Would a gun on the planes have made a difference on 9/11?

[Jack Burton]

Link >>> Would a gun on the planes have made a difference on 9/11?

I've gotten more grief over this one article than all the rest of the writing I've done combined. It's amazing how some people willfully distort both reality and what I wrote in order to justify their points of view.

 

[Rookie]

It's really easy to sit back and say (ten years later) that I would have jumped into action armed or not. You are right, the rules of hijacking were changed on September 11. The people that died on flight 93 have always been my true heroes of that day.

 

[sgreen3]

It's really easy to sit back and say (ten years later) that I would have jumped into action armed or not. You are right, the rules of hijacking were changed on September 11. The people that died on flight 93 have always been my true heroes of that day.

That is the truth,

 

[Sylvain]

Depends who would have the gun.

 

[J_Wales]

Whether having arms on the aircraft would have made a difference or not can be debated to the content of one's heart, but it is clear what the results of not having arms on the aircraft were.

 

[jeremy]

The one thing we do know for sure is that not having Firearms did nothing to help or stop the Hijacking of those Aircraft...

 

[Kutnupe14]

No, prior to that day., hijackers always landed the planes and made demands. Had I been armed, I would have never made a move until the plane was on the ground, if the situation looked hopeless. Now that we know these guys are willing to crash planes, I think it makes a difference.

 

[farmerdan]

At the time no one knew the intentions, so it probably would'nt have mattered.

 

[OZZY.40]

I thought about this earlier this week when they talked about flight 93 on the radio. I think an airplane is one place where a gun should not be allowed. I feel that one wrong shot and everybody who you would try to protect on the plane would be in trouble if that bullet hit something that could cause the plane to crash (a window, the pilot, controls). I feel a sky Marshall on every flight is the way to go, as long as he is highly trained and has the right ammo that wont go through a human body. I do feel we should not be unarmed though. Knives or expandable batons would be a better option. Had the passengers been armed with melee weapons they would've had a better chance at regaining control of the plane, since the terrorist were armed with plexy glass blades.

 

[ckcollins2003]

Good analysis Jack. You know, I only found one fault within the whole thing. The fact that the people on the plane that could have taken action wouldn't be able to fly the plane anyways. Even if they did have firearms and stop the attackers, everyone on the plane would have most likely died. Not only this, but if firearms were allowed on planes, the hi-jackers would have had some also. Lets not forget what the first instinct is when shots are fired... drop to cover. Most people would be frozen had the terrorists started shooting innocent people, and with 5 of them, most people who would stand up to fight back would have been killed before any good could have come of it.

Sure, they may have saved lives by just crashing the plane into a field somewhere, but like you said, noone would have known the plane was going into the Twin Towers. These terrorists are not stupid. They know how to fight. Just because they don't speak a lick of English doesn't mean they don't know how to shoot well. They are raised with a gun in their hands, it's their way of life.

9/11 was a tragedy... I don't feel that anything could have stopped the Muslim extremists from doing what they were set on doing.

 

[88E30M50]

A gun might have made a difference in Flight 93, but I don't think it would have on the other flights. I don't think that the folks on the first 3 flights thought they were in grave danger. I'll always be amazed at how quickly the idea of using a airliner as a bomb became obsolete. 4 planes were hijacked and yet, by the time the 3rd hit the Pentagon, that method of attack was no longer useful. The folks on Flight 93 set what may be a worlds record in adapting and thwarting an attack.

 

[revance]

I thought about this earlier this week when they talked about flight 93 on the radio. I think an airplane is one place where a gun should not be allowed. I feel that one wrong shot and everybody who you would try to protect on the plane would be in trouble if that bullet hit something that could cause the plane to crash (a window, the pilot, controls). I feel a sky Marshall on every flight is the way to go, as long as he is highly trained and has the right ammo that wont go through a human body. I do feel we should not be unarmed though. Knives or expandable batons would be a better option. Had the passengers been armed with melee weapons they would've had a better chance at regaining control of the plane, since the terrorist were armed with plexy glass blades.

OZZY... bullets don't hurt planes nearly as much as you think they do. You can shoot in pretty much any direction except straight down in a plane and not do much to it. You can unload a box of ammo into the side of a plane and its not going to decompress and crash.

The biggest danger is shooting good people.

P.S. I always fly armed. I take my flashlight, a tactical pen, and a padlock with a handy pair of extra tube socks. The padlock and socks are more than enough to take care of some retard with a box cutter.

 

[Jack Burton]

Whether having arms on the aircraft would have made a difference or not can be debated to the content of one's heart, but it is clear what the results of not having arms on the aircraft were.

Well, what would have been the results if there were guns on the planes that day?

 

[SpiralTragedy]

I have not read the article yet and I really feel like I could speak volumes on this topic on either side but I'll just say one thing. If pilots would have been allowed to have a gun onboard prior to 9/11, the FAA and the airlines would have made them lock it in a box and put the box in a cabinet so it would not "fall and endanger the plane" or risk some other liability.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Thanks, Jack. I'd completely forgotten the threat had been made of a bomb on the plane(s).
On the first plane, it might not have made a difference. Maybe the second also, but once the word was out that those planes were not going to land, I think the resolve shown by the people on 93 became the only real course of action; that is, if you have a choice of YOU (probably) dying vs. everyone on the plane (and at the target site) dying, the answer is clearly that you hope for backup and move to take out the closest SOB and use whatever you can to minimize the damage to yourself.

Would I have the cojones to do that? I don't know. I hope so.

God bless those who did, and all those who were lost without a chance to make that decision, along with all those who responded to the results.

Bill

 

[mike4sigs]

It's really easy to sit back and say (ten years later) that I would have jumped into action armed or not. You are right, the rules of hijacking were changed on September 11. The people that died on flight 93 have always been my true heroes of that day.

the minute i read the question from the O P i thought to my self hell yes and i hope whoever had it (them) had the knowledge and the Ka-huna's to use them .

But ! IMO Rookie hit the bullseye Here!

and may we never forget the victims and hereos of 9-11

 

[mike4sigs]

By the way !
Nice story Jack

 

[jeremy]

Well, what would have been the results if there were guns on the planes that day?

All we can do is Speculate on that question...

 

[Expat]

and may we never forget the victims and hereos of 9-11

I think we have been doing a pretty good job of remembering them. It is remembering who did it to us that we seem to have problems with. Even making this comment will likely tick off a whole bunch of people.

 

[youngda9]

Would a gun on the planes have made a difference on 9/11?

Depends on who had them and how they were used. In all honesty we can only speculate. I don't really see how they could have made the situation worse considering that we already know the results of that day. Perhaps flight 93 would have been successful in reaching its target if the hijackers had pistols. Perhaps the planes that hit the towers would have missed thier targets. Perhaps one or more of the planes could have safely landed. We'll never know.