Ceramic/Plastic Knives and Air Travel.

[Cruentus]

Letter opener on planes? I prefer a titanium stylus or three. ;)

The plastic/ceramic knife concern is exactly why people should be allowed to carry what they want in most places. We, the private citizen, are the 1st response to a threat, whether we like it or not. And it isn't us, the law abiding citizen, who is going to tape a CIA letter opener to our bodies to board a plane. And last, before I get off my soapbox, knife laws that restrict length, opening method (switchblade, etc.), material (ceramic or plastic) and so on are completely useless when it comes to preventing crime. If a ban of the sale of plastic/ceramic knives were in effect, people would just make their own. Just look at the clever impliments that our prisoners make from everyday objects right under the noses of authority.

Well the bottom line (then off the soapbox, I swear) is that the key to effective homeland security is empowerment of the everyday citizen.

As to the knife business; yes, it is a fairly sizable business considering how tightly niched the market is. This never ceases to amaze me.

:)

Paul

[arnisador]

I agree that switchblade laws are pretty silly. The article talks about the impact of those laws a fair amount. They were just a reaction to the James Dean image of hooligans of those days.

As for "an armed plane is a polite plane," I'm not so sure about that yet!

[Cruentus]

As for "an armed plane is a polite plane," I'm not so sure about that yet!

Me either. :) But I am still an advocate of all flight attendents having tazer access and access to at least 1 firearm (of a low velocity caliber that isn't likely to penetrate the plane walls) in a locked box with manditory minimal training, and all pilots having firearm access in their cabins with manditory minimal training and a sealed flight cabin.

These people are private citizens who should be given the capabilities of being an adequete 1st responder if there is a threat.

BTW... this isn't just me and my crazy idea's at work. I had discussed this a long time ago on MartialTalk, and people thought I was loonie then. It would appear that security and government agencies have been reading my posts (lol) , because this has been a point of debate and actual consideration.

I'll post the article when I get the chance.

:)

[Cruentus]

Here we go:

http://www.taserconnection.com/content/view/21/1/

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=129937&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=641262&highlight=

This is a really good article here:

http://www.thetravelinsider.info/2004/0206.htm

This one illustrates a United Airlines Plan to install tazers on all it's planes:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1579


So, to be more clear, in some select places like airplanes, I can see the need for some sort of weapon restriction for passangers. But the workers, who are private citizens, should be armed. This would be a much more effective move rather then the panic over things like nailclippers and such.

Also, I am in agreement with the travel insider regarding firearms, but I still see the tazer as a good initial responder. The tazer has to be backed up by lethal force (firearm), however, considering that you can only subdue one opponent with a tazer, among other things.

O.K....thread hijack over. :) (probably worth a seperate discussion, though..)

Paul

[Brian R. VanCise]

Hey Paul,

I am all okay with Flight attendant's having some personal security tools if they undergo rigorous training and can actually use them. (if not forget it)They are generally so busy when walking up an down the aisle's though, that I think they could easily be disarmed by a terrorist who would then be armed with something. (why bring the tool, when you can just take one)

Locked flight cabin's is definately a no brainer. Surprising that someone did not figure that out before 9/11. (oh the Israeli's figured it out)

What is interesting though is that terrorists will probably not try the airline jumbo jet into a building thing in the near future. I could see small private jet's into building's or nuclear power plant's. Needless to say they change their strategies readily so our security forces need to be constantly looking at new ways to protect the public.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com)

[Cruentus]

Hey Paul,

I am all okay with Flight attendant's having some personal security tools if they undergo rigorous training and can actually use them. (if not forget it)They are generally so busy when walking up an down the aisle's though, that I think they could easily be disarmed by a terrorist who would then be armed with something. (why bring the tool, when you can just take one)

I agree that you make a valid point, however it just depends where you are in the arguement. Some would say that it would be better to have nothing at all then to risk someone not responding with the weapon (whether it be a tazer or gun) properly due to insufficient awareness or skills/training. I disagree with that, though. I think a bigger risk is to have nothing at all. With nothing at all, the passangers and staff are left to the mercy of those who would attempt a take over with little available to equalize a threat. With manditory minimal training and weapons kept in a locked but accesssable box, there is at least a chance. With all the elements in place, locked pilot cabin, firearms to back up the tazers, training, a clear force continuum, cooperative passangers willing to stand up to the terrorists, etc., I think there can be a fairly good chance. The risk of a tazer or gun being used against people is no greater then the risk posed from someone willing to take over a plane in the 1st place.



What is interesting though is that terrorists will probably not try the airline jumbo jet into a building thing in the near future. I could see small private jet's into building's or nuclear power plant's. Needless to say they change their strategies readily so our security forces need to be constantly looking at new ways to protect the public.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com)

I agree. I was briefed on this a while ago when I did some federal work; the news doesn't really cover this, but it isn't classified or anything like that. Homeland Security has been keeping an eye on small utility trucks, like small Uhauls and moving trucks and freezer trucks. Basically trucks designed for transporting requiring a class C license, but not a CDL. Based on classified information, there is reason to believe that there was a plan to do a mass attack with multiple trucks like these loaded with explosives; think McVeigh and the Oklahoma tragidy to get an idea of what 1 truck can do.

But, just because the next attempt probably won't involve planes, I am sure you'd agree that it doesn't mean that we should neglect taking affective, low cost security measures at the airport. I would say that at least securing the pilot cabin with a lock and seal, and a pistol would fit under the category of low cost.

Paul

[arnisador]

Split from this thread (http://www.fmatalk.com/showthread.php?t=802).

-Arnisador
-FMAT Admin

[arnisador]

The small truck scenario is scary. They can be anywhere...how does one defend against that?

Securing the planes was necessary, but I agree that we're now fighting the last war as they say. Yet (http://www.bet.com/News/terrorplotairplanes.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&WBCMODE=PresentationUnpublished&Referrer=%7B03CE5360-2620-42CB-AD7E-77E4249C5FB7%7D)...we have this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4778891.stm):


A major terrorist attack, planned by at least 21 people who had plotted to blow up planes flying from Britain to the United States with devices smuggled on board as hand luggage, has been brought to a halt by British police.


The US is deploying extra air marshals to reinforce security on flights between the UK and the US, the head of homeland security has announced.

Secretary Michael Chertoff made the announcement in response to the arrests in Britain of people allegedly plotting to blow up transatlantic flights.


That's from today's news.

[Brian R. VanCise]

Blowing up planes is still on the agenda big time. I do not see them going for building's still with Jumbo Jets. (however you never know) However, I think our airline industries are still very vulnerable to various type's of explosive threats.

Paul,

I would rather have trained professionals working planes and let them handle terrorists. Airline flight attendants just do not form a really good security presence in my mind. (they are simply to busy with other functions) They can be good eyes and ears though and also can and should assist if need be. Sure, pilots should be trained with tactical tools to protect the cabin and the door should be locked to aid them in
this process. I would rather have more security (undercover or otherwise) working airlines to provide adequate protection for the passengers. I would be happy to pay an extra $25 or so for each ticket to have a couple of personel solely designated for security on each airplane. However, knowing how airline administration and security works from working and training with various personel, I doubt that this will happen.

Air Marshall's are still spread way to thin and simply cannot keep up with all of the flights international or otherwise. It would still be a great step to continue to increase air marshal presence both on international and domestic flights.

Unfortunately Airlines are still very vulnerable and probably always will be.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com)

[kabaroan]

Personally, I prefer to see more air marshalls flying the friendly skies. I would also like to see more air line security flying as well...security employed by the airline to handle a situation; someone with the training in proper use of and escalation of force...kubotan/pocket stick; mace/pepper spray; tazer; beanbag shotgun. Teach about locks, holds, disarms, etc.

Now then, that's impractical, we'd never be able to afford flying if we pay for all the security.

I think that the next best solution should be the training of the airline flight crew (pilots to attendants) in the proper use of force (kubotan, pepper spray, tazer, etc) with annual or semi-annual certification.

my two cents...

[Brian R. VanCise]

Personally, I prefer to see more air marshalls flying the friendly skies. I would also like to see more air line security flying as well...security employed by the airline to handle a situation; someone with the training in proper use of and escalation of force...kubotan/pocket stick; mace/pepper spray; tazer; beanbag shotgun. Teach about locks, holds, disarms, etc.

Now then, that's impractical, we'd never be able to afford flying if we pay for all the security.

I think that the next best solution should be the training of the airline flight crew (pilots to attendants) in the proper use of force (kubotan, pepper spray, tazer, etc) with annual or semi-annual certification.

my two cents...

Really an extra $20 per passenger would cover the cost! I personally think that most flights security/safety should be modeled after ElAl airlines. I am not completely against flight attendants having training but once or twice a year, come on. They are so busy doing their regular job that they would probably be unable to function well in a security role. My background in this field also points out that personel that are pushed into a security role that is not what they see themselves as ends up being simply poor security. For good, well trained security more marshals and private airline security. I hate flying because I have no faith in the airlines ability to protect us at this point. Whether it be that they do not check all checked in packages. (reportedly only 10 percent) Or that they do not screen passengers well enough. I have unfortunately very little faith in the major airlines at this point.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com)

[Apollo]

Force all passengers to fly completely naked, then walk through an xray to ensure they aren't "smuggling".

[Brian R. VanCise]

Force all passengers to fly completely naked, then walk through an xray to ensure they aren't "smuggling".

Perfect!

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com)

[arnisador]

Meanwhile, I came across this story in today's paper:
Pa. agency turns banned items into cash

(http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/08/12/agency_sells_passengers_banned_items/)


A man-sized artificial palm tree and a sausage grinder have shared space in a state government warehouse with piles of Swiss Army knives and chain saws -- just a few of the things travelers have had to give up at airport security checkpoints.

[...]

Most of the contraband merchandise is knives, nail clippers and cuticle scissors that were forbidden as carry-on items following the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

[...]

Knives, auctioned by the lot, sell fastest. Ten pounds of assorted pocket knives, for example, recently attracted nine bids and sold for $42.

Some of the 2 1/2 tons of miscellany that arrives every month consists of weapons, potential weapons and squirt guns.

However, the warehouse's current inventory also includes two sombreros, a plaque from a fishing contest in Cayuga Lake, N.Y., a jungle machete and about 100 sets of handcuffs, some fur-lined. At one point, the state had a sausage grinder, a man-sized artificial palm tree and a Christmas ornament decorated with the logo of hot dog purveyor Nathan's Famous.

The picture in my paper included a shot of the machete and fake grenade and toy guns. Also in the picture are two pair of nunchaku and what appear to be two throwing stars.

[arnisador]

Grandma sues Postal Service over fruitcakes (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15264582/?GT1=8618)

Postal clerk allegedly asked if 80-year-old was a terrorist (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15264582/?GT1=8618)



WILMINGTON, Del. - Lucille Greene takes baking and mailing about 30 fruitcakes as Christmas gifts seriously. Seriously enough that the 88-year-old grandmother sued the U.S. Postal Service for emotional distress after accusations of being a terrorist from a postal clerk, according to her federal lawsuit.

In December 2002, Greene showed up at the Magnolia post office to mail fruitcakes to relatives and friends when, her lawsuit says, a postal worker asked her, "What kind of explosives do you have in here?" before shaking the box.

In the lawsuit, Greene said others in the post office laughed at her, leaving her upset and in tears. She said she tripped over a concrete parking barrier outside and fell, breaking her glasses and chipping a tooth.

[arnisador]

A WSJ article on knives (and many other articles) taken from flyers:

Carry-On Items Taken at Airports Find Happy Homes
Machetes Sold Cheap,
Bargains on Box Cutters,
Deals on Louisville Sluggers
(http://www.exectravel.com/showdetail.asp?id=17848)

The print article had pictures of several swords.

[Carol]

I wish I had one of those FAA surplus shops around where I am! :D

[kabaroan]

Speaking of confiscated items...I recall reading where Joe Foss, USMC WW2 Ace and Medal of Honor recipient, and later US Senator, was detained in Pheonix carrying his MOH and a NRA bullet keychain and small pocket knife by the national guard. Foss was enroute to address the graduating class of the USMA, West Point.

I find it inconceivible that the national guard would not know what a Medal of Honor looks like. Sad but true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Foss

[tellner]

The automatic knife laws are stupid, the result of mid 20th century fear-mongering. And yes, people should be allowed to carry small knives on planes.

But if you're trying to figure out how to carry something on the plane illegally, Cruentus, you're conspiring to commit a felony. And if you do it, you are a felon twice over. You belong in jail with the rest of the criminals. Period. End of discussion.

[arnisador]

The automatic knife laws are stupid, the result of mid 20th century fear-mongering.

Agreed. Someone can just carry a fixed blade that's every bit as deadly...let alone that those setting out to cause trouble will carry what they will.

[arnisador]

Busy Travel Puts Pressure on Screeners (http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=104&sid=1296026)



Security screeners at the Newark airport could almost open a department store with all the banned items: nine bottles of wine, three sets of kitchen knives, a replica antique gun, pool cues, golf clubs and baseball bats.


The objects, confiscated from travelers over several recent days, also included martial-arts weapons and a belt with fake bullets.

[arnisador]

But Don't Ditch Steel, Yet (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122110096937922329.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)


Cooks have more options for slicing and dicing these days, as ceramic knives become widely available.


Enthusiasts say the knives have several benefits over steel ones. The blades require less-frequent sharpening and don't rust or stain. They're also lighter than steel knives, which some cooks say makes them easier to handle.


But they have drawbacks, too. You can't pry with them because the blade might snap. Cutting through bone or frozen foods is a no-no, since this can chip the blade. Putting them in the dishwasher also risks chipping the blade or other dishes. And you'll need to take the knives to a professional for sharpening.


In our testing, we found that the knives generally worked well.

[geezer]

But Don't Ditch Steel, Yet (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122110096937922329.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)
Enthusiasts say the knives have several benefits over steel ones. The blades require less-frequent sharpening and don't rust or stain.... And you'll need to take the knives to a professional for sharpening.


In our testing, we found that the knives generally worked well.

Back in my student days in the '70s I studied a bit of Anthropology/Archeology and took up Flint Knapping as a hobby for a bit. A well chipped obsidian or flint blade may be fragile, but is wicked sharp. For a more durable stabbing weapon without much of a blade, sanded bone, ivory or hardwood do just fine. I wonder if airport screeners are on the lookout for "natives" in loincloths carrying chunks of flint who could make their own weapons onboard during the flight? --LOL.

Personally, after 911, I can't imagine anyone ever again trying to highjack a flight again with a knife. First off, he'd never get access to the cockpit, and secondly he'd have to face a hundred or more enraged passengers wielding pens, brief cases, shoes and laptops with the rightious "wrath of god" in their eyes. I would not want to be the highjacker with a boxcutter facing that bunch of "peasants with pitchforks". They'd have to clean up what was left of him with a mop and sponge!!!

[chubbybutdangerous]

Hey Geezer! I didn't know you knew flint knapping?! Hey, maybe you can teach me out to "flint knap" a piece of stone into a springfield XD in .45 acp? Or maybe just a barong!?

[arnisador]

Personally, after 911, I can't imagine anyone ever again trying to highjack a flight again with a knife. First off, he'd never get access to the cockpit, and secondly he'd have to face a hundred or more enraged passengers

Yes, this is my thought too. Now that the passengers know that not stopping the hijacker could mean certain death (as opposed to the old advice to be patient), it'd be much harder!

[Shonin]

What all of those airplanes needed on board was more, not fewer knives in the possession of passengers. By this I mean absolutily no disrespect to all those brave and tragic victims of those terrorist barbarians. What I do mean, is that stupid security measures, put in place by what Jeff Cooper aptly termed "hoplophobes" ultimately get people killed. It is an incontrovertable truth that disarming everyone makes for a much more victim rich environment. That is precisely why those animals chose planes in the first place.

But I do feel so much safer knowing that I will not be attacked with your keychain knife. This is idiotic in the extreme. The ability to own and carry weapons is the premier mark of a free people. Sheep, sheep, everywhere.

[arnisador]

What all of those airplanes needed on board was more, not fewer knives in the possession of passengers.

But remember that the advice pre-9/11 was always to cooperate with the hijackers as that had the best record of getting everyone down on the ground safely. It wasn't an easy call then (though it would have been clear to some of the passengers at least that they were killing flight attendants); it would be now.

[Shonin]

I think I have my facts correct --the first known hijacking to Cuba was one man with a 6 shot revolver taking 230 odd passengers hostage. My comment should be inserted long prior to 9/11 when we started the "cooperate with the terrorists" mindset. Air passengers were already gelded by the government long before then. Once you disarm them, exactly what other options do you have except cooperate?

I am in no way suggesting that any of the victims were doing anything but what they thought they were supposed to do, nor am I suggesting they were being timorous. But they, courtesy of the Feds, had few other options. Every act of cooperation reinforces the terrorist mindset. As Kipling says, "once you pay the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane".

And even though, as you say, it would be clear now what would be happening, there remain even fewer options for anyone wishing to intervene, again courtesy of the Feds.

I live next to DC where they have the same stupid policies about weapons. The thugs are getting weapons and killing citizens. So what should we do -- ah yes, make it more difficult for citizens to get weapons. Now don't we all feel better.

I'm certainly not suggesting that we extend "open carry" of firearms to airplanes. What I am suggesting is that for years this country has had a hoplophobic mindset that "decent" people should not take steps to defend themselves. That is the government's job to do for us. Decent people just to not train with and carry weapons. Moreover, the burden of proof is usually on the one who prevails in a confrontation, regardless of circumstances.

It all started long before 9/11. That tragic day was, in my opinion, the fruit, not the seed.