"Going postal"
#16
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,617
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy:
At one point someone on here said that the guns aren't even loaded. Not sure if that's true.
</font>
At one point someone on here said that the guns aren't even loaded. Not sure if that's true.
</font>
So far the only one shot by the airport National Guard forces seems to be one of their own. A Guard member at SFO accidentally shot a bullet into his hip while handling his sidearm at the end of a shift.
[This message has been edited by Quokka (edited 02-18-2002).]
#17
Used to be Sydneysider
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: CPH
Programs: AS MVP/Gold (and 75K aspirant)
Posts: 2,984
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
Uhh, I'd content that one can do a lot more damage with an M-16 than a 9mm 92F. Rate of fire and accuracy come to mind, here.
Which might explain why they are carrying the M-16s in some places to begin with.
</font>
Uhh, I'd content that one can do a lot more damage with an M-16 than a 9mm 92F. Rate of fire and accuracy come to mind, here.
Which might explain why they are carrying the M-16s in some places to begin with.
</font>
also, i wasn't envisioning these being used as rifles in an assault (the accuracy factor). they would be far more deadly if used that way. i was thinking more of someone spraying a crowd from the hip with automatic fire.
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: أمريكا
Posts: 26,763
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Dudster:
That's complete BS. I've been through German airports 12 times since 9/11 (including two airports yesterday) and the level of armed personnel is much higher now in most US airports than it is in German airports (at least FRA and MUC, the two largest).</font>
That's complete BS. I've been through German airports 12 times since 9/11 (including two airports yesterday) and the level of armed personnel is much higher now in most US airports than it is in German airports (at least FRA and MUC, the two largest).</font>
In my visits to US airports, there have been two or three National Guard troops at each security checkpoint, and I have seen few of them roaming the airport.
Regardless, the Germans and a lot of other countries have had people roaming the airports with automatic weapons for lots of years. They certainly have a longer history and larger number of gun-hours in the airports than we have and I'm not familiar with any incidents happening.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by terenz -
There's a built-in safe guard of sorts right there. There are others who will (or should) stop the potential shooter by lethal meansif necessary. </font>
There's a built-in safe guard of sorts right there. There are others who will (or should) stop the potential shooter by lethal meansif necessary. </font>
d
#19
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 240
The question could have become moot. Tulsa, Dallas, and New Orleans guards were NOT carrying automatic weapons today, at least when I came through this morning. Side arms only. This is a change from Friday. Anybody notice the same thing?
#20
Join Date: May 2001
Location: omaha,Ne,usa
Programs: UAL, AA, Hilton, Marriott, and Northwest
Posts: 465
Actually there is a lot of misinformation here. The national guard troops called up so far are supposed to have been all military police troops. Therefore they do actually train with a sidearm. Next some units might not have the M16's loaded but that would be by unit and is a very stupid decision, I might add. The only reason that it is logical to have the NG at airports is to counter a Rome type incident where the terrorists attack the airport because they doubt that they would clear security. If that is the case then M16s are logical. If that is the case, then the fact that body armor and upgraded communications have not been bought on an expedited basis is insane. I have also failed to see much of what I would expect if they were serious about this type of scenario.
Next nearly all of the M16s at the airport would be semi automatic/ 3 round burst capable, not automatic. They would result in many more casualties than what a side arm would do.
Finally to answer the main point of this thread. We have already had this happen since 9-11. A NG soldier from Virginia requested to be called to active duty. He was transfered to New Jersey. While being processed in and before being assigned to an airport, the new unit commander felt that he was acting unusual. He requested a mental eval of him, when other MPs arrived to escort him he attacked them. Final result was several injured MPs and NJ police, I believe 1 or 2 dead but would have to do a search from september/october to find exact figures.
About the same time two AF guards at a Wyoming nuclear launch bunker were arrested trying to sneak into mexico with M16s and a M60 machine gun. This is really no different than some police officers that have been killed after standoffs with other police though. The rate would be less than among the general population.
------------------
Robert
Next nearly all of the M16s at the airport would be semi automatic/ 3 round burst capable, not automatic. They would result in many more casualties than what a side arm would do.
Finally to answer the main point of this thread. We have already had this happen since 9-11. A NG soldier from Virginia requested to be called to active duty. He was transfered to New Jersey. While being processed in and before being assigned to an airport, the new unit commander felt that he was acting unusual. He requested a mental eval of him, when other MPs arrived to escort him he attacked them. Final result was several injured MPs and NJ police, I believe 1 or 2 dead but would have to do a search from september/october to find exact figures.
About the same time two AF guards at a Wyoming nuclear launch bunker were arrested trying to sneak into mexico with M16s and a M60 machine gun. This is really no different than some police officers that have been killed after standoffs with other police though. The rate would be less than among the general population.
------------------
Robert
#21
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Programs: UA 1K, AA Lifetime Platinum, DL Platinum, Honors Diamond, Bonvoy Titanium, Hertz Platinum
Posts: 7,970
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Quokka:
Their weapons are loaded -- at least at SFO. It's stupid to be carrying weapons that aren't.</font>
Their weapons are loaded -- at least at SFO. It's stupid to be carrying weapons that aren't.</font>
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nashville -Past DL Plat, FO, WN-CP, various hotel programs
Programs: DL-MM, AA, SW w/companion,HiltonDiamond, Hyatt PLat, IHF Plat, Miles and Points Seeker
Posts: 11,074
So, if the story above is correct, more people have been killed as a result of our security efforts than from the bad guys.
And we have wasted hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars on the effort.
Sounds like a good idea.
#23
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,098
Interesting timing ...
(02-18) 17:56 PST LOS ANGELES (AP) --
An Army National Guardsman was arrested Monday at Los Angeles International Airport after trying to pass a security checkpoint with an explosive device in his bag, authorities said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...648EST0078.DTL
(02-18) 17:56 PST LOS ANGELES (AP) --
An Army National Guardsman was arrested Monday at Los Angeles International Airport after trying to pass a security checkpoint with an explosive device in his bag, authorities said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...648EST0078.DTL
#24
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Programs: Lifetime: UA Gold, AA Gold, & Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,352
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by robvberg:
Actually there is a lot of misinformation here. The national guard troops called up so far are supposed to have been all military police troops.
</font>
Actually there is a lot of misinformation here. The national guard troops called up so far are supposed to have been all military police troops.
</font>
#25
Join Date: May 2001
Location: omaha,Ne,usa
Programs: UAL, AA, Hilton, Marriott, and Northwest
Posts: 465
dudstar, Changing specialty is actually common in the national guard. I am guessing from the information provided that your cousin is switching units. In most cases a reserve/NG trooper would go through his 2 week course and be assigned to his new unit. He would then have to be trained in his individual skill tasks during weekend drills. The majority of the soldiers in the unit would have completed there normal individual training after basic. The soldier who is cross training would in a normal unit be paired with someone experienced if called to active duty, or most likely the whole unit would be required to meet both individual and unit minimums. Also many prison guards and even some small police forces put people on duty after being hired and don't send them to school until the next class would start. By keeping them paired with someone experienced or giving them non essential duties.
------------------
Robert
------------------
Robert
#26
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Programs: Lifetime: UA Gold, AA Gold, & Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,352
That's a good point. I do believe that he is changine units.
#27
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Third planet from the Sun
Posts: 7,022
The decision to deploy and what types of weapons the national guard troops carry is up the Govoner of each State. This is why you see some troops with only side arms and others with the M-16's.
This brings up the issue that the only reason why they were called up is not to enhance security but to make the public think that flying is safer. In reality, very little has changed since 9/11. If armed robbers can rob $6,500,000 within a secure area at Heathrow, then we still have a long ways to go.
This brings up the issue that the only reason why they were called up is not to enhance security but to make the public think that flying is safer. In reality, very little has changed since 9/11. If armed robbers can rob $6,500,000 within a secure area at Heathrow, then we still have a long ways to go.
#28
I think we should have packs of hundreds of trained German Shepards roaming the airport without supervision. That way everyone would get screened by someone who knows what they are doing, and all bags could be screened by our four footed friends as well.
If someone sets off a doggie's nose alarm, the dog would simply immobilze them in .3 seconds. If someone ran away to get a camera, some of the pack would chase and tackle the idiot, ripping out his or her throat. We wouldn't have to shut the terminal down.
This would also cut down on cost.
Instead of hiring people to operate expensive machines that they have no idea how to operate, we could hire half as many people simply to scoop poop in the terminal.
No need for pimply, sexually frustrated 18-year-olds with machine guns.
This is, of course, a joke. Although more trained dogs and handlers would drastically cut down on screeing costs and make screening more effective.
Additionally, few things in life are more chilling than a German Shepard. We have a nice 90 pound alpha female. She is a sweetheart who licks us to wake us up every morning, but just the sight of her scares the living bejeezus out of everyone but my immediate family or those she knows well. Plus, she could probably break any bone in my body with one bite, so I'm kept in line. I'm also pretty sure that the she prevents any potential home intrusion better than any gun or security system.
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.
If someone sets off a doggie's nose alarm, the dog would simply immobilze them in .3 seconds. If someone ran away to get a camera, some of the pack would chase and tackle the idiot, ripping out his or her throat. We wouldn't have to shut the terminal down.
This would also cut down on cost.
Instead of hiring people to operate expensive machines that they have no idea how to operate, we could hire half as many people simply to scoop poop in the terminal.
No need for pimply, sexually frustrated 18-year-olds with machine guns.
This is, of course, a joke. Although more trained dogs and handlers would drastically cut down on screeing costs and make screening more effective.
Additionally, few things in life are more chilling than a German Shepard. We have a nice 90 pound alpha female. She is a sweetheart who licks us to wake us up every morning, but just the sight of her scares the living bejeezus out of everyone but my immediate family or those she knows well. Plus, she could probably break any bone in my body with one bite, so I'm kept in line. I'm also pretty sure that the she prevents any potential home intrusion better than any gun or security system.
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.
#29
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
Posts: 2,802
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BoSoxFan45:
I think we should have packs of hundreds of trained German Shepards roaming the airport without supervision.
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.</font>
I think we should have packs of hundreds of trained German Shepards roaming the airport without supervision.
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.</font>
And if you think that there's groping going on now, ever been around an excited male dog? You'll just double the population of people who get groped. Right now, it's only women. Let the place go to the dogs, and men will get it, too.
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: أمريكا
Posts: 26,763
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BoSoxFan45:
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.</font>
I do think dogs are grossly underused in airport security. Ask a K-9 handler how useful his or her dog is.</font>
d