freeflir29 0 #26 March 6, 2002 QuoteI believe the politically correct term is "flight attendant"In those days they were "Stews" "Bring on the sexy Stews baby...Yeah!!!!"-Austin Powers!!"I only have a C license, so I don't know shit..right?"-Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beachbum 0 #27 March 6, 2002 QuoteAnother problem is money - not all airports have the proper equipmentMoney isn't entirely the problem ... tho I agree about the level of people hired to operate the security mechanisms ... a large part of it right now is availability. I read an article about it recently, and tho I won't quote numbers that I don't correctly remember ... there ARE machines now available to do the job right, but (1) they can't make them fast enough to meet the demand for all the airports and (2) they are VERY expensive ... so of course, Unca Sam (re: taxpayers) will foot the bill ... the government taking over responsibility for airport security was the first step in that direction, since they knew the airports/airlines would not be able to pay for what they percieve as the necessary level of security and survive. As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mountainman 0 #28 March 6, 2002 I see what all of you are saying. It seems that the biggest problem then if someone gets by is that the cockpit is taken over.What needs to happen? Are those "fortified doors" enough? Do you think that pilots should carry guns and/or other weapons in the cockpit and not be afraid to use them?I love to hear your opinions. They are absolutely mind expanding. Thanks! JumpinDuo.com...come and sign the guestbook. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #29 March 6, 2002 QuoteDo you think that pilots should carry guns and/or other weapons in the cockpit and not be afraid to use them?I have to say no.....The average pilot doesn't have the skills to use a weapon inside an aircraft without putting everyone at risk. Stun guns or other non lethal means would be fine but I think firearms are just too dangerous. There are means being put in place to have armed personnel on board damn near every domestic and international flight that have the training and know how to safely take care of just about any threat. The only real answer is to have lethal force on board the aircraft just in case. "I only have a C license, so I don't know shit..right?"-Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #30 March 6, 2002 I think the procedures they're going through are a little overboard, but justified considering the calibre of people working for the security companies.I find it incredible that magnatometers can become unplugged and nobody notices. It blows me away that security guards simply get up and leave their post. I don't understand how they can fall asleep at their jobs.I'm deeply concerned that when the gov't takes over, they won't do a better job with staffing.Until they hire REAL people to fill those positions, I think we need to put up with the rediculous nature of the evacuations.I hope the security companies are being held financially responsible for the evacuations. That's gotta cost everyone a whole lotta money.I also don't believe any of these security issues would've prevented September 11. Despite this they're still valuable. I was arguing for these kinds of changes long ago._AmICQ: 5578907MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freefallfreak 0 #31 March 6, 2002 QuoteThe average pilot doesn't have the skills to use a weapon inside an aircraft without putting everyone at risk.Think - GLAZER SAFETY SLUGS!!! - Nothing gets hurt but flesh...lol...TripleF"If you have something vital and it's sincere, you can communicate." Butch Trucks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beachbum 0 #32 March 6, 2002 Quote It seems that the biggest problem then if someone gets by is that the cockpit is taken over.I'm not sure about that ... I think that until they get all the new machines built and in place, there is still a significant danger in terms of checked baggage also. The equipment in use to scan luggage, etc. at most airports is not able to detect a lot of things, and there is a shortage trained dogs.As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #33 March 6, 2002 QuoteThe equipment in use to scan luggage, etc. at most airports is not able to detect a lot of thingsActually some of the new machines are very good. They are quite expensive but most high explosives such as C-4, Semtex(terrorist favorite), nitro based stuff gives off a significant amount of vapor. This makes them relatively easy to detect with the right equipment. Dogs are pretty good but they get tired just like people and can only work for short periods without a break. "I only have a C license, so I don't know shit..right?"-Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,640 #34 March 6, 2002 I don't know, but somehow it all reminds me of the movie "Brazil"jsk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #35 March 6, 2002 Quotewith current security you could still take everything you need to vilolently take over an aircraft Having just completed an airplane trip, let me tell you what I brought onto the plane in my overnight bag and my purse: ~Makeup bag with hairspray, nail polish remover~manicure kit (you ladies know the tools in one of those things)~A bottle of wine~About 7 pens~an emergency sewing kit, complete with needles, and safety pinsI remember thinking when I got there, how'd I get these things through 2 airports????????? The only thing I was aware of was the bottle of wine, and thought that "might" present a problem, but not even one question. I did get a search, from a female, who complimented me on my perfume while missing some excellent hiding places (baggy jeans and a well developed chest makes for some, well, "delicate areas" I could have easily hidden something).When I asked why I was pulled out of line to be searched, she said "just because the FAA is walking around, and if I don't look busy and they see me standing here, they will give me a problem. Don't worry, it's not you! (giggling)." As for the security taking 2 hours, it didn't. I went right in on both flights, and sat around and waited. Nothing more time consumptive than taking a regular flight on a busy day. Safer? Not yet. Will I still fly commerically? Sure. Just my .02 worth-Ciels and Pinks-MicheleIf you really want to, you can seize the day; if you really want to, you can fly away...~enya~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #36 March 6, 2002 Quoteand a well developed chest makes for some, well, "delicate areas" I could have easily hidden something). Yeah. That's why they should have let ME search you! Well, SOMEONE had to say it!!Speed Racer"Fill your hand, you son-of-a-bitch!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beachbum 0 #37 March 6, 2002 Quotesome of the new machines are very goodagreed ... that is why I said UNTIL they get enough of them built and in place ... some of the technology they've come up with to do this stuff is pretty slick!As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #38 March 6, 2002 It would be ill advised to rely solely on the opinions of families of the victims of September 11th about security measures at airports. The responses would generally be emotionally charged which makes them dangerous. Imagine asking the mother of a skydiver, whose daughter has just drilled herself into the ground after a low hook-turn, whether or not skydiving should be made illegal. Also, there is no reason why the opinion of someone who has suffered a loss is any more valid than someone who faces the possibility of a loss. FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #39 March 6, 2002 QuoteThink - GLAZER SAFETY SLUGS!!! - Nothing gets hurt but flesh...lol...Who's flesh??? The training for Air Marshalls these days is THE HIGHEST standards for any Law Enforcement or military organization. To qualify on "Full Performance" you must be able to complete a pop up range and keep all hits in a 2 In strip that runs through the center of the target. If you can't at least qualify on pop ups with all hits on standard torso targets you won't be doing the job. Period."I only have a C license, so I don't know shit..right?"-Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Haeloth 0 #40 March 6, 2002 What about giving the pilot a 12th century battleaxe or a short sword, and then make the cockpit door only 90 cm high, if I was a badguy, I don't think I would want to stick my head through that!- Platypus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #41 March 6, 2002 QuoteWhat about giving the pilot a 12th century battleaxe or a short swordThey do.....it's called a crash axe....used recently to bash in the skull and knock unconcious a nut case that was trying to break into a cockpit. "I only have a C license, so I don't know shit..right?"-Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
