How Many Refuse to Fly?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know about "refuse", but I have certainly been avoiding it for a number of reasons.

. On 9/11 I was just east of Kansas City on an 1100 mile drive to Kansas. My alternative would have been to fly out of Dulles that morning at about the same time as when the Dulles flight hit the Pentagon. Not sure if it would have been the same flight but it would have been really close. A neighbor a few doors down was killed at the Pentagon. I since moved to SC.

' On my only flight since, I had to mail home a miniature Victorinox pocket knife for almost the same cost as a new one...either that or have it confiscated. I have since read about confiscation of fingernail clippers...typical bureaucratic absurdity. I think I will wait until sanity is restored.

. TSA is stonewalling arming of pilots and deployment of sky marshals. In effect, I am boycotting because of that.

. I avoid "gun free" zones and situations

. Travelling between States is like travelling between countries because of variations in gun control laws. It's bad enough in a car.

. I am not sure I trust airport security. I don't enjoy the helpless feeling involved in flying. It requires too much trust that may not be warranted.

. All this "security" has more to do with protecting the airline industry and spin control than it does with actual passenger safety. If passenger safety was a real issue, then armed pilots and sky marshals would have been a slam dunk. Gun control mentality and insurance companies (redundant, but tort liability/reform is supposedly the issue) are what are standing in the way.
 
I dont like doing it, but my boss points towards the plane and I say "Yes, sir!" as required.

Kharn
 
I fly all the time and wont think twice about flying again.

Doesnt mean I dont agree with TSA's operations though. Just means that I have to get from point A to point B and the airplane is the easiest way to get there.

Also, my brother works for Continental which means round trip tickets to anywhere in the US is $100 for me:D
 
I used to fly a fair amount, but stopped about 2 years ago (the sole exception since being an international trip that I could only make by air).

Now, I either drive or don't go.
 
Sometime last week I was listening to a radio show and the MC told about an 83 year old grandmother that had had enough of the TSA bovine meadow muffins. Whatever he did the TSA guy made her mad enought that she ran him over with her wheel chair and kept going back & forth over him. He finnaly whimped that he was sorry and would not do it again. Another TSA guy came up behind grandma and attempted to hold her. She grabbed him by his hair and let him have it. Don't ask as I don't know how she kept them, but she stabed one of the TSA in the butt with knitting needles. She screamed that here you are going after an 83 year old woman when yoiu let middle eastern looking men go through with a flick of the hand. The other passengers were clapping and urging her on. The police took her to the staiton and then let her go ROR. A crowd had gethered outside of the police station and said that they would go for her bail. It also seems that 20 or so lawyers have said they will take her case pro bono. Hope this is not an urban ledgen as I really like it as it showed that the people are sick & tired of what the TSA is doing.
 
Maybe we should charter our own airline, Ala "Soul Plane"


-10% discount for bringing your piece. Checking of handguns is forbidden, you can only have them in the cabin with you, unless you already have two. Rifles and shotguns - You're briefed no shooting them on the plane. :D
-Baggage check: Retired military/police explosives dog.
-Loading. Well, you'll be forced to do it the old fashioned way, up the moving staircase. We aren't stepping into any terminal. Handicapped? Well, we'll figure something out.
-Pilots: Former Marine Pilots prefered. Bonus pay if they qualify marksman with their weapons. Oh, yeah, and they have the 'instant win' button. :evil:
-Stewardesses: Open carry.
- Lead time: 15-30 minutes? None of this hours stuff.
- Safety. Well, there'll be so many guns the terrorists wouldn't know what to do. Safety briefing spiced up with tips for how to best shoot any terrorists who try to hijack the plane.
 
I flew out to Kansas City last Monday and back to Columbus this past Friday. Going through security isn’t too bad. I always take my shoes off, empty my pockets ( except the billfold ), and walk through the metal detector. Haven’t been stopped yet.
Security doesn’t bother me, it’s the part when I’m five miles above the earth that gets my attention. :what:
 
Prior to 9-11, it took 12 hours for me and wife to fly from Miami to Knoxville, TN. Heck we could have almost driven it in 12 hours. A flood of excuses from the airline people.....
When I was cussing like a sailor back at the airport in Knoxville, the two airline workers at the counter asked if I wanted to hear the REAL reason for all the delays these days. They said that our politicians and FAA have spent big bucks on airport appearance improvements and not on a radical upgrade of air traffic control hardware/software. They said "you can only get so much water thru a straw". Only so much air traffic can be handled and at a certain rate given the old, antiquated traffic control system.
Kind of like the space shuttle operating on 1970s computer technology.

After 9-11, they have painted a facade of security for the sheeple to see.
The real problems have not been addressed. Subcontractors still enter planes without searches in order to stock/food/drink and provide cleaning services. Bush and TSA have fought arming the pilots with their every fiber, why is that?

No flying for me, thanks.
 
Flew once to Florida back in '89. I'll try never to fly again. Not that it went badly, but I figure if my ancestors intended for me to go someplace else, they'd have stettled. :)
 
I'll get back on a plane just as soon as Congress passes national "Vermont style" permitless concealed carry that allows me to arm myself for self defense on a commercial flight.
 
I'll get back on a plane just as soon as Congress passes national "Vermont style" permitless concealed carry that allows me to arm myself for self defense on a commercial flight.
Click to expand...

I hope that's a long wait. Carry laws are an infringement on the RKBA, no matter how permissive. If you allow them a controlling opinion, a later Congress could reverse it, all the while ignoring the Constitution. It's a long story, but please forget that idea. The recent LEO interstate carry law is unconstitutional for a couple reasons. "Hey, what about me?" is a natural reaction, but be careful what you buy into.

The fact that the 2nd Amendment has not been applied (by the SCOTUS) to all States via the 14th Amendment, after all this time, is outrageous, and we need to always remember that. Don't go for any workarounds. That concept will be in clear view as States start to institute their own AWB laws. If it ain't right for the Feds, it ain't right for the States either.

What if Congress decided to rule against concealed carry? Would you be enthusiastic about their supposed jurisdiction then? On what basis would you accept them doing that? Let's not, in effect, be hypocritical.

Now, we are in agreement about being able to board a plane armed, if we so choose, as long as we grant some control of potential fuselage penetration and know what we will do to secure the weapon during a nap. I guess I could see shoulder holsters or secured fanny packs becoming very popular. Think about it.
 
Wow. A lot more people than I expected have stopped flying. No wonder large portions of the airline industry are heading for Chapter 7.

Ironically, I think under the current set of standards the best way to avoid being searched is to dress up in robes and mutter about Allah and infidels. But if we're ever under terriorist assault by grandmas and CMH winners, TSA has us covered.
 
Bush and TSA have fought arming the pilots with their every fiber, why is that?
Click to expand...

On the contrary. TSA has been defiant of a bill passed by Congress and signed by the President. It was a post 9/11 security initiative. I don't know this to be a Bush bashing topic. If you believe otherwise, do you have some references?
 
From 1993 through most of 2001, I averaged flying about one trip every 2 months (give or take). I flew to TX in ealry October 2001. Since then, I've taken (as best I can recall) three trips by commercial airline. I've studiously avoided all unnecessary air travel. I've twice driven 500-600 miles (one way) rather than submit to the airport regimen. I'va also declined one very nice, company-paid trip to a primo resort area, because the reward of the 3-day retreat wasn't equal to the price of the airport pain.

I hate the reminder that the terrorists won on September 11. The unbearable airport hassles remind me of how much freedom we're willing to sacrifice for some temporary (and imaginary) security.

Odd, I keep hearing how my local airport is having increased passenger activity, but just heard that US Airways has filed for bankruptcy protection.

I say, let the airlines (and the airports and the TSA) go under; teleconferencing and videoconferencing are less fatiguing, faster and more convenient.
 
S.2268 Armed Pilots Shall-Issue Law

This bill to fix the TSA nonsense has been in the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Senate Committee since April 1, 2004. Note that the timing would have been questionable so close after the gun law voting debacle a few weeks earlier. But it can't be too important if it is just dormant in committee.
 
Funny. I have flown several times since 9/11 and while I have been pulled to the side and had my shoes removed and my wife had her carry-on inspected, the searches took only a few minutes and the TSA screeners were pretty professional about it. Doesn't mean I like it, but I recognize it as a necessary evil. Also, none of my fiends who fly on a regular (weekly) basis has ever had the horror stories that seem to be concensus here. Must be a pretty select group to have been manhandled that way. I am willing to accept a few inconveniences for the many benefits that air travel offers. Simply put, my time is too valuable to waste several days on the road that can be better spent on limited vacation or business.
 
I flew three weeks ago after several years of no flying. Now I know why. the real kicker of the inspection was when the snaps on my Levi 501's set off the hand held detector and the TSA goon had me unbutton them so he could look inside my fly. I guess he gets his jollies that way. Anyway the flight was less than 275 miles and with waiting and taking a second flight, it took be almost 8 hours! I can drive it in 4 1/2! From now on that is the way to go.
 
It all depends on your mindset, I guess. I don't mind going through an intense inspection and questioning when entering a foreign nation. It's their turf, and my rights are strictly limited. But I knew they would be going in. I made NO SUCH AGREEMENT for interstate travel. Indeed I feel common carriers should be freely available to all paying fares. There should be no implied waiver of fundamental rights.

So I take it very personally when I'm being searched before an interstate flight without due process, without reasonable suspicion, and without probable cause.
 
PS: You know, if some gov'ment agent had tried to make George Washington expose his fly (or the 18th century equivalent) for inspection, George would have horse whipped the scoundrel and hauled him to the nearest jail.

Times have changed, and not all for the better.
 
Jees, I thought I was the only one that hopes the airlines go broke. I was a Nasal Elevator back in the 60's. Flew off a carrier thousands of hours. Never, ever, took off without a firearm. Even if it was to go to Norfolk to get the CNO and bring him back to the ship.

When they let me take my shootin' iron aboard I guess I will start flying again.

My wife will still fly. I went to pick her up in St. Looie once. I showed up more than an hour early because I expected to get hassled for having a firearm in my vehicle. They forgot to hassle me so I stood at the security screening area and waited for her to come.

Used to be in the olden days you could meet your party at the gate. Now you gotta wait at the security screening area.

Anyway, I stood there and watched for more than an hour. The security screeners seemed to mostly select the babes for extra security. I know some old dogs will probably accuse me of anecdotalism but it sure seemed to me like the screener would select a babe, look through her stuff, feel up her luggage, look her over and when he saw another babe coming through the detector he would release the first and select the next babe and do the same thing.

The guys mostly went through. The babes got selected for extra perusal.

Anyway, hopefully some day, there will be nobody on the planes but .gov workers. Then TSA can screen the heck out of them.
 
This bill to fix the TSA nonsense has been in the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Senate Committee since April 1, 2004. Note that the timing would have been questionable so close after the gun law voting debacle a few weeks earlier. But it can't be too important if it is just dormant in committee.
Click to expand...

Re S.2268 "Armed Pilots Shall-Issue Law"

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
John McCain, Chairman
Ernest Hollings, Ranking Member

Aviation Subcommittee:

Chairman - Trent Lott
Ranking Member - John D. Rockefeller

Subcommittee Members:

Trent Lott, MS, Chairman
Ted Stevens, AK
Conrad Burns, MT
Kay Bailey Hutchison, TX
Olympia J. Snowe, ME
Sam Brownback, KS
Gordon Smith, OR
Peter G. Fitzgerald, IL
John Ensign, NV
George Allen, VA
John Sununu, NH
Ernest Hollings, SC
John D. Rockefeller, WV, Ranking
Daniel K. Inouye, HI
John Breaux, LA
Byron Dorgan, ND
Ron Wyden, OR
Bill Nelson, FL
Barbara Boxer, CA
Maria Cantwell, WA
Frank Lautenberg, NJ

I haven't analyzed the make up of the committee relative to the issue of arming pilots, but I do understand that Hollings and Breaux are retiring. I doubt if Hollings even voted for the original bill, let alone being willing to strengthen it by brushing aside any TSA regulatory discretion.

It seems certain at this point that the issue will not come up until the next Congress and a new Committee membership.
 
I hope that's a long wait. Carry laws are an infringement on the RKBA, no matter how permissive. If you allow them a controlling opinion, a later Congress could reverse it, all the while ignoring the Constitution. It's a long story, but please forget that idea. The recent LEO interstate carry law is unconstitutional for a couple reasons. "Hey, what about me?" is a natural reaction, but be careful what you buy into.
Click to expand...


My understanding of Vermont's permitless concealed carry, and I have never done any checking on this so I may be wrong, is that the Vermont legislature rescinded whatever statute was in effect that required a permit or passed legislation mandating that no permit is required, I am not sure which is the case.

When I said Congress could "pass" Nationwide Vermont style permitless concealed carry, I meant that it could pass legislation mandating that no permit should be required. I'm not sure if that rises to the level of Congress appropriating an impermissable degree of authority to regulate a fundamental right.

You are of course absolutely right about the government having no authority to require any type of license or permit in order to exercise the RKBA.

As for partial or total incorporation under the 14th, take your pick as to who's theory you want to accept on that score.
 
As for partial or total incorporation under the 14th, take your pick as to who's theory you want to accept on that score.
Click to expand...

Any legal reality that prevents it would be laws, judges, and lawyers making a mockery of the process. At some point you start cleaning house.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top