Never cry wolf

[Judge Hades]

Wouldn't tazers or rubber bullets be more useful in close quarter firing of weapons. I mean there isn't much space on one of those planes, unless yu are in first class.

[Gabrielle]

Wouldn't tazers or rubber bullets be more useful in close quarter firing of weapons.  I mean there isn't much space on one of those planes, unless yu are in first class.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would have little effect on someone that was pumped up on drugs.

[Judge Hades]

Point there. I know, they should use a battle axe. Swing hard and decapitate the bugger while not depressurizing the plane!

 

The passengers get to see a hell of a lot of blood while getting to live! A win win sitation.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Swing...

There's a potential problem right there. How big an axe are we talking here? Tasers are probably out - if mobile phones interfere with the plane's controls, what would a taser do?

 

How about tranquiliser darts? Could one be made that was fast-acting enough that the terrorist couldn't detonate the bomb by remote control?

[Judge Hades]

Tranquilizers would probably work very damn well. Even if you miss and hit an innocent bystander the won't die in most cases. What we need now is a SMG type weapon that can fire about 3 to 5 darts in a single combat round.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Hades_One

[Gabrielle]

Lethal force should be used in a situation like this. It saves on dollars being spent in court for convicting the terrorist and expenses for keeping the creep alive in jail.

 

But the problem there is you will have fools like this person who gets themselves killed. But sacrifices have to be made for the greater good of the whole.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

That would just OD them.

 

I dont think there should be any compromise here. The guy did something stupid and the authorities replied as they should.

 

When the potential is mass casualties you just dont take chances. If the police say stop and you dont, you pretty much deserve what you get.

[Judge Hades]

True, but as long as innocent people don't die inthe crossfire then all is good.

[Commissar]

Swing...

There's a potential problem right there. How big an axe are we talking here? Tasers are probably out - if mobile phones interfere with the plane's controls, what would a taser do?

 

How about tranquiliser darts? Could one be made that was fast-acting enough that the terrorist couldn't detonate the bomb by remote control?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mobile phones don't interfere with avionics, as far as I know.

 

And keep in mind, this happened outside of the plane, so using firearms is sort of irrelevant, since they were in the jetway, if memory serves.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Mobile phones don't interfere with avionics, as far as I know.

They used to. There were always announcements about turning off electrical devices, including computers and phones, during landing and take-off. Maybe the technology has improved?

And keep in mind, this happened outside of the plane, so using firearms is sort of irrelevant, since they were in the jetway, if memory serves.

The issue is what kind of arms, if any, are most suitable for an 'Air Marshall' to carry, so the choice has to be appropriate for all stages of the journey. I'd prefer not to have armed officials on the plane at all, though more for security reasons than for fear of gunshots bringing down the plane.

Edited December 8, 2005 by SteveThaiBinh

[Commissar]

They used to.  There were always announcements about turning off electrical devices, including computers and phones, during landing and take-off.  Maybe the technology has improved?

Well, the mobile phone thing came into use, I believe, mostly because it's difficult to get cellular cervice above a certain altitude, and also because airlines wanted to encourage the use of their skyphones. As far as other electronics go...it's pure overcautiousness or another motive that I have yet to deduce. There's no way your Walkman's going to interfere with the instruments. If it did, why aren't you more worried about getting onto a plane in the first place?

The issue is what kind of arms, if any, are most suitable for an 'Air Marshall' to carry, so the choice has to be appropriate for all stages of the journey.  I'd prefer not to have armed officials on the plane at all, though more for security reasons than for fear of gunshots bringing down the plane.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I could be wrong, but I believe they also have air marshals who don't actually board planes - just sit around undercover in the terminals, in other words. I know they have them in Russia, since one took away the drunk elderly lady who was harassing waiting passengers near me last time I was in Moscow. Guy in a Canadian tuxedo turned around, slapped cuffs on her, and dug out a radio. Could've been those guys. Either way, I agree with the sentiment that the risk of cabin depressurization isn't as important as the risk of somebody successfully pulling off whatever they're attempting, so I'm fine with guns on planes.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Commissar

[Child of Flame]

It should also be pointed out that while depressurization would happen should a bullet puncture a window, explosive depressurization occuring under such an event is pure Hollywood.

 

In other words, the only thing to worry about with the bullets is them hitting passengers.

[Commissar]

It should also be pointed out that while depressurization would happen should a bullet puncture a window, explosive depressurization occuring under such an event is pure Hollywood. 

 

In other words, the only thing to worry about with the bullets is them hitting passengers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yup.

[mkreku]

I bet the dead guy was fat and it was the passenger next to him that pointed at him and said, "This guy has a bomb!" to get more legspace.

[Gabrielle]

Yeah! That's the ticket!

[Child of Flame]

:ph34r:

[tarna]

Wouldn't tazers or rubber bullets be more useful in close quarter firing of weapons.  I mean there isn't much space on one of those planes, unless yu are in first class.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would have little effect on someone that was pumped up on drugs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I bought a Taser for my daughter a couple of years ago ( with her temper, I didn't trust her with a gun ). Short of curare, I don't think you could pump enough drugs into someone and still remain standing for a taser hit. I've taken various martial arts and had my share of fights but after playing with her taser, I never want someone hitting me with one of those. I would prefer to fight someone with a knife or a chain than a taser. Forget that stupid demo stuff or what you see in the movies. The AirTaser that I bought for my kid throws out around 75,000 volts. I've tinkered with voltages in the several thousands but nothing like that kind of juice. Thought about buying a smaller one to use as a tesla 'pump' for my Staff of Lightning'.

How about tranquiliser darts?  Could one be made that was fast-acting enough that the terrorist couldn't detonate the bomb by remote control?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To make sure you knocked him out immediately, you'd definitely overdose the dumb shmuck. Not that he didn't deserve it. Ask the Russians.

[Commissar]

curare

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tarna wins the thread just for that reference.

[tarna]

How so? Did I mis-spell it?

[Commissar]

How so? Did I mis-spell it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No. I've just never seen it used outside of Sherlock Holmes novels, and maybe a book I read as a kid, whose name I have long forgotten, but was about three kids who hunted monsters.

[tarna]

It's a strong paralytic. Some island tribes ( I don't remember who ) used to dip blowdarts in it and shoot intruders. Their heads soon became keyring decorations.

[Commissar]

It's a strong paralytic. Some island tribes ( I don't remember who ) used to dip blowdarts in it and shoot intruders. Their heads soon became keyring decorations. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep.

[Marka Ragnos]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_924 more info on this at wikipedia.

[Walsingham]

Er... curare also paralyses the heart muscles. Which is, like, bad 'n' stuff.

 

The point is, however, that if the mechanism of attack leaves the individual with any motor control for the 0.25 of a second required to press a switch, then it's adios amigo, should they be carrying a bomb. Bullets are the simplest, cost effective, and reliable way to inflict this level of damage.

 

The explosive decompression things is, as already said, not a serious issue with a bullet hole. Although the cabin would not be a fun place to be until the crew brought the plane down from its cruising altitude.

 

I don't fancy tasers myself. Aren't they basically single-shot?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Actually thats good. It was used in early surgery for it's effects although in some cases it left a fully aware patient completely paralyzed but still able to feel the full effects of surgery which could not have been at all pleasent.