It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Would putting military police officers on every plane give people an ease of mind from hijackings

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:04 PM
Wouldn't putting police officers/federal agents,military (armed of course), on planes with people, make them feel safer from possible hijackings??? With the recent threats from the taliban, Wouldn't the taliban be alittle more afraid?? I geuss they would not care since they got bombs. But wouldn't havent police officers on planes make it harder for terrorists to get into airports.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by Maddogkull]

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Maddogkull
But wouldn't havent police officers on planes make it harder for terrorists to get into airports.

No it won't. There is no correlation between having armed officers on planes and who gets into the airport and through security.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:13 PM
Sorry I wrote that wrong. I meant by the fact that they would have to pass screening at the airport then when they get to there individual planes, the armed force members, would search them again, but more thoroughly. If the government is in on the bombing, I geuss if wouldn't even matter.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by Maddogkull

What if the officers turn out to be the terrorists? Then you just let a fully armed and armored terrorist on to a plane.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:17 PM
Ah, so you're wondering about whether double checking (both at the gate and then again at the plane) would be a deterrent?

Aside from the nightmare logistics of that, I suppose if a terrorist were to actually have something on their person, that could be found and determined to be a threat, than this hypothetical would work. But, who wears a bomb on a plane? In fact, as we've experience, the plane itself could be the weapon, right? How to defend against a terrorist take-over of the plane and preventing them from gaining access to the flight deck would be a question to explore...

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:21 PM
With the armed forces having automatic weapons the terrorists can really do anything. As for the officers being terrorrists, well thats a problem we must deal with at the time

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:23 PM
No, it wouldn't because there is no threat of hijackings. Less than .01% of all flights have ever been hijacked. Even less have ended in death.

The only thing that will ease people's minds is for the MSM to quit fearmongering and ramming the idea that all planes will be hijacked.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:28 PM
I would agree with the consensus so far that NO it would ease fears. Very good reasons have already been stated that I agree with.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 05:02 PM
The sad truth is, airport security is little more than a dog-and-pony show to make travelers feel safer, and to scare off less dedicated terrorists.

A true Islamic martyr wouldn't fear an armed guard any more than he'd fear flying an airplane into a building. He's not there to survive the attack; he's there to die, taking with him as many infidels as possible. By dying in this way, he automatically goes to paradise without having to face Allah's judgement. He can't lose, according to his beliefs.

As for the security itself, it is pathetic. Sure, they X-ray your stuff and maybe make you take off your shoes. They make you pass through a metal detector. Great, except there are plenty of weapons that will pass right through a metal detector, and that wouldn't look worrisome in an X-ray. Also, the checking itself isn't very thorough.

Not long ago, I had to fly. I had a beard at the time, and looked kind of scary. So yes, each time I went through security they "randomly" had me take off my shoes, just in case I had a bomb in there. Lucky for me, I didn't bring one with me, so I passed all the checks.

When I got home and was unpacking, I discovered that my carry-on bag had a half-dozen Exacto knife blades in the bottom. They had fallen out of their container and into the carry-on, where I couldn't readily see them. Six blades. True, those blades make a poor weapon without a handle (and not such a great one even with the handle). Even so, had they been caught during the X-rays, I'd have been in some trouble. I should never have been able to get through security, but I did - in *spite* of them checking my shoes for explosives.

This is not such an unusual occurrence. I am constantly seeing articles about failures at airport security points, people getting through with bomb parts and what-not. These people are sent through just to check how well the security works. It doesn't work well.

Another thing to think about. If a terrorist wants to kill a bunch of people, he doesn't need to do it on an airplane. Before a flight, there are hundreds of people all gathered around the security point, trying to pass through and get on the plane. All a terrorist has to do is blow himself up in the middle of that crowd. He takes out just about the same number of people, plus he gets a couple of security guards.

Airport security isn't about protecting the passengers. It's about protecting the airplanes. Those suckers are expensive. Travelers aren't any safer as a result of security checks. Only the planes are.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 04:02 AM
Perhaps, but it's really not worth the money. I honestly doubt there are many people who would fly more if they weren't too scared of terrorists and other hijackers.

TLDR; military police has better things to do, it's not a very big problem anyway, and keeping another crew member on each flight cuts into an already narrow profit margin.

new topics

top topics


log in