English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Not just air marshals, but why not highly visible armed guards on every plane?

2006-08-14 20:54:03 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

Not just air marshals, but why not highly visible armed guards on every plane?

Some pilots are allowed to carried guns. Would trained security guard be worse or better?

2006-08-14 21:08:28 · update #1

10 answers

Having armed security guards, having bomb-proof cabin doors, having effective passenger security check-ins - all of these ideas have been vetted BEFORE 9/11 and after (of course)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/10/01/elal-usat.htm
El Al , the Israeli airline has used all of these methods for years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al When the proposal was made in this country to require air carriers to meet more stringent security requirements, it was blocked by the administration:

"US airlines are adamantly opposed to the proposal to increase the security tax on airline tickets from its current $2.50 one-way to $5.50, with a new cap of $8.00 for a multi-leg one-way trip (up from $5.00). Their concern is that today’s fierce competition makes it impossible for them to pass along the added cost to the passenger, making the additional $3 per flight yet another tax on hard-pressed airlines. As a public policy point, they argue that aviation security is really part of national defense, and hence should be paid for by all taxpayers."
http://www.rppi.org/aviationsecurity13.html
So the reason there are no armed guards is that airlines seek to keep costs at a minimum, and the present administration supports them .

2006-08-14 21:20:56 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. Knowitall 4 · 2 0

I hear Dick "quick trigger" Cheney will be flying to provide security services. He enjoys being armed and dangerous!

EDIT:

Ok, seriously, if they are identifiable, the terrorists will devise a means to deal with them first. Undercover is better, so then they will be in a position to take effective action, on their terms.

It's not like a uniformed cop versus undercover cop on the street. A uniformed cop will deter fringe criminals from committing any bad acts, but a terrorist is on a plane for one purpose only. Showing a uniform won't be beneficial in keeping little Johnny in line, since most people who fly are not borderline criminals.

2006-08-15 04:00:55 · answer #2 · answered by powhound 7 · 3 0

That's a whole lot of people to pay good money to. We're talking probably 10000 people minimum at $40K a year. That's $400 Million a year.

2006-08-15 03:57:33 · answer #3 · answered by Wocka wocka 6 · 2 0

we don't do this due to this being a free country, and most people are to stupid and if you fired a gun in an airplane it would cause a very bad chain of events it would be like opening the door at 30,000ft then the plane would crash and kill most on bord

2006-08-15 04:05:57 · answer #4 · answered by jr 1 · 0 0

I don't want to feel like I'm in a military barracks for 5 hours when I'm flying to Miami with my wife and kids for vacation.

2006-08-15 03:56:14 · answer #5 · answered by ic1212 2 · 3 0

Because we don't have enough money in the Homeland Security budget - as if we actually have Homeland Security.

2006-08-15 04:00:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Why don't you become one and apply for the job for some airline, spread the wealth and maybe that will happen. Good question though!

2006-08-15 03:58:46 · answer #7 · answered by Cherries 5 · 2 1

Isn't it better if the bad guys don't know who is armed?

2006-08-15 03:57:26 · answer #8 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 3 1

I've never seen that, if it's true then it must be a new thing.

2006-08-15 03:59:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

its safer to have undercover cops

2006-08-15 04:06:35 · answer #10 · answered by jason 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers