggles and laughs .. how about .. Ohhh, "Perception of safety > Walking in dark"
Out of 15 countries, America is TIED for 2nd .. Australia? The country that you think is so full of crime?
Umm, yeah, they rank ... 14th .. out of 15 countries!!
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...y-walking-dark

Please .. get out of Carolina, visit other countries, go through THEIR screens at airports,
then come back to America (like I've done) and tell me how bad we have it here!

I'm not even gonna address the rest of your post, as it's so full of bullet-holes, it's halarious!

This IS where the U.S. is headed and it's only 10% to blame on Obama's administration and the rest to blame on most of the previous administrations.

As an example, do you have a link in terms of that "10%" .. or did you just pull that percetage from your ass?

My point is, read history, look at what has made countries powerful and look at what has made them fail. THEN go and judge a country's governmental strength or weakness.

If your point is all about History, then I suggest that you do a bit more reading yourself,
along with research, before you bring anything into deabte.

Besides, this is about airline safety and protocol. Not about you being some hero on some jet!

edit: In terms of TOTAL crime .. America ranks FIRST! Numero UNO .. out of EIGHTY TWO countries ..
Australia? They rank 22nd .. so again there "mate" .. who has a higher crime rate again?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...e-total-crimes

[owequitit]

How? If I'm a terrorist and I believe that my fortune and 40 virgins in heaven is dependent on me succeeding in my suicide mission. I would be much less likely to hijack an airplane knowing there's a high probability of aware, armed citizens on board that will kill me before my mission is accomplished. If I die before I accomplish my mission I have failed and don't deserve the treats in heaven......that IS what motivates these extremists.

Now explain to my why the above reasoning isn't true instead of just saying I'm 100% incorrect. I'm just trying to respectfully offer alternatives to a broken system that obviously isn't perfect. My alternative is low cost, effective, it gets the picture across. The current system works pretty well to keep out terrorists, but it comes at a great cost to travelers realized in lengthy boarding times, effectively zero privacy, and occasionally damaged personal items from non-professional security staff.

I have already EXPLAINED IT TO YOU. You just DON'T WANT TO LISTEN. Let me just say thank God you aren't the bozo making the policy decisions because all you would accomplish is a false sense of pride, accomplishment and security while creating real, life threatening danger, or real people.

There already are armed people on many aircraft. The primary difference is that they actually know what they are doing.

[WilliamW]

TSA is just taking the next step in bull shit.

In St. Louis, they have signs everywhere that says "vehicle will be checked" and they never do. I could carry LOADS of guns and bombs into that airport and NEVER be stopped by anyone simply because they are not doing their job. And because that level of "security" is so lazy and can't do their job, they have to try and catch people in the gates with the virtual strip searches.

Last time I flew to San Francisco I got my knife on board in my pocket (accidentally) and checked it on the way back. It's hilarious, the feeling of sitting on a plane with a knife in your pocket with a 4" blade on it which is still legal and thinking of all the people who weren't doing their job. Obviously I'm no terrorist but still I would think that a huge metal knife would be red flags everywhere.


Besides anyone who wants to blow up a plane just needs to shove the bomb up their ass now LOL radars can't see that!

[owequitit]

TSA is just taking the next step in bull shit.

In St. Louis, they have signs everywhere that says "vehicle will be checked" and they never do. I could carry LOADS of guns and bombs into that airport and NEVER be stopped by anyone simply because they are not doing their job. And because that level of "security" is so lazy and can't do their job, they have to try and catch people in the gates with the virtual strip searches.

Last time I flew to San Francisco I got my knife on board in my pocket (accidentally) and checked it on the way back. It's hilarious, the feeling of sitting on a plane with a knife in your pocket with a 4" blade on it which is still legal and thinking of all the people who weren't doing their job. Obviously I'm no terrorist but still I would think that a huge metal knife would be red flags everywhere.


Besides anyone who wants to blow up a plane just needs to shove the bomb up their ass now LOL radars can't see that!

You do understand they have different security levels right? The full car search occurs at a higher level than we have now, but the signs stayed up when we came off that level after 9/11...

[19dabeast85]

bunch of statistics

Your statistics are over 10 years old, find recent stats from a relevant source and post back.


I pulled the 10% blame on Obama out of my butt, I have no idea exactly how much is his fault, who does???? My point was it's not all high fault, not even half his fault. I have extreme dislike for how he is ruling this country, but most of our current predicament is not his fault.


I could care less what security other countries have, I believe the U.S. is going way overboard, I don't need to compare it to other countries. BTW, I AM aware of the security in other countries.


OhOHOHOhhohohohohooh...."Perception of safety" - burgulary. The U.S. ranks 78%, Australia ranks 57%, significantly lower. But like I said, most of those stats are very old.

I challenge you. Read this, I challenge you, to find ANY world empire throughout history which has continuously taken freedoms away from its citizens AND not fallen in less than 500 years.

My point is airline security, among many other things, is severely encroaching on our liberties and the government has absolutely no constitutional right to take freedoms away from its citizens, period.