On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:14:30 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Nick
Hull quickly quoth:

In article
.com,
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Hell, I'd be pretty happy to know that at least 1/3 of the folks
aboard a flight I was on were armed.

I'd rather take my chances on a gunfight occurring, than a takeover.

Cheers
Trevor Jones

Sounds like you have never been in a firefight.

Bullets rarely go where they are supposed to...even with pro shooters.

In an airplane full of Sunday shooters the results would be
disasterous.

Sky marshalls have NEVER stopped a skyjacking. Armed pilots
have. We know what it is like when the passengers are disarmed,
what could be worse?

Unarmed passengers and ballsy flight attendants who now have God
complexes and can put a person in prison for smiling at them wrong.
THAT's what's worse, and it happening now.

Our fearful leaders are reacting just as the terrorists wanted.
They're concentrating on closing one hole while leaving dozens of
others wide open. If terrorists have any brains at all, they'd never
do another plane hijacking. It's much better covered now. They'll
choose one of the dozens of other methods for disrupting our life.
We're outspending the terrorists by something like a million to one.
For every buck they spend, we're wasting $1,000,000.

What has it netted us? _Maybe_ 5% safer airports? Feh!

--
"Excess regulation and government spending destroy jobs and increase
unemployment. Every regulator we fire results in the creation of over
150 new jobs, enough to hire the ex-regulator, the unemployed, and
the able-bodied poor." -Michael Badnarik