Fox's Andrew Napolitano: "If the feds had not stripped us" of gun rights, "9-11 would never have happened"

Fox's Andrew Napolitano: "If the feds had not stripped us" of gun rights, "9-11 would never have happened"

Right, yeronner.

'Cause, as we all know, the way to stop a hijacking is for all passengers to discharge firearms in pressurized aircraft at 30,000 feet . . .

Yeah, the folks in New York City could have shot those planes out of the sky with their six-shooters and rifles. What the HELL! I'm so sick of these people. They tell lie after lie after lie and their ridiculously unquestioning audience BELIEVES them.

Bill O'Reilly was railing on a cartoon on the NPR website the other night and the guy is getting HATE MAIL from O'Reilly's robots. Fairliberal, did you write one of 'em?

Bearing arms on commercial airlines?

How is that even workable?

I just wish we would have an honest discussion in this country about terrorism. I do not know if there is a politician, including President Obama, who have the ability to lead it though.
We need a "reset" on our expectations. The system will never be 100%...never. But that does not mean that we should be afraid or live in bunkers. This fearful state is the playground of demogouges, and idiots.

This is so funny. Back before the Troglodytes took over the media, there was a show called All in the Family, which most of you will remember. On one episode, Archie Bunker got the opportunity to do a short editorial comment on the TV News. His topic was how to stop hijackings. He suggested arming all the passengers.

Of course, that was done for laughs; Now we've come full circle. See, Archie was a caricature of a conservative, but to the modern day Troglodyte, he's a role model.

Are you kidding me? Did he forget that before 9/11 we had hijackers like crazy? If we have guns on planes, we are likely to have more violence, not less. The Wild West makes for great movies, but you wouldn't want to live there.

Stripped us of gun rights? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I think we're getting the best of the judges common sense, here. Just think if all those terrorists would have known that most of the passengers on those planes were packing heat. They would have thought twice before bringing on box cutters, I'll bet.

Yes, that's what would have prevented 9/11: people shooting at one another in a small pressurized cabin. Flippin' brilliant.

I'll go one step further. If more guns means less crime, then let's just hand out guns to passengers along with their copies of SkyMall and crappy headphones. Sure, occasionally some passengers will threaten flight attendants if they refuse to serve another bloody mary, but that's a small price to pay for the added security that comes with equipping every passenger with lethal force.

I fully agree with the Judge. The government has taken away far too much of my freedom. Who is the state to claim that I can't smoke a cigarette while I'm refilling my car at the gas station? And why can't I bring my revolver with me when I'm undergoing surgery? For goodness sake, when my life is in someone else's hands the only way to level the playing field is and make sure that the surgeon isn't making mistakes is to keep the doctor in my crosshairs! Who else is going to protect me in that situation -- the nanny state government? No thanks, liberals!

Fox's Andrew Napolitano: "If the feds had not stripped us" of gun rights, "9-11 would never have happened"

That's what we need. Everyone carrying arms like the old west. Well if you believe that "arms" cannot be regulated, then why can't I bring biological, nuclear, artillery or even a bomb on a plane then? We are just taking this argument to its logical conclusion, right? Anything to stop that would be infringing on my unfettered "right to bear arms".

Because nothing stops a hijacking like a bullet through the pressurized fuselage of a plane cruising at 30,000 feet.

OH YES!
OH YES!
Give everyone a gun! To protect us as we fly the Friendly Skys!
WE need more GUNS to remove Office employees, More Blue collar work place Killings ,School Massacres are way down,Drive by Shooting of innocent children,and let me not forget Thanksgiving day murder by gun!

Happiness (is a warm gun)
Bang Bang Shoot Shoot
Happiness (is a warm gun, momma)
Bang Bang Shoot Shoot
(When I hold you in my arms)
Oooooooooh, oh yeah!
And when I feel my finger on your trigger
Oooooooooh, oh yeah!
I know nobody can do me no harm
Oooooooooh, oh yeah!
Happiness (is a warm gun, momma)
Bang Bang Shoot Shoot
(lennon mccartney)

"Cockpit doors are now like bank vaults" because, after 9/11, the FAA (that's the GOVERNMENT YOU RUBE, not the PRIVATE SECTOR) required all cockpit doors and framing on about 7,000 domestic aircraft to be replaced with a tougher access system by April of 2003.

Some of the comments to this post are interesting.

But they seem to miss the point.

When did "the feds strip us of gun right" ???

Why is this sort of nonsense allowed to be aired on a "news" channel?

To paraphrase Roger Rabbit: "How's that [idiot] ever get to be a judge?"

Actually the big bad government did the whole airline screening, cockpit doors and sky marshalls. And the private sector consistently resisted those things.

If he's so interested in having his (phallic) gun, why not move to Somalia? I understand there aren't as many gun laws there!

Huh??? When was I stripped of my gun rights? And just how could have 9/11 been prevented if there were even more guns around???

Now, I'm not a member of the TSA, nor have I ever worked security for an airline, or an airport, but I'm pretty sure loaded weapons have never been allowed in the cabins of aircraft, so I'm not too sure what "rights" the good Judge here is talking about. Sure, you can pack your weapon, check it, and it can be on the plane then (after you declare it, oh, and make sure it's unloaded). You can't just carry a gun on a plane, and I'm pretty sure you've never been able to do that. Ever. OK, maybe in the early days of air travel, but I digress.

Oh, and shooting out the windows of a plane, or putting holes in the body with bullets, won't decompress the plane. If an entire window goes missing, yes, but even if you put say, 12 holes in one with a gun, it ain't happening. Just saying.

So, what really DOES happen when you put a few bullet holes through the skin of a jetliner at altitude.

Noting much, actually.

I guess all you people making snarky comments about shooting holes in airliners missed the MythBusters episode where they demonstrated that nothing much happens.

Jeebus! Don't they teach physics in schools anymore?

They even shot a window. It made a nice little hole in the plastic. That's about it. Really, you could patch the holes with duct tape and get the cabin back up to pressure in no time.

DO NOT INFER FOR AN INSTANT that I support or endorse the batcrap crazy of Napolitano. I don't. There are many very good reasons why you shouldn't be shooting off guns in a jet in flight.

Causing explosive decompression and crashing the jet is not one of them. It just won't happen.

Cue the "Well, the MythBusters are WRONG because..." comments from all the Internet Tough Guys in 3...2...1...

the "judge" has us on a technicality; If the passengers had guns, when the hijackers made their move the bullets would have stopped them and destroyed the planes. Thus you'd have 4 destroyed planes but not destroyed twin towers. The intended dramatic terror of crashing into buildings would have been foiled by the passengers, even though it lead to their own destruction. So, we'd still have a disaster but a different one. So, he is probably right that 9/11 "would never have happened" if he is referring to the specific events.

This demonstrates to me the way that conservatives think: Americans killed by others = Bad. Americans killed by each other = Constitutional Right.

What gun rights did we lose before 9/11? That statement makes no sense.

Yes but if people could carry weapons onto airplanes, which is what he seems to be suggesting, then what's to stop the hijackers from doing the same?

I mean, if they're labeled as potential hijackers then they aren't allowed on a plane at all. If they're cleared however, then they're just passengers and would have a right to be armed also.

They used box cutters because it was slightly more "armed" than the rest of the passengers. If passengers were carrying handguns, then they would have found some way to be slightly more heavily armed than the passengers, and then we'd have a massive shootout.

Another great recommendation from the insane right wing fringe.

Wasn't the plane decompression-by-gunshot myth debunked on Mythbusters some time ago?

I'm not a physicist; that's why I'm hoping someone here can point me to a resource that supports the seemingly alluded to postulation regarding the decompression-by-gunshot scenario.

Thanks.

Sorry if my other post was already added (the site offered no sort of verification and my post is not present), but I was just wondering if there was any sources out there to back up the explosive decompression scenario to which it has seemingly been alluded in these comments.