Air marshal leaves pistol in limousine

Air marshal leaves pistol in limousine

There are 81 comments on the The Indianapolis Star story from Sep 13, 2007, titled Air marshal leaves pistol in limousine. In it, The Indianapolis Star reports that:

Indianapolis Airport Police say a federal air marshal lost his firearm Wednesday at Indianapolis International Airport.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Indianapolis Star.

RKBA

Florence, KY

#72 Sep 13, 2007
herman wrote:
Say, Dennis -- Do you really think that if the passengers were able to carry guns that the terrorists would still have been carrying box cutters?
Lemme think --- Uh, no.
The terrorists weren't American citizens and not privy to the protections citizens are. IOW, they didn't have the RKBA.

Even if they did, they still would have been shot.
B-T Resident

Greenwood, IN

#73 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope I misunderstand you...because what I think you're saying is that anyone should be able to take any gun on board any airplane, any time, with full ammunition load. The drunks, the mentally ill, the terrorists, the upset and depressed...
I fly often, and I don't want the airplane to become a shooting gallery at 35,000 feet...rapid depressurization is, I was told by WWII Army Air Corps veterans, real hard on the human body
A common misconception and old wives tale - modern planes have a redundant system designed for many small holes in a plane, which minimizes and controls the decompression and potential harmful effects. About 20 years ago a big passenger jet still managed to fly and land on Hawaii after a massive decompression at 24,000 feet due to metal fatigue ripped off a large part of its top. 95 passengers, 1 death, 94 survivors (65 injured). This is far better odds of survival than the many times when a maniac hijacker(s) has taken control of a plane.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#74 Sep 13, 2007
Brick Tamland wrote:
<quoted text>
As I saw in a post recently...
You been BMV lately? I don't want everybody there to HAVE to own a gun. My God. Most of them can barely stand and chew gum. You want them to possess a weapon? You're crazy!
I like the 2nd ammendment. But, I think you should have to show an ability to handle a gun before you can get a license and purchase one. A car is a lethal weapon in the unskilled or impared person's hands. We require licenses there, and it seems fair. A gun is certainly more dangerous in some dolt's possession. IF you can pass an ability test you Can, but not Must, possess. That's my solution...that and background checks!
Federal Background checks are required to buy a gun. Go to your local gun shop and ask. Training is a good idea and I cannot disagree. I do feel all former LEO's, with a good record, should carry and conceal, if they choose. The permit should be Federal and accepted in all States.
RKBA

Florence, KY

#75 Sep 13, 2007
JJJ wrote:
<quoted text>
The first thing that Hitler did when he came to power was to take away guns from the citizens!
This is a myth. Gun control laws in Germany were put in place in 1928 under Weimar regime.
RKBA

Florence, KY

#76 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, no, herman, they would have been carrying guns of their own...and they would have taken over the plane, and the first person to stand up to shoot back would have been shot dead, and any wild shots could lead to the plane depressurizing and going down...or, the terrorists simply start shooting everyone when someone shot back, and then crash the plane into a target building.
You watch too many movies.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#77 Sep 13, 2007
Brick Tamland wrote:
<quoted text>
As I saw in a post recently...
You been BMV lately? I don't want everybody there to HAVE to own a gun. My God. Most of them can barely stand and chew gum. You want them to possess a weapon? You're crazy!
I like the 2nd ammendment. But, I think you should have to show an ability to handle a gun before you can get a license and purchase one. A car is a lethal weapon in the unskilled or impared person's hands. We require licenses there, and it seems fair. A gun is certainly more dangerous in some dolt's possession. IF you can pass an ability test you Can, but not Must, possess. That's my solution...that and background checks!
I see your IPS is Illinois. If you liev in Illinois, good luck getting a gun. Illinois has the most Drachonian Gun Laws around. Simply a case of the Gov't. wanting to disarm the Citizens and have total control should they ever decide too.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#78 Sep 13, 2007
Brick Tamland wrote:
<quoted text>
Or on the Michigan football team because they Lost all of their Defense too ;)
If you are in Indiana go down to your local Target World and take an NRA course. Whether you like the NRA or not you have to admit they know how to teach gun safety and how to safely shoot.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#79 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope I misunderstand you...because what I think you're saying is that anyone should be able to take any gun on board any airplane, any time, with full ammunition load. The drunks, the mentally ill, the terrorists, the upset and depressed...
I fly often, and I don't want the airplane to become a shooting gallery at 35,000 feet...rapid depressurization is, I was told by WWII Army Air Corps veterans, real hard on the human body
Federal Law prohibits the Ajudicated or diagnosed Mentally ill form posessing or owning a gun. Felons cannot own a gun, Federal Law. Carrying a gun is to protect against the Terrorists. If a terrorist has a gun on an airplane and shoots decompression is a possibility. It is and always has been a requirement to declare your gun to the Captain, who determines if one can carry it or lock it up until the end of the flight. If a terrorist has a gun I would like to have a fighting chance and not bother the Pilots who have to land the plane.

If you survive decompression it is not the fall from 12K feet that will hurt anyone, it is the sudden stop that will ruin your whole day. My step dad an Army Air Corps Fighter Pilot during the big one said that.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#80 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, no, herman, they would have been carrying guns of their own...and they would have taken over the plane, and the first person to stand up to shoot back would have been shot dead, and any wild shots could lead to the plane depressurizing and going down...or, the terrorists simply start shooting everyone when someone shot back, and then crash the plane into a target building.
Yea, but if I am going to go dowm I am going to take as many terrorists as I can with me.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#81 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope I misunderstand you...because what I think you're saying is that anyone should be able to take any gun on board any airplane, any time, with full ammunition load. The drunks, the mentally ill, the terrorists, the upset and depressed...
I fly often, and I don't want the airplane to become a shooting gallery at 35,000 feet...rapid depressurization is, I was told by WWII Army Air Corps veterans, real hard on the human body
http://hobbes.ncsa.uiuc.edu/onsheepwolvesands...

Here is a link to go to and read. It is a long read but really says it all.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#82 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
and then hand them back when he inducted them into the Wermacht. The problem wasn't that they didn't have guns (though most in the non-urban areas, still did). It was that the rest of that society's institutions were not up to the task of stopping a Hitler. The Army went along for the ride, mostly with pleasure. The rest of Europe, especially the British and the French, and the Americans, went along because they didn't want to send in troops to stop Hitler. If Britain and France had sent in troops went Hitler re-militarized the Rhineland, the "war" would have been over in a week...
Hitler knew that too, especially France. France does not have an enviable history of defending themselves; let England and the United State do it for them.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#83 Sep 13, 2007
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
Time for you to change prescriptions...whatever you're on apparently isn't helping...
You are probably fairly young. What do you think HST or RR would have done after 9-11-2001? I don' there would be a Middle East to worry about. HST would have taken the biggest baddest Bomb available and obliterated Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. Actually he would have done it long before 9-11. When the USS Cole and Anbar Towers were attacked, give e'm hell Harry would have given them a literal hell. Ronnie would have done the same. No Aspirin factories for him. Remember Qudaffi (sp) his tent and dead daughter? Ronnie got his point across and Mommar (sp) is a good boy now. What would Harry and Ronnie have done when the Sudan offered Bin Laden? We would not be looking for him now. Lets see, LBJ did Viet Nam, RMN ended it, JEC and his Iran Hostages, GHB got them home, WJC messed up the Middle east and screwed anyone he could, except Hillary, GHWB (GW) was no HST or RR, unfortunately. When intelligence knew where Bin Laden was he should have melted the Afghanistan Mountain to get him.
WTF

Indianapolis, IN

#84 Sep 13, 2007
OiCu812 wrote:
<quoted text> Yeah ! Everyone on planes should have guns !
Good idea, lets let anybody shoot holes in a pressurized tube moving 550 MPH six miles high...

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#85 Sep 13, 2007
Oh why not wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you like one to show competency before utilizing any of the other rights outlined in the Bill of Rights?
How about if we had to show competency before we protest against the government?
Slippery slope lady. I would LIKE everyone that owns a firearm to be competent with it. But making it mandatory does away with the RIGHT to own one.
And you don't have a Constitutional right to drive.
I understand you position however, I recall the first time I fired a hand gun. I had no idea what to expect and I don't think I hit the target. As I was instructed I became competent. I would like people to take a course before carrying a gun.
Logic

Syracuse, NY

#86 Sep 13, 2007
Under federal law, both active and retired police officers who train and qualify are now allowed to carry a firearm in all states but still aren't allowed to take one on a plane or past the screeners inside an airport. Just one could have made all the difference in the world on 9/11. Talk about a waste of resources.
Dennis wrote:
On 9/11 , let's see, 11 or so bearded fanatical primitives with boxcutters versus 30 plus non-Socialist Democrats with carry permits and sidearms---wow! There would still be the Twin Towers standing, an undamaged Pentagon, and no smoking hole in a field. Several thousand people would still be alive and the War on Terror would have been put on hold until the primitives found another way to attack us !
Since civilian disarmament and infringements/subversion of the Second Amendment is so politically popular with Soc/Dems infesting Congress, the number of unarmed victims inevitably will escalate as proven time and again. Virginia Tech was a very graphic example of that, yet the Political Masters again scurried the opposite direction of what was an obvious solution , by expanding their focus on civilian disarmament and thereby creating more "gun free zones" of opportunity for the armed criminals, deviates and primitives. The Second Amendment is our first, best and ultimate Homeland Security, and is the sheeple would rather call 911 and become another statistic or line in the obituary column, then they deserved the results they encouraged .

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#87 Sep 13, 2007
RKBA wrote:
<quoted text>
People who have concealed carry permits are not a danger to you. They are law abiding citizens who recognize the police can't and have no responsibility to protect you from anything. Fact is, you have probably been around more people legally carrying a handgun than you think because these people make a point not to make an issue of the fact they are carrying.
The people you should worry about are the criminals, who regardless of what any law says, will have the guns they desire.
Why put the good guys at a disadvantage by allowing the criminals to be the one's with the guns?
Thank you, well said. You are going to get mail on your comment about police protection even though you are correct.

Since: Dec 06

Cincinnati, OH

#88 Sep 13, 2007
B-T Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
A common misconception and old wives tale - modern planes have a redundant system designed for many small holes in a plane, which minimizes and controls the decompression and potential harmful effects. About 20 years ago a big passenger jet still managed to fly and land on Hawaii after a massive decompression at 24,000 feet due to metal fatigue ripped off a large part of its top. 95 passengers, 1 death, 94 survivors (65 injured). This is far better odds of survival than the many times when a maniac hijacker(s) has taken control of a plane.
Did you see the actual photo of the Aloha Airline plane? Amazing that the pilot and Co-pilot were able to fly the plane. The flying convertible. Yoou could see seats where passengers were sitting without a side of the plane next to them. The only thing holding them in was the seat belt. The death was an flight attendant.

It takes quite a bit to down an airliner. All of their systems are redundant.
You are EFFIN RIGHT

Fort Worth, TX

#90 Sep 13, 2007
Dennis wrote:
On 9/11 , let's see, 11 or so bearded fanatical primitives with boxcutters versus 30 plus non-Socialist Democrats with carry permits and sidearms---wow! There would still be the Twin Towers standing, an undamaged Pentagon, and no smoking hole in a field. Several thousand people would still be alive and the War on Terror would have been put on hold until the primitives found another way to attack us !
Since civilian disarmament and infringements/subversion of the Second Amendment is so politically popular with Soc/Dems infesting Congress, the number of unarmed victims inevitably will escalate as proven time and again. Virginia Tech was a very graphic example of that, yet the Political Masters again scurried the opposite direction of what was an obvious solution , by expanding their focus on civilian disarmament and thereby creating more "gun free zones" of opportunity for the armed criminals, deviates and primitives. The Second Amendment is our first, best and ultimate Homeland Security, and is the sheeple would rather call 911 and become another statistic or line in the obituary column, then they deserved the results they encouraged .
EOM

Since: Dec 06

Peru, Indiana

#91 Sep 13, 2007
I guess it could happen to anyone, but you would think no way.
Wendy Weinbaum

Tyler, TX

#92 Sep 14, 2007
As a Jewess in the US, I am appalled at the special treatment for "Law nforcement Officers" when they make the same mistake a citizen might. No double standards there!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Battle Ground Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Person responsible for double homicide (Mar '17) 1 hr Chimes 10,504
Golf hat/cap? Sat Wishpeoplewouldli... 14
crime (Feb '17) Sep 20 Abertine 378
News Grandfather of Indiana teen found dead near hik... (Mar '17) Sep 17 justice 144
Tips for Delphi murders Sep 17 SerialBells 2
Newest picture of BG!! what do you think? Sep 11 Chimes 135
News Stop 'armchair sleuthing' online, warn cops inv... Sep 11 Sweet Life 5

Battle Ground Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Battle Ground Mortgages