Knives OK'ed for Carry onto Airplanes, Feds Announce

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by Philippines

 

Great news. This means I can travel with my box-cutters again!

Yep, still not swallowing that one...the day someone can actually threaten me with a box cutter?

The whole idea is ridiculous anyhow, as there are a dozen ways to easily smuggle customized weapons onto a plane, if someone was really determined enough to do so. All these measures do is make it less likely, but at the expense of inconveniencing EVERYONE else.

Happens to me too. Randomly selected to go in the full body cancer machine. Every time.

I get the full pat down, etc. Likely because I lived in the Middle East as a kid, albeit for two years, and I was born in America, and haven't been to the Middle East in over 20 years.... Every time I see that little SS on my boarding pass....

edit on 6-3-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

I think you mean.. At the expense of the taxpayer.

And nowadays really, why pay taxes? Can you audit the Fed, an organized religion, the police, or any other public/private organization to really see where your taxes/donations go?

I don't mean this question personally at you, but just saying =b

So... let me get this perfectly straight. Knives, which are a more effective weapon to use, to take over a plane than are guns, the use of which is likely to penetrate the skin of the aircraft and cause a massive pressure loss, resulting in an uncontrolled crash, rather than a controlled kamikaze attack, are now allowed on a plane?

Therefore, unless my ability to read has suffered a failiure of catastrophic proportions, it is now possible to take the most effective hijacking weapon, that one could possibly use, onto a plane in the US. This seems slightly ridiculous, since the investigators who looked into the events of 9/11 believed that the hijackers used knives to subdue resistance within those aircraft.

So basically, they are asking for a sequel! What in the name of the seventh circle of hell are they playing at? I mean, lets just forget for a moment, that there are STILL questions which remain unanswered about the events of that day (and no, I wont be engaging in discussion about those in this thread). If things went exactly as the official story goes, then there can be no good reason to allow any bladed object on an aircraft!

reply to post by TrueBrit


Less than a 3 inch blade...hardly much of a weapon...

This kind of speaks though, to just how willingly we're giving up any freedoms, for perceived safety. If you check CNN right now, they have a poll on it, and 64% disagree with allowing them to be carried.

Personally, I always have a Swiss Army style pocket knife with me, I find uses for it every day. My father carried one, his father before him, etc.

Threat of the hull breech or not, a gun is still way more effective in a hijacking (perhaps even because of that reason). Then again, I have a stun gun that looks like a cell phone, that I've accidentally had (and gotten on the plane with) in my carry on bag even since 911. That's why all the security is a joke. If someone is determined to get something on the plane, there are a myriad of ways to do so.

If things went exactly as the official story goes

Would you honestly be threatened by a box cutter?

And yet I still cannot bring my own bottle of water on.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNutjob

Originally posted by Philippines
Great news. This means I can travel with my box-cutters again!

Maybe they need another 9/11 to grow the police state?

We will feel your testicles and grope your wifes breasts and allow you to take on board the same weapons that were used to hijack some planes that flew into the twin towers.

Can anyone else see the hypocrisy with the establishment? Do they really believe that we are this stupid?

Yes.

And they are right.

How many years.has it been since grope and rope made its debut? People made all manner of threats, but I notice that I am still not flying because I still have standards of privacy that flying doesn't allow for.

reply to post by Gazrok


Well I wouldnt sir, but not everyone has lived my life lol.

The fact is that a tool is only as useful or dangerous as the person holding it. A three inch blade is more than enough to slice open the jugular vein, the femoral artery, penetrate the eye and carry on into the brain, or cause any number of other incapacitating wounds, and in the right (read wrong) hands, can cause massive damage to a person.

I dont agree with the removal of peoples liberties any more than the next person, please understand that. I just dont see what the point of lifting the ban is. If a knife was dangerous once, then surely it is dangerous now.

Perhaps the presence of armed law enforcement officials on aircraft negates that threat to a degree? Heck, its probably all fine, all threats seen and countered. I just question the idea of lifting the ban on a weapon type which was considered as a very strong probablility as the weapon which allowed hijackers to create the biggest terror attack in history.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
So... let me get this perfectly straight. Knives, which are a more effective weapon to use, to take over a plane than are guns, the use of which is likely to penetrate the skin of the aircraft and cause a massive pressure loss, resulting in an uncontrolled crash, rather than a controlled kamikaze attack, are now allowed on a plane?

Therefore, unless my ability to read has suffered a failiure of catastrophic proportions, it is now possible to take the most effective hijacking weapon, that one could possibly use, onto a plane in the US. This seems slightly ridiculous, since the investigators who looked into the events of 9/11 believed that the hijackers used knives to subdue resistance within those aircraft.

So basically, they are asking for a sequel! What in the name of the seventh circle of hell are they playing at? I mean, lets just forget for a moment, that there are STILL questions which remain unanswered about the events of that day (and no, I wont be engaging in discussion about those in this thread). If things went exactly as the official story goes, then there can be no good reason to allow any bladed object on an aircraft!

They are allowing pocket knives. Its not like they are an effective weapon. You would have better luck with a fork. Their is no good reason to not allow them.

Originally posted by Gazrok

Would you honestly be threatened by a box cutter?

edit on 6-3-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

Apparently the aircrew in 4 planes were a while back.

You know, that whole debacle that made it tough to get through the lines in the airport.

That thing that brought about all the security and strangeness of being groped, and I think the sole weapon used was .........what was it.......Oh yea, a blade less than 2.5 inches.

So we keep all the security, we keep all the groping, we keep all the x-ray machines, but we allow the one thing that "supposedly" caused everything. Yep, makes sense to me.

Only old fashioned 2" swiss army knives are allowed. 2" assault knives are not permitted.

So, you get suspended for disarming a gun-wielding student on the bus, but it's okay to carry a sharp utensil on a passenger missile loaded with civilians? Makes perfect sense.

reply to post by AtticusRye

Okay .. so peanut butter or baby forumula can't be taken on.
But knives are allowed. Got it.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
So... let me get this perfectly straight. Knives, which are a more effective weapon to use, to take over a plane than are guns, the use of which is likely to penetrate the skin of the aircraft and cause a massive pressure loss, resulting in an uncontrolled crash, rather than a controlled kamikaze attack, are now allowed on a plane?

Actually that's a Hollywood myth. A gun won't cause more than a bullet sized hole in the side of the plane. It will depressurize, but unless it happens to pass through the oxygen system there's no reason the pilots couldn't go on oxygen and get the plane to a lower altitude. Depending on the altitude they might not even have to put masks on to get lower.

reply to post by Kandinsky


I think you might be missing the bigger picture.

The Knives were the catalyst to all the other liberties that were revoked. Now the knives are allowed back, yet the liberties are still taken away. (see groping, x-rays, remove shoes)

It's an incredible irony that exists. My wife was almost arrested when she tried to bring crochet needles along on a trip to pass the time. I am just glad nobody got poked in the eye.

reply to post by AtticusRye
I tried to get on an Air Canada (or as Ben Affleck would say, "American Airlines") flight in St. John's, NFLD, with a waiter's corkscrew in my carry-on. They had to confiscate it. Beloved Newfoundlanders that they were...it ruined their whole day! They were bereft at having inconvenienced me so.

Wonder if I can have it back now?