Subject:
|
Re: The *militia* saved flight 93 from a worse fate...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 20:30:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
276 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I'm not entirely opposed to sky marshals, but I'd rather the airlines supply
> the guards. That way each consumer could choose to pay or not pay for the
> added security.
But the effects of that decision outweigh the need for the individual to
preserve that decision-making right, unless only the individual is going to
be affected by the decision. That is, if a plane is to be hijacked and used
to kill several thousand people, I really don't give a hoot whether or not
Joe Smith decided not to pay for an on-board marshall. The decision to put
marshals aboard is and must be the purview of the airlines, even if in
making that decision they defer to the Fed.
If Joe Smith really wants to carry a gun on board and really wants to fly
without marshals, let him charter a puddlejumper.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
