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

How effective where they on 911?

2006-12-16 23:05:46 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

8 answers

Since your not allowed to carry guns on planes they were not effective. If they were allowed 911 would not of been as bad

2006-12-16 23:08:53 · answer #1 · answered by bob K 3 · 2 0

I would say that the Citizenry was very effective aboard the 4th plane. Even without firearms.

Anyone that thinks an armed Citizenry isn't effective had better take the time to study history .

Here is the result of disarming a Citizenry:
Everyone knows about the Nazi Holocaust directed against Jews, Gypsies, and others, and most people have some awareness of a Turkish genocide against Armenians (1915-1917) and the Cambodian campaign against all educated persons between 1975 and 1979. But official campaigns designed to exterminate all the people in a given group were also carried out in the Soviet Union, in China, in Guatemala (against the Indian population between 1960 and 1981), and in Uganda under the brutal regime of Idi Amin.

The total death toll from these episodes of officially-sponsored mass murder? About 56 million human beings.

2006-12-17 10:37:47 · answer #2 · answered by tom l 6 · 0 0

There's not much good in having an armed citizenry when they are all ignorant red necks. What are they doing about Bush and his madness? Nothing. And the ones who are intelligent are brainwashed by the media so not much point in them having guns either.

You're living in the past with your gun laws.

2006-12-17 08:28:04 · answer #3 · answered by airmonkey1001 4 · 0 0

Yeah armed citizens are a great idea. Look at all the kids that american children kill with guns each year or my country's Marty Bryant. Or hell, look at any of the countries in the middle east where so many people do have guns. Its a great idea isnt it?

Yes we must be prepared for war to preserve peace but thats why we have the military.

2006-12-17 07:50:53 · answer #4 · answered by delprofundo 3 · 0 0

The question you should be asking is: if you had your choice of getting on two airplanes, which would you get on? The first airplane was operating under the restrictions as they are now, no weapons, no pocket knives, no fingernail clippers & c. On the second airplane, everyone was armed.

I know that I would get on the second airplane. I would rather take my chances where no terrorist has an advantage over me. Its funny how some people feel safer when they are helpless.

2006-12-17 11:03:31 · answer #5 · answered by iraqisax 6 · 0 0

In my youth it was not at all unusual to take a firearm on a plane and leave it in the flight compartment. A box-cutter is a fearsome weapon, but there is an old admonition against bringing a knife to a gunfight.

2006-12-17 07:29:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You might ask the same question of the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all those in the "intelligence" community.Why weren't these agencies able to twart 911? Isn't this their full time job?

2006-12-17 17:44:11 · answer #7 · answered by WC 7 · 0 0

bad idea...

2006-12-17 07:12:57 · answer #8 · answered by zoli_zly 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers