|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:53 am
|
|
|
|
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/?p=6874&cpage=1
Quote: The Obama administration is quietly taking steps to shut down the program that qualifies commercial airline pilots to carry firearms in jetliner cockpits in order to ward off another 9/11-type attack, according to a March 18 Newsmax story by David A. Patten. The administration recently diverted $2 million from a program to train and certify pilots to carry firearms safely while on duty, Patten wrote, summarizing a March 17 report in the Washington Times. Instead, it is using the money to hire additional field inspectors to help discipline pilots who step out of line, he wrote. On the same day, a Washington Times editorial condemned the Obama administration’s action, calling it “completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots.” Since Obama took office, the approval process for certifying pilots to carry firearms has ground to a halt, the newspaper reported. Pilots are afraid to speak out about the behind-the-scenes maneuverings, for fear of retaliation, according to the newspaper. No cases have been reported in which pilots have brandished a weapon inappropriately or otherwise abused their eligibility to carry firearms. I love that one. Even with Rodney King in most people's memory, he's shutting down a law enforcement program with flawless results that is almost certainly the BEST defense against another 9/11.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:28 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:27 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:38 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:37 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 5:17 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:11 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:56 am
|
|
|
|
Desert_Fox_Rommel Anima_Raptor Ya, thats a point taken away from Obama for me =/ One of the guys in my English class heard about Obama wanting to replace the assault weapon ban. Now he's pissed off that he voted for him. Actually that's another thing about voting that pisses me off. I hate the whole "well you didn't vote so you have no right to complain" line. The vote of one person can't do d**k to change anything especially if your states electoral votes went for McCain when you vote Obama. No matter what you would have voted your vote would not have changed the electoral vote and the popular vote would have done less since out of the 435 electoral votes given based on population your state only gets 7. gonk scream gonk scream I reject this line of thought on grounds of widespread complacency. Sure, your one vote means little. But FIVE MILLION PEOPLE not voting because their vote 'means nothing' is a whole lot. It's the same reason I refuse to sacrifice morals to jump on the winner's bandwagon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:16 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel Desert_Fox_Rommel Anima_Raptor Ya, thats a point taken away from Obama for me =/ One of the guys in my English class heard about Obama wanting to replace the assault weapon ban. Now he's pissed off that he voted for him. Actually that's another thing about voting that pisses me off. I hate the whole "well you didn't vote so you have no right to complain" line. The vote of one person can't do d**k to change anything especially if your states electoral votes went for McCain when you vote Obama. No matter what you would have voted your vote would not have changed the electoral vote and the popular vote would have done less since out of the 435 electoral votes given based on population your state only gets 7. gonk scream gonk scream I reject this line of thought on grounds of widespread complacency. Sure, your one vote means little. But FIVE MILLION PEOPLE not voting because their vote 'means nothing' is a whole lot. It's the same reason I refuse to sacrifice morals to jump on the winner's bandwagon. I also hear this argument used against people who don't vote because they are too young. In that context it's bullshit because they couldn't do anything about it. I also still stand by my point of view if the states electoral votes went for McCain because even if you voted McCain it would not have made the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:37 pm
|
|
|
|
Desert_Fox_Rommel Fresnel Desert_Fox_Rommel Anima_Raptor Ya, thats a point taken away from Obama for me =/ One of the guys in my English class heard about Obama wanting to replace the assault weapon ban. Now he's pissed off that he voted for him. Actually that's another thing about voting that pisses me off. I hate the whole "well you didn't vote so you have no right to complain" line. The vote of one person can't do d**k to change anything especially if your states electoral votes went for McCain when you vote Obama. No matter what you would have voted your vote would not have changed the electoral vote and the popular vote would have done less since out of the 435 electoral votes given based on population your state only gets 7. gonk scream gonk scream I reject this line of thought on grounds of widespread complacency. Sure, your one vote means little. But FIVE MILLION PEOPLE not voting because their vote 'means nothing' is a whole lot. It's the same reason I refuse to sacrifice morals to jump on the winner's bandwagon. I also hear this argument used against people who don't vote because they are too young. In that context it's bullshit because they couldn't do anything about it. I also still stand by my point of view if the states electoral votes went for McCain because even if you voted McCain it would not have made the difference. Used against minors it's bullshit. They didn't choose not to vote, they were not allowed to vote. Big difference.
I bet there's enough people in any given state who didn't vote that if they had, they could have swayed the popular vote in that state, and by doing so changed the electoral votes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:22 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel http://www.generalaviationnews.com/?p=6874&cpage=1 Quote: The Obama administration is quietly taking steps to shut down the program that qualifies commercial airline pilots to carry firearms in jetliner cockpits in order to ward off another 9/11-type attack, according to a March 18 Newsmax story by David A. Patten. The administration recently diverted $2 million from a program to train and certify pilots to carry firearms safely while on duty, Patten wrote, summarizing a March 17 report in the Washington Times. Instead, it is using the money to hire additional field inspectors to help discipline pilots who step out of line, he wrote. On the same day, a Washington Times editorial condemned the Obama administration’s action, calling it “completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots.” Since Obama took office, the approval process for certifying pilots to carry firearms has ground to a halt, the newspaper reported. Pilots are afraid to speak out about the behind-the-scenes maneuverings, for fear of retaliation, according to the newspaper. No cases have been reported in which pilots have brandished a weapon inappropriately or otherwise abused their eligibility to carry firearms. I love that one. Even with Rodney King in most people's memory, he's shutting down a law enforcement program with flawless results that is almost certainly the BEST defense against another 9/11. i understand this IF the pilot is misusing his firearm handling privilages but if pilots had guns in 01 then 9/11 wouldnt have happened in the first place because they jacked it with BOX CUTTERS!!! BOX MOTHER ******** CUTTERS!! those are thin a** sheets of metal that are but to be sharp enough to cut boxes and they used it to jack a whole 747 air liner plane!!! WTF???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:31 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel Desert_Fox_Rommel Fresnel Desert_Fox_Rommel Anima_Raptor Ya, thats a point taken away from Obama for me =/ One of the guys in my English class heard about Obama wanting to replace the assault weapon ban. Now he's pissed off that he voted for him. Actually that's another thing about voting that pisses me off. I hate the whole "well you didn't vote so you have no right to complain" line. The vote of one person can't do d**k to change anything especially if your states electoral votes went for McCain when you vote Obama. No matter what you would have voted your vote would not have changed the electoral vote and the popular vote would have done less since out of the 435 electoral votes given based on population your state only gets 7. gonk scream gonk scream I reject this line of thought on grounds of widespread complacency. Sure, your one vote means little. But FIVE MILLION PEOPLE not voting because their vote 'means nothing' is a whole lot. It's the same reason I refuse to sacrifice morals to jump on the winner's bandwagon. I also hear this argument used against people who don't vote because they are too young. In that context it's bullshit because they couldn't do anything about it. I also still stand by my point of view if the states electoral votes went for McCain because even if you voted McCain it would not have made the difference. Used against minors it's bullshit. They didn't choose not to vote, they were not allowed to vote. Big difference. I bet there's enough people in any given state who didn't vote that if they had, they could have swayed the popular vote in that state, and by doing so changed the electoral votes. i think the biggest bull s**t is that when you vote for someone it doesnt mean crap the the guy in the electoral college they just go "oh look they wanted obama, well im in the electoral college so i dont give a GOD DAMN s**t!!! about what this guy wants ill vote McCain lolololoolollol ******** lol" WTF?? whats the point of voting in the first place when the guy can vote for another person??? it literally makes no sense at ALL i mean seriously why vote in the first place when the person in the electoral college decides who to give the support to plus they act like younger people are dumb s**t who dont know what they're talking about but if they didnt then how do they know anymore in 1 year from 17 to 18 it makes no sense at all kids think so i think they should at least be able to put their opinion in at the age of 13 where they understand enough to know what the hell is going on and who makes the decisions in the country but some people are really dumb so i dont really think that can be made possible so at the least it would make more sense for peoples votes to actually be counted instead if how it technically gets ignored right now
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:33 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|