Associated Press: Multiple People Shot Outside Empire State Building (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 14, 2024, 10:56:35 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Associated Press: Multiple People Shot Outside Empire State Building (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Associated Press: Multiple People Shot Outside Empire State Building  (Read 4777 times)
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« on: August 24, 2012, 05:34:18 PM »

What if someone in the crowd had a gun?

Yes the correct response to 911 should have been to let everyone take a machete into a plane.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2012, 07:33:41 PM »

What if someone in the crowd had a gun?

Yes the correct response to 911 should have been to let everyone take a machete into a plane.

The correct response to 9/11 was to arm airplane staff; pilots and co-pilots and stewardesses. With guns, not machetes. And teach them to use them.

You obviously haven't seen the abysmal hiring standards for pilots and co-pilots particularly on the regional airlines. Those guys and gals are sleep deprived and living on food stamps.  Sure I guess all that cocktail needs is firearms.  And flight attendants?!



Do we give them the gun before or after the beers?
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2012, 08:52:03 AM »


What if someone in the crowd had a gun?

Yes the correct response to 911 should have been to let everyone take a machete into a plane.

The correct response to 9/11 was to arm airplane staff; pilots and co-pilots and stewardesses. With guns, not machetes. And teach them to use them.

You obviously haven't seen the abysmal hiring standards for pilots and co-pilots particularly on the regional airlines. Those guys and gals are sleep deprived and living on food stamps.  Sure I guess all that cocktail needs is firearms.  And flight attendants?!



Do we give them the gun before or after the beers?


You could make the same argument about police, but we give them guns.

The hiring, internal regulating, promotion, and accountability standards of the NYPD are not the same as those at Continental Express.  Are you kidding?  You can make Captain at Continental Express within MONTHS.  Who comes out of the police academy in New York and makes Captain in months?  So you think US Airways Express has an internal affairs department?

Slater was an isolated case, and keep in mind I'm also proposing the companies train their employees on how and in what circumstances to use them.

So if you aren't sliding down the escape slide with two beers in hand you are fine to handle a gun at 30,000 feet?  I dated a flight attendant and I wouldn't want her to have a gun on the ground let alone at 30,000 feet in a pressurized tin can full of people.  That's insane.

And if we give pilots guns we can stop treating frequent flyers like criminals.

As mentioned before the training standards at some of the regional airlines have been abysmal.  Let's concentrate on training these people to be pilots and leave the gun slinging to the pros.  Besides there are simpler safer solutions.  Bullet proofing and reinforcing the cockpit door makes the chances of another 911 drop to zero.  Another solution is bringing our troops home and leaving other countries alone.  Those are too easy solutions that don't involve giving a flight attendant a gun.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2012, 09:51:31 AM »

This is the actual story:

Disgruntled man shoots ex-coworker; police shoot him, and nine bystanders.

J. J.  I know you are new around here but do you have a link or should we just take your pronouncements on faith?

I read this...

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2012, 10:10:31 AM »
« Edited: August 25, 2012, 10:17:53 AM by Link »

You're literally putting your life in the captain's hands and you don't trust him to have a gun?

I don't trust them to do surgery on me either.


I don't "trust" the airlines either.  It's just when my boss tells me I have to be in Miami in three days I have no choice.

Also, notice that I'm also proposing pilots are trained to use guns.

Why don't we concentrate on training them to FLY PLANES first and leave the gun stuff to the experts okay?  We are talking about regional airlines where they are promoting people to CAPTAIN within MONTHS.  That's inadequate training to fly a plane... let alone fly a plane and sling bullets at the same time.

So if you aren't sliding down the escape slide with two beers in hand you are fine to handle a gun at 30,000 feet?  I dated a flight attendant and I wouldn't want her to have a gun on the ground let alone at 30,000 feet in a pressurized tin can full of people.  That's insane.

No, it's not. Why is it insane? Are pilots and flight attendants somehow specially poor candidates to handle guns?

They are as poor as any other person chosen at random to handle a gun at 30,000 feet in a pressurized tin can full of people.

As mentioned before the training standards at some of the regional airlines have been abysmal.  Let's concentrate on training these people to be pilots and leave the gun slinging to the pros.
The point is to make pilots pros. Do you think people (or police officers, or soldiers, or anybody who can competently use a gun) were born 'pros'? They were trained.

99.9% of cops don't' have to fly planes or train to shoot guns in pressurized tin cans at 30,000 feet full of people.  We have failed to train pilots to do their primary job and your suggestion is to train them to do policing even the average policeman doesn't do?!

Reinforce cabin doors, hire air marshals, and train the pilots to fly.  That is a lot safer and will save a lot more lives than giving some dizzy flight attendant a gun.

This was from two years ago, almost a DECADE after 911...

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2012, 11:46:38 AM »
« Edited: August 25, 2012, 11:50:09 AM by Link »

Having an actual gun on board is the most sure way to prevent hijackings...

No lock and secure the cockpit door.  Easy.


As mentioned before the training standards at some of the regional airlines have been abysmal.  Let's concentrate on training these people to be pilots and leave the gun slinging to the pros.
The point is to make pilots pros. Do you think people (or police officers, or soldiers, or anybody who can competently use a gun) were born 'pros'? They were trained.

99.9% of cops don't' have to fly planes or train to shoot guns in pressurized tin cans at 30,000 feet full of people.  We have failed to train pilots to do their primary job and your suggestion is to train them to do policing even the average policeman doesn't do?!

Somebody's got to do it.

No.  Lock and secure cockpit doors and have air marshals.  Leave the gun slinging to the pros.

This was from two years ago, almost a DECADE after 911...

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link.

I agree with you that pilots need better and more training to fly planes. Learning to use a gun should be part of that.

Mmm... if someone isn't doing their job well the solution is not to give them a gun.  If you reread the articles that have been linked to that is precisely what caused this unfortunate situation.  Poor job performance and guns are a deadly cocktail.  What happened in Colorado?


Anyways, it doesn't increase our death rate to something significantly above other nations. In fact, the impact is infinitesimal. Whatever it "tells me", I couldn't give a damn.

You should make that a bumper sticker and run for office.

How many 911 have happened in the history of America?  So I guess you think spending hundreds of billions of dollars to go after Bin Laden was a total waste since the chances of any of us being a direct victim of a 911 attack is "infinitesimal?"  Is that what you are saying?
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2012, 12:39:38 PM »

So obviously we shouldn't let people have guns. In Colorado a crazy person went on a massacre, which wasn't, as I understand, linked to job performance.

The guy was a PhD candidate and as with all PhD candidates he was paid a stipend for his work.  He got poor performance reviews and failed an oral exam.  He was dismissed just prior to going on his rampage.

If someone is performing poorly at their job giving them a gun is not a good idea.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2012, 08:46:58 PM »

This is the actual story:

Disgruntled man shoots ex-coworker; police shoot him, and nine bystanders.

Looks like an excellent argument against people going all vigilante justice on shooters. If a cop can't take him down without injuring others, what chance does some amateur have?

Plenty. This hero put a bullet in the shooter from 150+ yards.

http://www.brownwoodtx.com/news/local/article_851fd04a-db90-11e1-8237-0019bb2963f4.html

Great so this one guy is a good shooter. So?

So, it's quite silly to think that these cops are experts while the people are not.

Lol.  Are you kidding?  Two entirely different situations.  A sparsely populated trailer park vs a crowded New York street?  Police distracting the shooter so the guy can line up a shot?  You did read the part where he initially missed and hit a tree?  That would be a wounded person in NYC.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 10 queries.