THIS is why they shouldn't have guns....(Pilot "accidentally" shoots plane)

[truebrit71]

...http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15690409/detail.html

I shudder to think about what might have happened...

Effing stupid of you ask me...

[jody]

1. And if one LEO accidentally fires their gun, then we should take guns away from all LEOs. n/t

[class2068]

6. In 2005...

"... the last year for which records and analyses are complete, people used handguns between 800,000 and 2.5 million times to save themselves from assault by criminals and other persons." -- US Dept. of Justice

Why don't we ever hear about these cases? I'm no gun nut, but without full disclosure any argument is just stupid.

[jody]

12. Those stats and more are discussed on DU's Guns forum. Visit it and join the debate. n/t

[GTurck]

69. AND OTHER PERSONS?

What does that mean?

[tabasco]

2. I think they should have guns but with COMPLETE training.

This was a failure due to incomplete safety training, IMO.

[damntexdem]

5. Only let the autopilot have a gun ...

but only after it's had complete programming.

;-)

[slackmaster]

58. Excellent idea

[damntexdem]

3. Probably thought someone at the airport was trying to break in.

He had to defend his "castle."

;-)

Note that the plane didn't depressurize BECAUSE IT WAS ON LANDING APPROACH. Had this happened at 30,000 feet, crash-scene investigators would likely have been trying to figure out what had happened.

[selador]

8. depressurization

is a GROSSLY misunderstood thing, arguably a media myth in that everybody thinks bullet in airplane = immediate depressurization

not really



One objection that Congressmen have given for not wanting to arm pilots is the supposed idea that a bullet hole in an airplane's hull can cause catastrophic depressurization or cause the ship to crash.

However, writer David Kopel (along with author and pilot, Captain David Petteys) notes that the risks related to the hull being punctured are greatly exaggerated. In a recent National Review Online article dated September 16, they state, "There is only one known instance in which a bullet hole in an aircraft frame yanked objects across the plane, expanded, and sucked a person out into the sky. That was the James Bond movie Goldfinger. The movie was not intended to teach real-life lessons about physics."

In a follow-up article, Dave Kopel notes that "the risk of a stray bullet creating a decompression that could cause a crash, which I'd reported to be virtually nil, is apparently even less than that. Retired Air Force General James Chambers points out that the Air Force has plenty of pressurized planes, such as AWACS, which are able to sustain penetration/damage from bullets from enemy fighter jet machine guns. The General said that the worst case would simply require a plane flying at an altitude of about 30,000 feet to hurry down to lower altitudes. If the plane were above 30,000 feet, there would probably be enough breathable air for the pilots to maintain consciousness, even without the air masks."

Aircraft engineers have likewise downplayed the ability of a few bullets to depressurize a plane.

"First of all, there already is a 'hole' in the aircraft, for regulating the cabin pressure," says Dan Todd, a licensed aircraft engineer for 20 years. "It's called the outflow valve. It modulates to maintain desired cabin pressure, in response to signals from a cabin pressure controller, which responds to inputs from a selector panel in the cockpit, all automatic when it's all working normally.

"There's also always pressurized cabin air leaking out past door seals and a few other places," Todd says. "Remember, the airplane is pressurized by a constant flow of compressed air into the cabin from the engines (via the pneumatic systems and the air conditioning systems).

"If one round, or two or three for that matter pierce the skin , it's not necessarily catastrophic." Todd says that in such a case, "air will go whistling out the hole, and the outflow valve will close a little further to maintain the desired cabin pressure."

note also that if the pilot was using glaser safety slugs (or other frangible type rounds) the risk is even less.

[truebrit71]

11. Tell you what sparky..let me be the first to volunteer YOU to try that out...

...m'kay?

As for me, it's hard enough to keep the friggin' pilots sober...now we have to worry about them shooting themselves out of the sky...

Brilliant!!!

Only in America...

[selador]

13. since you ask

i've carried a firearm numerous times on an airplane

and as was explained to me during the "flying while armed" class, the science is such that it is NOT a big deal

do you believe in science (specifically physics) or do you get your knowledge of same from james bond movies?

i prefer SCIENCE! (cue: south park!)

man, people (on ANY side of the spectrum) will just run to accept whatever pseudoscience they can find when it supports their agenda

never ceases to amaze me

[truebrit71]

16. Sorry but I call bullshit...

...but thanks for playing Mr Constitutional Lawyer/Armed Air Dude/Physicist/Cyber stalker/Science guru...

:eyes:

Remind me again...what happened to Payne Stewart when HIS plane depressurized? I seem to recall that it left a fairly large fucking hole in the ground somehere in the continental US...

But you contend that a bullet couldn't cause a cabin to suddenly lose pressure...


Ooooooookay.... :eyes:

[selador]

17. nice strawman

i said that the risk of a bullet causing catastrophic depressurization on commercial flights (the kind of airplanes i have done armed extradition on) is extremely low

i never said it COULDN'T cause depressurization. the issue is relative risk, which is EXTREMELY small.

it would be like me saying that flying is extremely safe and the risk of crashing is extremely small and you saying "but you contend that a plane COULDN'T crash?"

in science we talk about probabilities and relative risks.


that's the SCIENCE

feel free to contact the air marshalls if you have questions. they fly armed every day. i do it on occasion

again, i'll rely on science.

your scientific data is WHERE? place your source here:

[truebrit71]

19. Back pedal much?

Where's my science? In the hole in ground that Payne Stewart's plane made...

Who is this "we in science" you talk about...in between going on planes fully armed, being a constitutional lawyer and worldwide expert on freedom of speech (when not hampered by facts that say the absolute opposite) AND a scientist...how do you find the time to post on DU?

[selador]

21. lie much

i didn't say a bullet couldn't cause depressurization

try reading for once in your life.

please quote where i said that. put it here:

and then you devolve to ad hominems

because your childish feverish google search to support your non-fact-based bias(typical that you would form an opinion before researching) yielded no results.

so typical. form opinion, THEN search for data to back up your nonsupported prejudice, and when you can't find it -devolve to personal attacks

i prefer to educate myself about an issue BEFORE forming an opinion. that's how one forms EDUCATED opinions (my case) vs. your uninformed prejudices.

educated opinions can still be wrong. but educated people look for evidence before they change their mind. prejudiced people just keep propping up their myths by deflecting data and evidence with personal attacks, snark, etc. all to protect themselves from the unfomfortable truths, and cognitive dissonance

again... present your facts here:

[truebrit71]

23. P.S. try punctuation and capitalization...

..it'll be easier for people to believe that you are actually as educated as you claim to be...

[skater314159]

27. Spelling and grammar complains, the true mark

of someone who has lost an argument on the net.

[truebrit71]

29. Do you have anything to add to this or are you by nature just an interfering twat?

...

[selador]

35. the only thing

he is interfering with, is you making an arse of yerself.

you can't simply be an adult and admit that you were taken in by a (common) myth- that a bullet fired in an airplane results in massive chaos and depressurization.

this myth is likely traced to the ian fleming novel goldfinger (hint: novels are FICTION) and has been repeated MANY times since in the popular media (movies, teevee, etc.) but it is simply not FACTUALLY based.

many people have troubles giving up myths they have held for years, especially when they can just namecall and ignore data. that's easier for them to deal with than having to commit the ultimate sin: admit they were wrong on the internet.

it really is friggin' childish though

i might as well be trying to explain evolution to a creationist.

[skater314159]

41. And you consider this to be reasonable debate?

I'm just enjoying your calling others stupid while acting a fool.

[SteveM]

33. You're flame-bait expressions are common in "Forums: Guns"

[skater314159]

25. Don't you have GOOGLE in the UK?

When I was there, they had it... did the internets' tubes get disconnected?

If you don't think he is telling the truth, maybe you should do some research and post rebuttal data here.

[truebrit71]

26. I'm sure they do...I live in the States however...

...

[skater314159]

28. Then what is your excuse?

Don't you know how to do research?

[truebrit71]

31. I'm sorry, your opinion in this matter is what again?

...

[selador]

36. he doesn't need research

he;'s got the ian fleming myth

" i saw it in movies so it must be true" about what bullets do in an airplane

fwiw, i believed (tactitly) this myth as well. PRIOR to taking my flying while armed class (required under the FAA regs if you want to carry a firearm on an airplane), i had no idea what the science said. when presented with evidence that ran contrary to my *(erroneous) belief, i checked into it and LEARNED something. so sad truebrit can't.

the difference between me and truebrit is that when i was presented with INFORMATION i used that information to modify (my previously uneducated opinion).

that's how adults, heck that<'s how sentient beings - operate.[br />
i am CERTAIN he's feverishly searched google etc and found only that what i said was correct. but since he already COMMITTED himself to the myth - psychologically he is not adult enough to simply say "my bad. i was wrong"

it says FAR more about child psychology, than it does about science, frankly

[skater314159]

43. As a forensic anthropologist, I can tell you

I am sick and fucking tired of the " I SAW IT ON T.V./IN A MOVIE/ON YOUTUBE SO IT MUST BE TRUE !!!11!!!" line of reasoning.

The only good I can see that comes of it is that it makes the job of detectives and forensic scientists easier 'cause people believe stupid bullshit and can't understand why real life works differently than the screen.

[selador]

48. hey man

im there for you and with you.

in law enforcement we call it the "CSI effect".

i think cops had a relatively good influence on how the public perceives cops.

but now with CSI people think we are going to bring the FBI lab in to solve the case of the stolen Xbox.


and don't even get me started on Law and Order. love the show, but it's PURE entertainment. barney miller was more realistic than that show

[skater314159]

51. Finally! Someone who understands!

:woohoo:

Yeah, people expect you to find fingerprints and "clues" everywhere... like I'm working for freakin' Scooby-Doo or something. And they would get ANGRY when you try to explain that not every case gets solved.

:eyes:

[selador]

53. when in doubt!

it's the meddling kids!

it's always those DARN MEDDLING KIDS!

that, or the one armed man

[michreject]

61. I saw that movie

Didn't Goldfinger get sucked through a small window?

[skater314159]

42. You are a narcissist who hopes to cover up

his/her lack of data with bluster and insults.

You hope that you can fool us here on the internets and that we won't notice that you are really insecure and have a poor self-image. You seek to make up for your insecurities by arguing against guns and weaponry in an internet forum in the hope that it will make you feel better about yourself. Fear immobilizes you IRL, so you come here where you can feel a sense of power and superiority. You doubt your own intelligence, you so take it out on people who make you feel dumb.

Also, I don't know why, but you don't care how you look to others, as long as you "win".

I think Selador knows what s/he is talking about and you have NFC.

Do you even own a gun? Fire one regularly? Know anything about airplanes? I think all three are no.

That's pretty much what I think at this point.

[Ghost in the Machine]

39. "Remind me again...what happened to Payne Stewart when HIS plane depressurized?"

Ummm.... it stayed in the air until it ran out of fuel? :shrug:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Payne Stewart Accident Information

Both pilots and all four passengers, including professional golfer and 1999 U.S. Open winner Payne Stewart, were killed in the crash of a Lear 35 jet near Mina, SD on 25 October 1999. The jet, originally on a flight from Orlando to Dallas, strayed off course over northern Florida and continued flying to the northwest until the fuel apparently ran out.

U.S. Air Force pilots reported that the cockpit windows were obscured by frost. The conditions of the windows are consistent with a loss of pressurization and a subsequent rapid drop of temperature. It is likely that the pilots and occupants may have lost consciousness due to hypoxia, or a lack of oxygen. Between the last communication between the aircraft and air traffic control and the aircraft's final descent, the aircraft was reportedly flying as high as 45,000 feet.

The NTSB determined that the probable cause of this accident was incapacitation of the flight crewmembers as a result of their failure to receive supplemental oxygen following a loss of cabin pressurization, for undetermined reasons.

http://www.airsafe.com/stewart.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any other questions I can help you with??

[truebrit71]

45. ...and the occupants...were they alive or DEAD before they made that large hole?

..they were DEAD...why? Because the plane depressurized....KILLING THE OCCUPANTS...

[Ghost in the Machine]

60. Actually, if you can read, the article states that they were killed when they crashed

until then, they were presumed UNCONCIOUS from RAPID depressurization...

Please explain, in detail, how a tiny bullet hole would suck ALL of the oxygen out of the plane in this case today, causing unconsiousness to the crew members and other occupants...

Also, remember that the RAPID depressurization happened in Payne Stewarts jet within a 6 minute period or less, from the time of the last recieved radio transmission and the one they failed to answer. The military pilots sent to intercept the plane did a visual inspection in the air, and saw NO DAMAGE to the exterior of the plane. What do *you* think caused the rapid depressurization? I have no clue, other than equipment malfunction, as I'm not an airplane mechanic and don't know how the systems work.

[truebrit71]

63. They have no way of knowing when they died but I'd bet having almost zero oxygen...

..wasn't helping that whole "staying alive and breathing" part...

As to how ONE bullet would suck ALL of the oxygen out of a plane please see another post I made with a link down thread...

I managed to read that article...even the really big words...:eyes:

[Ghost in the Machine]

65. You may have managed to *read* the article, but you clearly didn't *comprehend* it

It's no wonder you only posted the link without any context except for your own assertions...

From your link:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are four things that might happen if a person were to fire a gun on an airplane:

The bullet simply goes through the aluminum skin of the plane and punches a small hole as it exits.
The bullet hits a window and blows it out.
The bullet hits wiring hidden in the walls or the floor.
The bullet hits a fuel tank.
If the bullet simply punctures the skin of an airplane, then it's no big deal. The cabin of the airplane is pressurized and the hole creates a small leak, but the pressurization system will compensate for it. A single hole, or even a few holes like this, will have no effect.

If the bullet blows out a window, that's a problem. When the window blows, the plane will depressurize over the course of several seconds. Since all of the air in the cockpit is rushing toward the missing window, a lot of debris will be heading in that direction with it. If the person sitting next to the window is not strapped in, then it's possible that he or she will get sucked out -- another good reason to wear your safety belt at all times! In the meantime, the loss of cabin pressurization creates a problem for everyone on the plane. A commercial airliner flying at 30,000 feet is flying slightly higher than the peak of Mt. Everest. The air at this altitude is so thin that a person will become incoherent in a matter of a minute or so without supplemental oxygen. That's why the oxygen masks will drop from the panel in the ceiling. If you're in this situation, putting the mask on quickly, while you're still thinking clearly, is important.

If the bullet hits wiring (or worse, if the bullet hits something important like the instrument panel in the cockpit), it could cause problems that range from trivial (in-flight entertainment stops working) to severe. The damage depends on what gets hits and how important it is.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/gun-on-plane.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

You should try more honesty and less hyperbole in your replies, you'll get farther with your arguments that way.

[truebrit71]

70. From my link "If the bullet blows out a window, that's a problem."

You should try reading before offering classes on arguing...

[Ghost in the Machine]

74. It's still a comprehension problem on *your* part.... you see, a "blown out window"

is a much larger than a simple, tiny bullet hole... it's a large, gaping hole. My question to you was "Please explain, in detail, how a tiny bullet hole would suck ALL of the oxygen out of the plane in this case today, causing unconsiousness to the crew members and other occupants..." http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3054414&mesg_id=3055588

Comprehension is your friend, don't fear it. Words have meaning, ya know...

What was it you said to someone else in this thread?.... oh yeah.. "you got owned by facts....." Well my friend, YOU have been owned by facts now, haven't you?? You should quit while you're behind so you don't make yourself look any dumber...

[truebrit71]

75. A tiny bullet hole...

...IN A FUCKING WINDOW WOULD SUCK ALL OF THE OXYGEN OUT OF THE PLANE BECAUSE THE WINDOW WOULD SHATTER...

READ my link you imbecile...it's NOT that hard...

Here's the important bit you didn't comprehend...

"If the bullet blows out a window, that's a problem. When the window blows, the plane will depressurize over the course of several seconds."

[Name removed]

76. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[XOKCowboy]

15. Even Mythbusters debunked that myth

Now as for the bullet hitting a vital instrument or even part of the wiring and causing a plane to crash that's another question.

I'm flying tomorrow. I'll be looking for mysterious bulges on any of the flight crew. :)

[selador]

18. correct

mythbusters did do an episode on it.

like i said, it just never ceases to amaze me the amount of junk and fantasy science that people rely on when their pet issue is gored

[truebrit71]

20. Wait, so Myth busters is the de facto standard by which reality is now gauged?

...and supposedly I'm the one with my head up my arse...

[selador]

22. again, nice strawman

that is not what either of us said.

i merely said that mythbusters DID do an episode on this

i didn't rely on them, nor did i cite them.

i cited more credible sources than a pop tv show

but for you, a simple source like mythbusters might be right up yer alley

you might hurt yourself reading the big words in a scientific journal or primary source document.

again, when you have no facts, you devolve to personal attacks, strawmen, etc.

part and parcel.

[truebrit71]

24. So you get owned by the facts, and resort to poorly structured and badly punctuated sentences...

...I'm done with you chump...

[selador]

30. noted that

for those observing...

"trubrit71" has posted exactly THIS much evidence that a gunshot on an airplane is the least bit likely to cause catastrophic depressurization

{}

iow... nothing.

adults can admit when they are wrong. he can't. so sad

[truebrit71]

32. Most people have common sense I guess....

..unlike grammatically challenged armed law experts that are also scientists...

[selador]

37. common sense vs data

it may be "common sense" that an airplane would have massive problems when a bullet is fired within, but that common sense comes from a media myth first inspired by ian fleming.

"common sense" would say that a large metal tube wouldn't be able to fly in the first place

but SCIENCE and empirical data both say otherwise. hence, we have the "miracle" of flight. of course, truebrit would have told the wright bros. that it defied 'common sense' but thankfully science trumps 'common sense'

here in the reality based community, we rely on real world data and science

you rely on james bond movies for your science education

which is about as scientific as yer average creationist and equally as tiresome

[truebrit71]

47. Regardless of your apparent James Bond issues...

..when you take a look at research and SCIENCE by people that don't have a pro-gun axe to grind they think that it would be a pretty bad idea for a gun to go off in an airplane..

http://science.howstuffworks.com/gun-on-plane.htm

What was that about me making stuff up, or 'Hollywood myths'...?

[sergeiAK]

40. You haven't posted a single fact -nt

[reformedrethug]

4. I have no problem

with PROPERLY trained individuals having a handgun in the cockpit. More than likely this idiot was playing with it, it should stay stowed until the flight has landed and has been shut-down.

[damntexdem]

Yeah, but Samuel Jackson can't be on every flight ...

to rid the flight of all those snakes.

How about a weapon that wouldn't pierce a bulkhead? There are weapons that incapacitate, perhaps even kill, but without threatening to decompress a plane.

[selador]

10. see my other post

1) the risk of depressurization (especially of a catastrophic nature) is VERY small. it's a media myth. do you believe everything you see in james bond movies and the media?
2) there already ARE rounds that are designed especially for the purpose of not piercing walls, etc. glaser safety slugs, among others

[reformedrethug]

34. actually

mythbusters did a show about just this. They showed that a single bullet could not cause explosive decompression.

[selador]

38. and

numerous other real world data, studies, and testimony (before the house, etc.) back this up

it's a MEDIA MYTH first inspired by goldfinger (james bond) but people believe what they see on teevee

what is typical is that so many "critical thinkers" here are so eager to believe whatever they saw in movies growing up as a kid to the detriment of all data to the contrary

[truebrit71]

50. Yeah that whole gaping hole in the fuselage issue..

...as just so passe...

Pilot..in the cockpit...surrounded by windows...gun goes bang...bloody great big holes start appearing...

No need to worry in your "science" based world...

:eyes:

How about this, the guys up front with the small-penis issues just concentrate on staying sober and making sure the plane gets to where it's supposed to go rather then playing 'wild west' with their penis extensions in their holsters...

[selador]

54. ah...

the guns as penis metaphor.

well, that cliche is even older than goldfinger, so at least you like the classics

[reformedrethug]

55. tell ya what

find some real world data to back up your assertation that a single bullet hole in the fuselage of a jet causes explosive decompression. Since your so sure about it you should have no problems at all finding the data.

[truebrit71]

64. See post 47

..

[reformedrethug]

67. and they indicated

what we have already said, a bullet hole through the skin will not bring an aircraft down, even a shot through a window will not bring an aircraft down. Your own post shot your argument full of holes.

[truebrit71]

71. Nice try rethug....

..."The damage depends on what gets hits and how important it is."

Forgot to read that sentence did you...?

[reformedrethug]

77. Where in that post

did it say that explosive decompression bad enough to take down a jet would occur?

[truebrit71]

78. ..the part about hitting fuel tanks maybe?

..:shrug:

[reformedrethug]

79. That is not

explosive decompression and of that happening are VERY remote anyways. It would take a hell of a shot to pull that off considering you cannot see the wings from the cockpit, and to hit it from the passenger cabin you would have to be right over it to even have much of a chance. Then take into account the forward airspeed of the aircraft vs the lateral direction of the round. Even IF you hit the tank more than likely you would have a fuel leak and not an explosion, that is unless your firing explosive rounds.

Your reaching for straws here, may be time to admit that your reaching.

[sergeiAK]

56. If it's such a problem,

Care to post an example where a single handgun round brought down an aircraft larger than a Cessna 172?

And ditch the gun = penis "analogy". It just makes you look incapable of putting forth a valid argument.

[truebrit71]

73. Sure newbie...just as soon as yo show me where I said that it had already happened...

....I'll use whatever analogies I choose thank you very much...but obviously I have touched a nerve with you...I wonder why?

[dysfunctional press]

7. they need to put cameras in the cockpits.

with digital technology being what it is, there's got to be room on the black box recorder for the data.
and it would prevent knuckleheaded pilots from doing stupid shit like this.

[damntexdem]

9. Or at least make a captivating You-Tube video.

[Speck Tater]

14. Was it the same pilot who flew Hillary into Bosnia?

That might explain the "sniper fire" claim.

[Thepricebreaker]

44. Way more people die from cars and alcohol. Shall we ban them too?

[truebrit71]

49. As soon as cars are pressurized and fly at 30,000+ feet then it might be something to consider...

...

[rocktivity]

46. It just went off? Was it in a holster? Was there something pressing against the trigger?

:shrug:
rocknation

[Squatch]

52. If an airline pilot wants to kill you, do you think he really needs a gun?

:rofl:

[CatWoman]

57. GIMME A KISS, BEFORE I SHOOT "YOU"

:)

:hi:

[apocalypsehow]

59. Hell, there's some savants around here who think all THE PASSENGERS should be armed in flight.

They seem to believe that a shoot-out at 30,000 feet is no biggie, as long as everyone has quick access to their shootin' irons and the drop-down oxygen masks still work.

:thumbsdown:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

66. Could you please post evidence of that?

[Xenotime]

62. Exactly. Thank you for making my point.

[KG]

68. more gun nuttery, and on a plane. how great is that?

probably whipped it out, showing a flight attendant how 'big' it was. :eyes:

[Name removed]

72. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ManiacJoe]

80. This has bad engineering written all over it.

http://www.crimefilenews.com/2008/03/gun-accident-in-airliner-cockpit-was.html
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2007/12/tsa-arrogance-threatens-safety-of-air.html