NationStates Jolt Archive

Adopt El Al's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al) security tactics.

Before you start saying profiling is wrong, you have to realize something. When was the last time that a southerner tried to hijack a plane? Now, when was the last time an arab tried to hijack a plane? This one certainly raises a few eyebrows, but definetly will be good. I mean, passengers are individually interrogated by El Al security forces. Interrogated! Don't go on about the constitution on this one. You have to agree that if we actually interrogated people that no one who was planning to hijack a plane would actually get through.

Also, compare their undercover agents on planes to ours. Half of the time when air marshals are looking for people who stick out as possible terrorists, they find out that in fact, the person they were suspecting as a terrorist was another air marshal! The thing with this country is that you can so easily tell if someone is an undercover cop.

And here's my personal favorite. Anti-missile systems on a plane. So what if it'll take a few extra dollars out of tax payers pockets? Would you rather have higher taxes or be shot down while in a plane by a missile?

So, think it's a good idea?

Easy to say, much harder to implement. Do you have any idea just how much larger our airline system is compared to El Al?

Easy to say, much harder to implement. Do you have any idea just how much larger our airline system is compared to El Al?

Still, if America at least TRIED to adopt it, it would turn out for the better.

Easy to say, much harder to implement. Do you have any idea just how much larger our airline system is compared to El Al?

agreed, it would take more than "a few extra dollars out of tax-payers wallets" it would take BILLIONS. Also interrogating everyone who flies on an american plane would take days, you'd have to take a week off work, to take a buissiness trip.

Commuter planes would become non-existant

agreed, it would take more than "a few extra dollars out of tax-payers wallets" it would take BILLIONS. Also interrogating everyone who flies on an american plane would take days, you'd have to take a week off work, to take a buissiness trip.

Commuter planes would become non-existant

What I'm saying is it needs to be modified to American airlines. We would interrogate those who have higher level of suspicion, and just monitor those who are lower on the suspicion meter.

One size doesn't fit all.

When was the last time that a southerner tried to hijack a plane?

auburn calloway was from mephis, i think

I vote that it is already in place to some extent.

In the eight flights I've taken since 2001, I have been stopped every single time. Random, my ass.

What I'm saying is it needs to be modified to American airlines. We would interrogate those who have higher level of suspicion, and just monitor those who are lower on the suspicion meter.

One size doesn't fit all.

Another thing I was about to say was that we haven't an attack using planes since 9/11, and I don't think the terrorists are going to try that tactic again, were guarding that gate way to well. Profiling is already common in american airports just go to an airport and watch the checkpoints, every sikh/arab is pulled aside and checked thoroughly carryon and all. We should focus on areas where we are lacking security like the mexican border, how easy would it be for a terrorist to smuggle a bomb over the border and blow it up in LA?

There is a simpler system. Arm the crew. Train them to fire at humans w/o hesitation. Reinforce the flight deck door. Keep one extra well armed and trained man aboard just in case.

Terrorists have neither interest not abilities to fight for a plane.

But, really, I think ones capable of taking over a plane won't try this again. This would be too uncreative for high-profile guys like them.

Adopt El Al's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al) security tactics.

Before you start saying profiling is wrong, you have to realize something. When was the last time that a southerner tried to hijack a plane? Now, when was the last time an arab tried to hijack a plane? This one certainly raises a few eyebrows, but definetly will be good. I mean, passengers are individually interrogated by El Al security forces. Interrogated! Don't go on about the constitution on this one. You have to agree that if we actually interrogated people that no one who was planning to hijack a plane would actually get through.

Also, compare their undercover agents on planes to ours. Half of the time when air marshals are looking for people who stick out as possible terrorists, they find out that in fact, the person they were suspecting as a terrorist was another air marshal! The thing with this country is that you can so easily tell if someone is an undercover cop.

And here's my personal favorite. Anti-missile systems on a plane. So what if it'll take a few extra dollars out of tax payers pockets? Would you rather have higher taxes or be shot down while in a plane by a missile?

So, think it's a good idea?

I think it would be easier and safer to pack everybody on the airplane in styrofoam peanuts. You know, just fill the whole plane with them. That might make crash landings more survivable too. :)

Still, if America at least TRIED to adopt it, it would turn out for the better.

If by better you mean even more bankrupt and inept than it is right now, yep, better.

It's funny because you're actually suggesting that we have airline security.

I think it would be easier and safer to pack everybody on the airplane in styrofoam peanuts. You know, just fill the whole plane with them. That might make crash landings more survivable too. :)

Until people discover packing peanuts are highly flammable.

As someone who flies somewhat regularly, allow me to suggest that this is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard.
Its now been 5 years since 9/11, and there have been no repeats, no serious disasters on US planes, nothing. That might seem to suggest that the current zoo that one wades through to board a plane is working well enough.
And, even though it sounds rough, you have to realize that there comes a point when the cost of protection becomes higher than the cost of just letting shit happen. One can only get bet so safe.

Until people discover packing peanuts are highly flammable.

How about we use asbestos packing peanuts? Or, considering that in flight service would be greatly hampered by this plan, lets just use real peanuts. Safety and tasty treats all in one.

I think it would be easier and safer to pack everybody on the airplane in styrofoam peanuts. You know, just fill the whole plane with them. That might make crash landings more survivable too. :)Until people discover packing peanuts are highly flammable.
and the solution to that is also simple.

Air Popped Popcorn! it's biodegradable, edible (so they don't have to pass out those damned peanuts.) and healthy too.

Or, considering that in flight service would be greatly hampered by this plan, lets just use real peanuts. Safety and tasty treats all in one.
One could but, alas, one is no longer allowed to bring or purchase peanuts on US flights, because certain people are convinced that their heads will explode should they ever be forced to even look at those lascivious legumes.

Until people discover packing peanuts are highly flammable.

Oops.

How about bubble wrap? :p

and the solution to that is also simple.

Air Popped Popcorn! it's biodegradable, edible (so they don't have to pass out those damned peanuts.) and healthy too.

Brilliant! :D

I'd love to answer your question.

1 time arabs tried to hijack a plane in america, 2001.
0 for a southerner.

I hope I didn't forget anything. Hardly cause to start profiling against arabs.

I'd love to answer your question.

1 time arabs tried to hijack a plane in america, 2001.
0 for a southerner.

I hope I didn't forget anything. Hardly cause to start profiling against arabs.

Refined:
Number of planes hijacked in the US in 2001.
by Middle Eastern passengers - 4 (over 3000 dead)

by Southerner - 0

Brilliant! :D

yeah... the only problem tho... is when one of those unpopped kernals works it's way inside your underwear...

yeah... the only problem tho... is when one of those unpopped kernals works it's way inside your underwear...

And then there's the butter...

and the solution to that is also simple.

Air Popped Popcorn! it's biodegradable, edible (so they don't have to pass out those damned peanuts.) and healthy too.

Except popcorn is quite flammable too. I worked at a theatre, and I got very bored at times. Trust me.

Refined:
Number of planes hijacked in the US in 2001.
by Middle Eastern passengers - 4 (over 3000 dead)

by Southerner - 0

He asked how many times, I consider 9/11 one large attempt. But even by that standard, its 4 planes versus 0. Considering how thats one incident of that in our history as a country.

Even counting just from the '93 attacks, thats what, less than 300 people dead per year from terrorist hijackings since the last homeland terrorist attemt. Not really worth spending assloads of money for extra protection against such a non-threat.

It would be much cheaper, and effective, to arm the crew. Hell, I'm more afraid of a snake attack on a plane than a terrorist hijacking.

Except popcorn is quite flammable too. I worked at a theatre, and I got very bored at times. Trust me. ahh.. but when you're trapped by popcorn and you hear fire... which is easier... pushing your way out of styro popcorn?

or eating your way out?

:D

ahh.. but when you're trapped by popcorn and you hear fire... which is easier... pushing your way out of styro popcorn?

or eating your way out?

:D

I'd rather eat my way out of styro popcorn at this point.

He asked how many times, I consider 9/11 one large attempt. But even by that standard, its 4 planes versus 0. Considering how thats one incident of that in our history as a country.it's one event, yes, but it's still four planes.

Even counting just from the '93 attacks, thats what, less than 300 people dead per year from terrorist hijackings since the last homeland terrorist attemt. Not really worth spending assloads of money for extra protection against such a non-threat.that's because before 2001, when a plane was Hijacked, it was usually held hostage for a goal; freeing of prisoners, asylum, or something, not to fly into buildings. That's saying Armed Robbery isn't a violent crime because fewer percentage of people die from them when compared to the percentage of deaths that occur during a murder...

It would be much cheaper, and effective, to arm the crew. Hell, I'm more afraid of a snake attack on a plane than a terrorist hijacking.they did think about arming the crew. the hard part was securing the weapons in such a way that the crew can easily get to them while any hijacker can't. Given the media coverage here in the US, you can bet your life that they will air where those weapons are kept.

I'd rather eat my way out of styro popcorn at this point.

Bleah....


now if it was that styrofoam that desolves in liquids...


PEE YOUR WAY TO FREEDOM!!!!

PEE YOUR WAY TO FREEDOM!!!!
Taken out of context, this is, without doubt, the:
Greatest. Quote. Evah.

it's one event, yes, but it's still four planes.

that's because before 2001, when a plane was Hijacked, it was usually held hostage for a goal; freeing of prisoners, asylum, or something, not to fly into buildings. That's saying Armed Robbery isn't a violent crime because fewer percentage of people die from them when compared to the percentage of deaths that occur during a murder...

they did think about arming the crew. the hard part was securing the weapons in such a way that the crew can easily get to them while any hijacker can't. Given the media coverage here in the US, you can bet your life that they will air where those weapons are kept.

Bad comparison. I'm saying that it's so infrequent that we shouldn't spend tons of money on it, when that money could be put to better use.

And locked cockpit doors. Should be a camera outside the door to see who wants in, in addition to a comm system. Trouble starts, the co-pilot comes out with his .45

auburn calloway was from mephis, i think

Hush you, don't try and confuse these good simple people with your high-falutin 'facts'.

So what if it'll take a few extra dollars out of tax payers pockets?


It's no trivial amount to give every airliner a ECM suite as well as a chaff/flares dispenser. We're talking BILLIONS. Who gets the contract, and then who decides who gets the contracts?

Wouldn't stop the most basic forms of physical threats either - i.e. the hijacker passenger.

Bad comparison. I'm saying that it's so infrequent that we shouldn't spend tons of money on it, when that money could be put to better use.again, it depends on wether you catagorize 9/11 as a hijacking or a terrorist attack. lots of planes got hijacked before 9/11. it may not happen with the frequency of armed robbery, but it has happened more often than terrorist attacks (speaking on a Global Scale) and during those pre 9/11 hijackings, the people were usually safe because the Hijackers wanted something in return for sparing the hostages. that's why almost all of the passengers didn't fight back. they assumed that they would land and it would be a standoff between the hijackers and the feds. IF those hijacking flt 93 didn't allow the passengers to call home and find out about the WTF, they wouldn't have fought.

after 9/11, that changed. now the idea of your plane being hijacked now carries the possibility of everyone dying... including those on the ground.

and for true numbers, since it was a TERRORIST attack, you need to add the number of US persons killed in all terrorist attacks... here and abroad.

now as for the constantly tightening of securty... blame the stupid media that constantly tests the security measures and forces the government to come up with tighter procedures. everytime they air one of their stupid tests of "OMG look what we snuck aboard" news, the government has to respond by... guess what... making things tighter. So for the constantly increasing of taxpayer dollars and irritation... I blame the media, not the government.

And locked cockpit doors. Should be a camera outside the door to see who wants in, in addition to a comm system. Trouble starts, the co-pilot comes out with his .45oh sure, and I'm sure you would be happy to be sitting up there in the LINE OF FIRE when the co-pilot opens the door and fires his gun or they struggle with that gun pointing wildly all over the place...

and for long flights... when the armed pilot or co pilot leaves to go to the rest room... remember, there were on average, 5 hijackers per plane on 9/11...

Hush you, don't try and confuse these good simple people with your high-falutin 'facts'.

besides that was 1994... any others?

besides that was 1994... any others?

Well, as far as I'm aware, the actual identity of 'DB Cooper' has never been entirely resolved, so we could say that's a 30% chance, maybe?

Well, as far as I'm aware, the actual identity of 'DB Cooper' has never been entirely resolved, so we could say that's a 30% chance, maybe?possibly... say... Half a southern then... just to provide a margin of error... :D

again, it depends on wether you catagorize 9/11 as a hijacking or a terrorist attack. lots of planes got hijacked before 9/11. it may not happen with the frequency of armed robbery, but it has happened more often than terrorist attacks (speaking on a Global Scale) and during those pre 9/11 hijackings, the people were usually safe because the Hijackers wanted something in return for sparing the hostages. that's why almost all of the passengers didn't fight back. they assumed that they would land and it would be a standoff between the hijackers and the feds. IF those hijacking flt 93 didn't allow the passengers to call home and find out about the WTF, they wouldn't have fought.

after 9/11, that changed. now the idea of your plane being hijacked now carries the possibility of everyone dying... including those on the ground.

and for true numbers, since it was a TERRORIST attack, you need to add the number of US persons killed in all terrorist attacks... here and abroad.

now as for the constantly tightening of securty... blame the stupid media that constantly tests the security measures and forces the government to come up with tighter procedures. everytime they air one of their stupid tests of "OMG look what we snuck aboard" news, the government has to respond by... guess what... making things tighter. So for the constantly increasing of taxpayer dollars and irritation... I blame the media, not the government.

oh sure, and I'm sure you would be happy to be sitting up there in the LINE OF FIRE when the co-pilot opens the door and fires his gun or they struggle with that gun pointing wildly all over the place...

and for long flights... when the armed pilot or co pilot leaves to go to the rest room... remember, there were on average, 5 hijackers per plane on 9/11...

I wouldn't be afraid if the co-pilot had been trained in any decent manner. He comes out, and shoots anyone who has a weapon. Then goes back inside.

A flight attendant could be trained to take the place of the co-pilot, gun-wise, when the co-pilot has duties to attend to.

I wouldn't be afraid if the co-pilot had been trained in any decent manner. He comes out, and shoots anyone who has a weapon. Then goes back inside.

A flight attendant could be trained to take the place of the co-pilot, gun-wise, when the co-pilot has duties to attend to.

So if your lover/family member dies because they were shot by the co-pilot in a hijacking attempt, you will not hold the pilot/co pilot nor the airline responsible?

considering how many bystanders are shot by trained professionals (Cops, Soldiers, hunters... etc...) Remember, you're sitting in one long Gunport. no room to duck on most planes.

I wouldn't be afraid if the co-pilot had been trained in any decent manner. He comes out, and shoots anyone who has a weapon. Then goes back inside.

Call me an old traditionalist, but I still see the over-riding role of a co-pilot and his/her training to be concerned with flying a plane or helping the pilot do so. Diluting such skills with weapon training sticks in my craw.

So if your lover/family member dies because they were shot by the co-pilot in a hijacking attempt, you will not hold the pilot/co pilot nor the airline responsible?

considering how many bystanders are shot by trained professionals (Cops, Soldiers, hunters... etc...) Remember, you're sitting in one long Gunport. no room to duck on most planes.

I wouldn't expect it to happen.

Its pretty clear who's holding a weapon, and who isn't. Its one long gunport, like you said. If you've identified anyone with a weapon, through the camera's, you tell them to kick the weapon to you, put their hands up, and walk to the nearest flight attendant, who is ready to handcuff them to a chair or whatever.

If they don't give it up, you shoot them. If they take a human shield, you refuse to negotiate, and try to shoot them. Double tap just to make sure.

If a hijacker used a family member/lover as a human shield, and the pilot shot them, no, I wouldn't sue/hold them responsible. It was for the greater good.

And once the terrorist realized that we have armed pilots who will stop at nothing to stop them, they won't try to hijack anymore. Getting one human shield killed would be pointless, they would do more damage going on a stabbing rampage in a mall.

Its not like the copilot is going to unload in the general direction of the hijacker. He will actually aim, and fire. I don't regularly walk around randomly on a plane, especially if I know its being hijacked.

Call me an old traditionalist, but I still see the over-riding role of a co-pilot and his/her training to be concerned with flying a plane or helping the pilot do so. Diluting such skills with weapon training sticks in my craw.

Millions of people do their jobs fine, while training with a gun in their free time. I don't see why co-pilots can't do the same.

Millions of people do their jobs fine, while training with a gun in their free time. I don't see why co-pilots can't do the same.

Possibly, but your initial spot on the matter implied very strongly to me that such training wouldn't be on free time, but part of the job:

I wouldn't be afraid if the co-pilot had been trained in any decent manner. He comes out, and shoots anyone who has a weapon. Then goes back inside.

A flight attendant could be trained to take the place of the co-pilot, gun-wise, when the co-pilot has duties to attend to.

So, the gun training is expected of the co-pilot and flight attendant, and not provided by the airline?

When we change our security measures to stop and interrogate all arabs and let the westerners pass through, My bet is on two weeks before the terrorists find a sympathetic westerner to carry out the attack for them, slipping the weapons/explosives past security guardsmen looking for guys with bombs in their turbans.