Ron 10 #51 June 10, 2004 QuoteYou could also say that they had not used an Aircraft as a weapon before. Yep, but I can also say they have blown up people on busses and trains before. So the threat is even higher. And if we don't take some minor steps then we just are asking for it."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #52 June 10, 2004 QuoteAnd your point about the second ammendment is good. Well that means I should be allowed to have an M60 belt fed maching gun right? And sniper systems. But congress has said no....So Congress again can say that I can be searched. I find it funny that you will support them stepping on my rights to have any weapon I want, but will support other areas. You seem to have me confused with someone else. *I* won't step on your rights to have any weapon you want. *I* believe you should be able to have a belt-fed M60 if you want and have stated as much in this forum on previous occasions. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #53 June 11, 2004 QuoteI think you'll need a consultant. They don't have all those math and physics whizzes at Los Alamos for nothing. Ever read about the atomic boyscout? It's not all that hard to come up with a nuke. The hard part is not dying of radiation and coming up with a safe way to keep it. Anyone bent on terorism is probably not worried about that. They are worried about what the world would say about setting off a nuke (no matter what they're capable of doing, there is a whole order of magnitude between 9/11 and a nuke). That, and low rent nukes show up on satellites.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #54 June 11, 2004 QuoteEver read about the atomic boyscout? I pile of irradiated crap is a little different than a nuclear bomb. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #55 June 11, 2004 QuoteA pile of irradiated crap is a little different than a nuclear bomb. So is a 'dirty bomb,' but that doesn't make it any less scary. My point anyone really interested in it already knows how to make a low rent nuke. The kid didn't even mean to and he probably sterilized half his block. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #56 June 11, 2004 QuoteQuoteA pile of irradiated crap is a little different than a nuclear bomb. So is a 'dirty bomb,' but that doesn't make it any less scary. My point anyone really interested in it already knows how to make a low rent nuke. The kid didn't even mean to and he probably sterilized half his block. Anyone really interested would have studied enough math and physics too - my original point. If they were easy to make, how come so few nations have managed it?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #57 June 12, 2004 >I CAN say that they have not used an Aircraft as a weapon again. A few months after 9/11 a terrorist flew a private aircraft into a bank building. Florida, I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #58 June 12, 2004 >If I want to carry a small suitcase full of C4 onto a bus and kill > eveyone on the bus...Again, something else. What if you go to a gun store to buy a handgun to do the same? Is it still something else? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #59 June 12, 2004 Quote>I CAN say that they have not used an Aircraft as a weapon again. A few months after 9/11 a terrorist flew a private aircraft into a bank building. Florida, I think. Terrorist? That's a stretch, and a weak, meaningless rebuttal. It was a confused 15 year old student pilot bent on taking himself out. A real bin-Laden supporter for sure . . . . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tailgate 0 #60 June 12, 2004 Freedom- hmmm. don't remember who said it but .... I will not get it exactly right but here goes. For a person to enjoy freedom, they must enjoy solitude for to be truly free a person must be alone. Might not be applicable. Not in reply to anyones reply in particular. just my 2 cents Thank you (edited to make the pronouns match) _________________________________________________ Let me live in my house by the side of the road and be a friend to man- Sam Walter Foss Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #61 June 13, 2004 >Terrorist? That's a stretch, and a weak, meaningless rebuttal. Ron claimed that the changes we have made to security have prevented anyone from using aircraft for attacks against US targets. A 15 year old kid DID use an airplane to attack a US target. Had it been Al Qaeda, that plane (filled with diesel fuel and fertilizer, or nuclear waste) could have taken out a city block. Fortunately, it was only a kid. If you think we are safe now, you're kidding yourself. If a confused 15 year old can slip through our security, think Al Qaeda (or an Iraqi insurgent, or a Tamil Tiger who hates the US) is going to have much trouble? If it makes you feel better to believe that, go right ahead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #62 June 14, 2004 QuoteA few months after 9/11 a terrorist flew a private aircraft into a bank building. Florida, I think. That "Terroist" was a 15 year old kid in a Cessna 172. He destroyed a total of two offices and a nice Cessna. Are you saying we should ban General Aviation? Cause that is the only way to prevent that again."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #63 June 14, 2004 QuoteWhat if you go to a gun store to buy a handgun to do the same? Is it still something else? Same thing..so lets make it illegal to kill people with a gun, and allow searches of people in high risk areas.... Oh, wait...We already do that. You just seem to be getting your panties ina wad over adding another area."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #64 June 14, 2004 >Are you saying we should ban General Aviation? Cause that is the only >way to prevent that again. Exactly. It ain't worth it. We are not lots more safe today than we were before 9/11; we have not taken away the ability to use aircraft as weapons. A terrorist can still buy a used Beech Baron, load it up with ANFO at a private strip somewhere, take off without a flight plan, and fly straight into the Sears Tower. We take that risk because the freedom of being able to fly our own planes is worth the risk of someone abusing that freedom. >Oh, wait...We already do that. You just seem to be getting your >panties ina wad over adding another area. Hmm; I thought it was you who were calling for more rules. "Extreme situations call for more extreme measures," you said. We have to stop people from being able to walk onto a bus with a suitcase of C-4. you said. How do we do that? Do we make it illegal to blow people up or carry a bomb onto a bus? That's already illegal. So what else do we do? What are the "extreme measures" you're talking about? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #65 June 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhat if you go to a gun store to buy a handgun to do the same? Is it still something else? Same thing..so lets make it illegal to kill people with a gun, and allow searches of people in high risk areas.... Oh, wait...We already do that. You just seem to be getting your panties ina wad over adding another area. Do the TFRs make a difference? There was a TFR over a motor speedway this weekend. Just what exactly would have happened if a terrorist group hijacked a twin Otter, filled it with ANFO, Sarin and Anthrax, and violated the TFR to crash it into the stadium? Were there any AA missiles deployed? NO. F16s on patrol? NO! All the TFR does is inconvenience law abiding pilots and extract fines from careless ones. It does nothing at all to prevent bad guys from doing what they want.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #66 June 14, 2004 QuoteDo the TFRs make a difference? Tell that to the people at the Funeral this Friday. I think the TSR's are pretty stupid, UNLESS they can be enforced....I can enforce a search."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #67 June 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteDo the TFRs make a difference? Tell that to the people at the Funeral this Friday. I think the TSR's are pretty stupid, UNLESS they can be enforced....I can enforce a search. How would you enforce them (the ones popping up every weekend over stadiums and rallies, etc)? Mobile AA batteries? Standing patrols of F16s?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
