Who knows ? If you think about the scenario for a little bit longer than the
average NRA-propagandist, you'll realize that there are way too many
variables in that thought-experiment for anyone to give a meaningful answer.

And not only is this thread rapidly departing from any scuba-related topic,
it also has all the characteristics of the sort of "discussion" that leads
to a 10-day competition for the best analogy, so I'll decline the invitation
to play.

Bjorn

----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Kelly Cunningham" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 08:56
Subject: Re: [SCUBA-SE] Travel to Cozumel


> Bjorn Vang Jensen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Chuck wrote:
> >
> > > Well we are speaking hypothetically. the point is that weapons of a
sort
> > > are available easily after you get past security.
> >
> > Of course they are. Some people are weapons in themselves. But the point
is
> > that the fact that you COULD do damage with something on the plane
should
> > not mean that we should make it easier by letting people bring their own
> > weapons. With that logic, we should allow people to hand-carry AK-47s,
so
> > long as they aren't loaded...
>
> How far do you think the Bad Guys of 9/11 would've gotten if everyone on
the 'planes had been armed?
>
> -- kc
>