Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D.Austin who wrote (13451)	5/27/2002 5:56:08 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Also,I believe if a gun is fired in the cockpit,and the bullet goes through the fuselage it will not cause any decompression in the cabin.I would go so far as to say several small holes could be fired into the skin and nothing would happen to aircraft. What leads you to say that?

To: D.Austin who wrote (13451)	5/30/2002 11:14:17 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

They are highly trained mentally,mechanically,physically and have extremely good eye/hand coordination. I also believe that a gun in the hand of almost any pilot is probably safer than a lot of policemen. I am also willing to bet that the pilots themselves are willing to carry guns. What is a more complicated to operate a jumbo jet or a revolver ? That's like saying that because a concert pianist has extensive musical training and unusual manual dexterity, the pianist is qualified to play the violin solo. Pilots are trained to fly airplanes, not to engage in armed combat at close range. The two are very different things. A member of a cabin crew that left the cabin during a hijacking would almost certainly be outnumbered. The number of hijackers, their armaments, and their positioning would be unknown. There would be a large number of hostages in a confined space. This is an extraordinarily difficult position for even a highly experienced and trained individual. Worst of all, leaving the cockpit would entail a breach of cockpit security and expose the cockpit to possible entry, the eventuality that must be avoided at all costs. I think it would be worth considering a system that would seal the cockpit completely for a fixed time, one that the cockpit crew could not override. If it were widely known that such systems were installed and that pilots were instructed to deploy them at the first sign of a hijacking, it would serve as a powerful deterrent to hijackings aimed at gaining control of the aircraft, much as time-delay locks on bank vaults deter bank robberies. Obviously no system is perfect. I hesitate, though, to jump on the bandwagon that assumes personal armament to be the ideal solution to all problems involving violence. I also worry that excessive concern is being devoted to airline security, and that this concern has a hint of closing the barn door after the horses are gone. Certainly airline security is important and should not be neglected, but my gut feeling is that the next attack will use a completely different tactic.