Michael Moore is being sued!

[Miscue]

Originally posted by Army
CB....I AM your expert who has studied these things. Even a mediocre trained person could easily engage hundreds of terrorists in the confines of a commercial aircraft.

Hundreds? Are there any passengers?
Who the heck is doing security at that airport?!

[Restola]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Yes I do think so. It is rather simple; there is only so much a guy can do. By the time the air marshal pops off two shots, the terrorist will be on him.

Picture the problem.

Ok I'm laughing at this one.

You ever been in a 737 Collegeboy? lol...you ever been in ANY aircraft? Get on the plane when it's nice and empty and run as fast as you can between the seats. See how fast you move, assuming you don't end up on your face.

Now picture a man 50-100' away firing a gun at you as you run in a straight line (box cutter in hand) down the two foot wide path. Oh yeah, your buddy just died in front of you, so you'll need to either pick him up and use him as a human shield, or hope he's kind enough to fall straight to the floor with his arms at his sides so you can, with any luck, get over him alive.

Oh yeah, there's also about 200 people a spitting distance away (a third of which you'll pass within an arms length of) that want you dead.

Oh wait, you're in a 747 now, two rows... Well since your first and second buddy both died running straight down the isle at the air marshall, you might have a better chance in the other isle...except now even after you run 50-200 feet (pick an average number) down the isle you are still 8 feet away from the man with the gun with no way to close that distance (except to climb over half a dozen angry passengers).

Picture...the problem...

Obviously you can keep adding terrorists until everyone dies, or throw in a knife-to-the-woman's-neck scenario, but clearly the gun is still the best method to positively impact the situation.

[Konigballer]

This thread is making me so mad! Collegeboy, I'm tired of your theoretical babbling about the capabilities of an air marshall engaging multiple opponents on an airplane! You sound like you have ZERO experience with modern firearms and have NO idea about their capabilities. "By the time the air marshall pops off two shots the terrorist will be on him", what in god's name are you talking about?!?! The air marshall, who will almost certainly be equipped with at least a Glock or Beretta 9mm of some model and probably with a high-cap magazine, will be able to get of several aimed shots at a close range opponent. Even smaller framed female officers in the police can rapidly fire 9mm caliber handguns, the recoil is much lower than what you must picture in your fevered brain. You dont "aim" in a slow, deliberate stance when engaging an individual at close proximity, its not the target range. You point shoot, lining up the front sight of your weapon on your opponent and firing instinctively. A trained individual can eliminate multiple opponents at close range, ie 25feet or there abouts, very effectively in this way. Its not james bond stuff...

However, that doesnt even matter, because as Army has so rightly pointed out, most passenger planes have only a single hallway. Its maybe not even a meter wide and yet you somehow think a terrorist is going to be able to leap over the body of his dead or dying comrade(s) in front of him to reach and take down the air marshall before he can eliminate all of the terrorist?!? Have you ever walked down an airliner's hallway? Not to mention the fact that you must think its perfectly logical for a terrorist to "charge down the guns" of a person firing a gun directly at them within a extremely confined area. Even if they were not hit immedietly by bullets their face and eyes would be scorched by the small un burnt particles of gunpowder leaving the barrel at the speed of a bullet. Add to that the fact that their eardrums, and probably everyone on the plane in the vicinity, would almost certainly burst as soon as the first rounds are fired. Of course somehow none of these factors would matter to the terrorist that you imagine.

I'm sorry, we're not talking about terminators, these terrorist are people. No matter how strong their fanaticism, they are also almost certainly very scared people when they board that plane. As soon as they see their best friend take a bullet through the brain directly in front of an armed man, maybe 5 or 10 feet away, firing a gun directly at them they will quickly be thrown into a state of frenzied panic.

[Konigballer]

dang, i just saw that me an Restola had the same points. I gotta learn to type faster.

[davidb]

Originally posted by Konigballer
This thread is making me so mad!

Am I the only one who really enjoys these discussions?

Say, that's a good point about the gunshots blowing out ears- Maybe they could contract somebody to make (if it doesn't already exist) a pistol with an integrated suppressor?

CB, I'm going to throw out some more guesses as to the Most-Secret Alternate Method!

Crossbow?
Advantages: Adequate range for an aircraft, unlikely to poke holes in the big metal bird!
Disadvantages: Somewhat difficult to conceal, slow reload time may necessitate pinning more than one baddy with each shot.

Taser?
Adv: Rhymes with laser
Dis: Depending on style, either lacking in range or only good against one assailant.

Rabid rodents released in rear (of plane )?
Adv: Guaranteed to scare bejeezus out of hoodlums and miscreants, alliteration
Dis: Likely to also have adverse effect on good guys.

Professional Wrestlers interspersed with passengers?
Adv: Not only will they stop the terrorists, they'll stop them in neat ways while delivering cheesy lines.
Dis: Expensive, somewhat conspicuous.


Let me know if I'm getting close, eh?

[nippinout]

I swear, if Collegeboy contests Army's knowledge and experience again...

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
Army, I am glad you have experience in the way a gun fires, really good for you. Study after study has shown that a few shots placed in a close proximity to each other in a pressurized cabin, can lead to a sizable hole being created in the side of the airplane. But that is not the point I am arguing, I could care less if a hole is opened in the side.

Where's your study? It's a big internet, I'm sure you've got some evidence of that. Until then I trust Army.

The question, very simple one at that, that I am asking is why chose a gun to take out terrorist (plural) on a plane when in the best case scenario you will get two, before you yourself are swarmed by the others.

How do you figure that's the best case? The best case is you kill them all. The worst case you kill some passengers and are then killed yourself. Training is what makes the difference, which is why we need to train the folks with guns.

I swear CB, where do you get your information from? You must just be making it up.

All of you have of first get this into your heads that this is what would happen. Forget the John Wayne crap about one man with one gun taking out 20 people before he is finally taken down. No matter what weapons the terrorist have, there is only so many people the guy can bring down before he is taking down. To me the most possible is 3, more likely 2. That leaves more then likely 3 terrorist left with now a gun instead of a razor blade.

Get this through your head. One man with a gun could in a lot of situations stop as many as half a dozen hijackers on a plane. I wouldn't want to do it but I'll bet I could. The trick is to us your inherent advantages in a plane when you're shooting. Kill the guys in you aisle first then work your way around the cabin.

Plus what's the alternative? Let them have the plane without resisting?

I would be glad to state some of my ideas as to systems in which to disable all of the terrorist while causing the least amount of damage to the people. But by your responses to the possibilities it is clear you all are not even thinking of some of the ideas. Hint, they don't require one guy throwing a pillow, armed with a tazor gun, or one guy doing anything.

This is like the 5th time you've told us you have wonderful ideas but don't want to share them. Shut up dude, you know nothing.

Take some more time and think about the question I am posing, and the way it is posed and what I have said about the actions of one man. Then come up with possible actions that could be taken.

Is this a pop quiz or a debate. If you have a point you want to make then do it, and spare us this being coy nonsense.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Before I give my suggestions people have to first agree that a gun in the cockpit will not be effective.

Based on what evidence?

Based on what CB?

No really, Based on what CB?

You're basing you assumption on what CB?

What evidence do you have to support that CB?

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Now matter how much training you have, there is only so much a person can do. With the terrorist concentration on smaller airplanes (easier to control) there is no way an air marshal can take out more then 2, if he is lucky and a bullet passes threw one and hits another maybe 3.

CB, if you have 5 guys in close proximity to each other and 20 feet from me I GUARANTEE I kill them all before they even realize I'm firing.

You seem to thnk that these hijackers tend to be trained space marine cyborg commando ninjas or something.

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
I am not pitting my knowledge of guns against his, I am pitting experts who have studied this and have shown their results, against his.

What experts?

Show us your experts?

I havn't seen any experts

I've just seen you babble

I am not afraid of a person catching a stray bullet for that is just what happens. I know that the marshal will take out two at most before he is taken out, now the terrorist have a gun.

Oh, you know that?

BASED ON WHAT?

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
Yes I do think so. It is rather simple; there is only so much a guy can do. By the time the air marshal pops off two shots, the terrorist will be on him.

Using what? Their teleportation devices?

This on the scenario. 5 guys jump from from roughly similiar areas of the plane and start rushing the cockpit. The marshal starts shooting, killing a few as they run towards the cockpit. Now, they can either keep running towards the cockpit, where they have to face a new reinforced door and a pilot with a gun, or turn around and head back to the marshal who is still shooting at them.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Army

The only time they are offensive, is when I forget to don my hearing protection.

LOL

What? Can you hear me now?

Big stick? Lasso? Foam #1 hand to shake your finger at him better? Taser? Pillow? You do know that airline pillows are tiny little things...right?

I like the foam finger! You can poke the terrorist in the eye from a safe distance.

I suggest one well placed shot into his cranium, and apologise to the few people close-by that will get sprayed with the gore. 2 (I'll let you count them again) TWO attempts at hijacking El-Al flights have been attempted since 1973....both times resulted in 5 dead members of the PLO (yep, dear sweet Uncle Yassars little club), and not one casualty among the passengers or crew. huh, go figure... Consequently, nobody bothers to piss off the Israeli flight security teams any more.

Amen!

Like I said above no successful hijackings of EL AL!!!

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by davidb


Replace muzzle loading piratey-type pistol with Glock - Problem solved.

ROFL!!!!

Hey CB,
I can pull 13 bps on my x-mag. Guess how many I can pull on my Pre-Ban Glock 17? I can hit multiple targets approaching me and my training is from private security consultants. An air marshall with a 16 round mag should be able to disable at least 4 to 5 terrorists swarming him. Just keep pulling the trigger, Also the felled terrorists would get in the way of their brethren attacking the marshall giving him even more time.

)Plus the passengers will join in. Richard Reid the shoebomber ring any bells?

[aaron_mag]

CB, CB, CB, CB........

I don't know why you argue some of these points? How many terrorists with razor blades can a armed US Marshall take out before he is overwhelmed? You can't be serious. This is not the sort of thing than can be proved/disproved in an internet discussion. Obviously there is a host of scenarios where things can go horribly wrong/incredibly right to prove/disprove the effectiveness of the armed US Marshall on the plane.

Soon we will be arguing the exact number of terrorist that might be on the plane. What if EVERY single passenger is an incognito terrorist? Could the Marshall handle that?

I'm being silly to show how stupid this line of argument is. This argument has gone from a discussion on the Moore documentary to a discussion of how many terrorists a Marshall on a plane can take out. Why has it gone that direction? Because you must take the bait in EVERY argument presented to you. Has it occured to you that a debating strategy is to lead a person to a point that he has no experience/knowledge in, give him enough rope to hang himself, then discredit his dead carcass over the last stupid things he said. Wise up!!!

[spazzed]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Now matter how much training you have, there is only so much a person can do. With the terrorist concentration on smaller airplanes (easier to control) there is no way an air marshal can take out more then 2, if he is lucky and a bullet passes threw one and hits another maybe 3.

Are you an Air Marshall CB? Have *YOU* gone through the training? The marksmenship training? Are you a qualified marksmen?

Here's an idea. Why don't you go & *GASP* actually FLY on a plane. We'll hire a variety of baddies, ghouls & monsters to rush the cockpit, while you are in charge of defending that door at all costs. Try whatever methods you want, and if they work better than me & my Sig .40, then I'll take a hike. But if I end up having to save your *** because your asinine methods failed, then I'm saving one for you, so you can put yourself out of your self-imposed misery.

If you're gonna sit there & spout off all your uberliberal rhetoric, atleast do the rest of us the decency to show us some factual evidense. *NOT* I heard this, I know this, or some other BS line like you always do.