TexasCHLforum.com

I wonder if these statistics have been analyzed?

Are you at greater risk from one or the other?

philip964 wrote:I wonder if these statistics have been analyzed?

Are you at greater risk from one or the other?

Considering there are 100,000 global commercial flights per DAY and the number of events like this can be counted on one hand -two if you count 9/11, firearms are not going to be on the winning end.

I'm of the opinion that if people are willing to die, you'll never be able to completely prevent them from killing others. Not without completely removing the concept of "freedom".

The government (ours, I don't know about Germany's) requires that pilots be mentally fit and will actively yank a pilot based on a very low bar indication of any mental health issue. And once you've got a documented mental health issue, it's very expensive and time consuming to get flying status back if it's even possible at all. IMHO, it encourages pilots NOT to seek treatment of any sort - let alone treatment for a mental health condition. That's not the case with firearm ownership at all where you basically self-certify and the government has no right to request your medical records.

I'm not sure when locking doors and went into that particular German airplane.. If it was a change made post-911, it's particularly ironic, as that "safety" change essentially enabled a suicidal co-pilot.

It does add some food for thought in the debate about how licenses and background checks can prevent persons from committing crimes with firearms/aircraft......

cb1000rider wrote:I'm of the opinion that if people are willing to die, you'll never be able to completely prevent them from killing others. Not without completely removing the concept of "freedom".

The government (ours, I don't know about Germany's) requires that pilots be mentally fit and will actively yank a pilot based on a very low bar indication of any mental health issue. And once you've got a documented mental health issue, it's very expensive and time consuming to get flying status back if it's even possible at all. IMHO, it encourages pilots NOT to seek treatment of any sort - let alone treatment for a mental health condition. That's not the case with firearm ownership at all where you basically self-certify and the government has no right to request your medical records.

I'm not sure when locking doors and went into that particular German airplane.. If it was a change made post-911, it's particularly ironic, as that "safety" change essentially enabled a suicidal co-pilot.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03 ... m-convert/
Screen shot of copilot's facebook page (caution, a couple of posters used not-for-10-yr-old-daughter language:
http://3-ps.googleusercontent.com/hk/9d ... __j6U.webp

TVGuy wrote:

philip964 wrote:I wonder if these statistics have been analyzed?

Are you at greater risk from one or the other?

Considering there are 100,000 global commercial flights per DAY and the number of events like this can be counted on one hand -two if you count 9/11, firearms are not going to be on the winning end.

Are you sure about that? In numbers, flights are much, much higher. 3,000 on 9/11 alone.

There has not been a fatal crash of a U.S. MAJOR airline in 14 years. The last fatal accident of any U.S. airline was in 2009. I flew F/E and F/O on the B-727 for the first 11 years of my Delta career (3 crew members), 15 years as Captain on the MD-88 (2 crew members), and the last 3 years as Captain on the 767-400 flying domestic and International (2 crew on domestic and 3 international over 8 hours. ) Prior to 911, we were not required to have a F/A in the cockpit when a pilot left. After 911, it was required because the F/A was required to look out the door peephole to verify the returning pilot. The flying pilot could not get up and let the other pilot in without leaving the airplane unattended. Having the F/A up there was NEVER to protect against crazy pilots. This is the second crash of an A-320 in the last few months. Airbus has a lot riding on this newest accident not being the fault of the aircraft. Airbus is a European Consortium and THEY have alot on the line too. Let the accident investigation run its' course and maybe the truth will come out. Knee jerk reactions are not needed.

baldeagle wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

philip964 wrote:I wonder if these statistics have been analyzed?

Are you at greater risk from one or the other?

Considering there are 100,000 global commercial flights per DAY and the number of events like this can be counted on one hand -two if you count 9/11, firearms are not going to be on the winning end.

Are you sure about that? In numbers, flights are much, much higher. 3,000 on 9/11 alone.

Yes, yes I'm quite sure. The math is VERY easy.

Even if you add in 9/11, the number of people killed by murderous pilots over the last 30-ish years is about 3575. There are over 36,500,000 commercial flights a year. Say that's an average of about 100 souls per flight. That's 36,000,000,000 passengers per annum. (I'm guessing on the average load factor, but even if it was half it would still work) Given, those are 2014 numbers and they go up every year, so that's the highest year on record. Even if you count all 3575 people that died (which includes 9/11) in such events in the last 30 years divided by the passengers in ONE year it's one murder per 1,020,979 passengers. The real number would be exponentially lower.

howdy wrote:There has not been a fatal crash of a U.S. MAJOR airline in 14 years. The last fatal accident of any U.S. airline was in 2009. I flew F/E and F/O on the B-727 for the first 11 years of my Delta career (3 crew members), 15 years as Captain on the MD-88 (2 crew members), and the last 3 years as Captain on the 767-400 flying domestic and International (2 crew on domestic and 3 international over 8 hours. ) Prior to 911, we were not required to have a F/A in the cockpit when a pilot left. After 911, it was required because the F/A was required to look out the door peephole to verify the returning pilot. The flying pilot could not get up and let the other pilot in without leaving the airplane unattended. Having the F/A up there was NEVER to protect against crazy pilots. This is the second crash of an A-320 in the last few months. Airbus has a lot riding on this newest accident not being the fault of the aircraft. Airbus is a European Consortium and THEY have alot on the line too. Let the accident investigation run its' course and maybe the truth will come out. Knee jerk reactions are not needed.

What knee jerk reaction are you referring to? I'm not seeing any.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03 ... m-convert/
Screen shot of copilot's facebook page (caution, a couple of posters used not-for-10-yr-old-daughter language:
http://3-ps.googleusercontent.com/hk/9d ... __j6U.webp

Very interesting article and facebook screenshots. Nothing to see here folks just a peaceable fellow with mental issues.
The White House says no link to terrorism so book those seats and fly away people...

howdy wrote:There has not been a fatal crash of a U.S. MAJOR airline in 14 years. The last fatal accident of any U.S. airline was in 2009. I flew F/E and F/O on the B-727 for the first 11 years of my Delta career (3 crew members), 15 years as Captain on the MD-88 (2 crew members), and the last 3 years as Captain on the 767-400 flying domestic and International (2 crew on domestic and 3 international over 8 hours. ) Prior to 911, we were not required to have a F/A in the cockpit when a pilot left. After 911, it was required because the F/A was required to look out the door peephole to verify the returning pilot. The flying pilot could not get up and let the other pilot in without leaving the airplane unattended. Having the F/A up there was NEVER to protect against crazy pilots. This is the second crash of an A-320 in the last few months. Airbus has a lot riding on this newest accident not being the fault of the aircraft. Airbus is a European Consortium and THEY have alot on the line too. Let the accident investigation run its' course and maybe the truth will come out. Knee jerk reactions are not needed.

From what has been released already a lot of the truth appears to be out. From your expertise on this subject is there a solution? Should there be a secret air marshal on every flight (hopefully a non-suicidal one) with a capability to open the cockpit in an emergency? I don't see a flight attendant in the cockpit as much of a deterrent. Pure speculation but any response from an experienced pilot is welcomed.

Adding an air marshal is just adding another potential single point of security failure. Having that work out just depends on the statistics for screening air marshals over pilots. There is no perfect system that will be totally secure. We should perhaps focus our energy (and tax dollars) not on what the media sensationalizes, but on what actually causes death and harm in the USA.. And statistically, airlines aren't at the top of the list.

If I am somewhere where a trigger press might end my life odds are I also have a trigger to press.

OTOH if I am where a crazy pilot or terrorist is soon to auger me into a solid object or dirt odds are I might have a spork to defend myself.


Easy choice for me. I might not ever fly again.

anygunanywhere wrote:If I am somewhere where a trigger press might end my life odds are I also have a trigger to press.

OTOH if I am where a crazy pilot or terrorist is soon to auger me into a solid object or dirt odds are I might have a spork to defend myself.


Easy choice for me. I might not ever fly again.

I used to fly weekly. The last decade I can count on on one hand how many times I've flown.