Subject:
|
Re: The *militia* saved flight 93 from a worse fate...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 20:51:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
368 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> 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.
But, But... if Joe Smith decided not to pay, he isn't going to be flying. At
least not with me, anyway.
I certainly will not choose an airline that won't take the maximum steps to
ensure my safety. I plan to quiz NWA quite closely about that. And I carry
some weight, at least a bit more than the average appender here (ain't
talking about mass, although I got most of you beat there too). I fly a LOT.
I think Chris was talking about people choosing who to fly with on that
basis. Not an alacarte flight where you choose what amenities you get ("go
ahead and hold Joe Smith hostage Mr. Terrorist, he didn't pay for
protection, or for the peanuts either!"). Not that I'd rather not delete
some airline food for cash back, but I digress.
> If Joe Smith really wants to carry a gun on board and really wants to fly
> without marshals, let him charter a puddlejumper.
Strangely enough I think you are going to see a big increase in people doing
just that. The airlines were already losing a lot of business class
passengers to fractional jets (great for me as I got to sit up there free
more often, but bad for their bottom line) before this. Now execs are going
to be saying "If i charter, I know exactly who all my copassengers are. No
risk there". (but forgetting that maybe a subordinate may well want to toss
them out the door at 5k feet...)
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
