4 ms·

It wouldn't be hard at all to sneak a few bullets on a plane. Have you flown recently? At many airports they try to force everyone through the body scanners, bu

by Jach 14y ago

It wouldn't be hard at all to sneak a few bullets on a plane. Have you flown recently? At many airports they try to force everyone through the body scanners, but if you refuse, you bypass both the body scanner and the metal detector and get a non-invasive patdown that wouldn't be sufficient to find a couple .22 bullets. The harder part would be assembling and loading the thing once you're on the plane without someone noticing.

b6 14y ago
I don't think it's true that opting out always bypasses the metal detector. I preemptively opt out every time I fly, and I think only once did they take me around the metal detector. I remember it because I was so surprised.
reeses 14y ago
In that situation, a simple zip gun would probably meet your needs and be easier to conceal, carry, and assemble, than something with so many pieces. "What, my big cigar holder, little cigar holder, tie tack, and rubber band around these legal briefs are a problem?"
- Pinckney 14y ago
  What do you think somebody could do with a zip gun on a plane?
  - bmelton 14y ago
    Shoot someone with bullets? Perhaps you're thinking of a zip gun as something that shoots rubber bands, but what you'd do is fashion a firing pin out of the smaller cigar holder and plunge it into the larger cigar holder to make the bullet come out the other end, or any variation on those mechanics. Edit: http://www.howtomakeonline.org/IYUgBMoneysA7DfH/MACEs-Homemade-Zip-Gun-22LR-22Short.html http://www.howtomakeonline.org/IYUgBMoneysA7DfH/MACEs-Homema...
    - Pinckney 14y ago
      No, I got that. What I'm saying is that this doesn't really matter. Cockpit doors lock now, and waving a gun isn't going to make the pilots open them. If terrorists just want to shoot somebody, there's no reason for them to bother getting on an airplane. The most such an attacker could hope to accomplish would be to take someone hostage and negotiate over intercom for the plane to land at a different airport, the way hijackings used to work. This is undesirable, but not a threat of nearly the same magnitude as the 9/11 attacks. It barely even makes the news when it happens. In any case, the hijacker's game is up the moment they actually shoot anybody, as their zip gun is almost certainly difficult and slow to reload, and they will be trapped in close quarters with scores of angry and frightened passengers. With this in mind, they'll almost certainly have better luck producing realistic looking fake guns. A submachine gun, even a fake one, is more likely to scare passengers into cooperating, and that cooperation is what gives them a chance to succeed.
      - bmelton 14y ago
        Ah. Sorry, I was thinking the reference to the rubber band might have thrown you off, as it originally did me. Fair point.
      - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
        >"The most such an attacker could hope to accomplish [...]" // I think you're lacking imagination there. "If pressure was lost at that altitude, everyone aboard would have been incapacitated almost immediately. Autopsies will tell if they died before the crash or from the impact." http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/golf/stewart/stewfs05.htm http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/golf/stewart/stewfs05.... It seems like a rapid/explosive depressurisation event would be possible to create from inside the cabin with an explosive weapon. I'm not saying that's going to down the aircraft but it seems it would create more of an incident than your imagined scenario.
        Pinckney 14y ago
        Bullets shouldn't be sufficient to produce even rapid, much less explosive decompression. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontrolled_decompression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontrolled_decompression The pilots should have time to don oxygen masks unless pressure is lost very rapidly at very high altitude. I'm doubtful that just shooting the plane is an effective way to accomplish this.
  - reeses 14y ago
    Why would you be on the plane? This is getting it through security. Get enough of them through security and one can eliminate security. What happens next is no longer constrained by "what one can get through security." But to answer your question more directly, an airplane is one of the few places where a zip gun could actually be effective as a firearm. The cockpit door is fortified. Is the galley bulkhead or the wall of the lavatory? What about that period of time when one of the pilots has to use the lavatory and the 5'2" FA is guarding the front of the plane during egress and ingress? At that point you're relying on human tissue to prevent access to the cockpit.

by Jach 14y ago

b6 14y ago

I don't think it's true that opting out always bypasses the metal detector. I preemptively opt out every time I fly, and I think only once did they take me around the metal detector. I remember it because I was so surprised.

reeses 14y ago

In that situation, a simple zip gun would probably meet your needs and be easier to conceal, carry, and assemble, than something with so many pieces. "What, my big cigar holder, little cigar holder, tie tack, and rubber band around these legal briefs are a problem?"

Pinckney 14y ago
What do you think somebody could do with a zip gun on a plane?
- bmelton 14y ago
  Shoot someone with bullets? Perhaps you're thinking of a zip gun as something that shoots rubber bands, but what you'd do is fashion a firing pin out of the smaller cigar holder and plunge it into the larger cigar holder to make the bullet come out the other end, or any variation on those mechanics. Edit: http://www.howtomakeonline.org/IYUgBMoneysA7DfH/MACEs-Homemade-Zip-Gun-22LR-22Short.html http://www.howtomakeonline.org/IYUgBMoneysA7DfH/MACEs-Homema...
  - Pinckney 14y ago
    No, I got that. What I'm saying is that this doesn't really matter. Cockpit doors lock now, and waving a gun isn't going to make the pilots open them. If terrorists just want to shoot somebody, there's no reason for them to bother getting on an airplane. The most such an attacker could hope to accomplish would be to take someone hostage and negotiate over intercom for the plane to land at a different airport, the way hijackings used to work. This is undesirable, but not a threat of nearly the same magnitude as the 9/11 attacks. It barely even makes the news when it happens. In any case, the hijacker's game is up the moment they actually shoot anybody, as their zip gun is almost certainly difficult and slow to reload, and they will be trapped in close quarters with scores of angry and frightened passengers. With this in mind, they'll almost certainly have better luck producing realistic looking fake guns. A submachine gun, even a fake one, is more likely to scare passengers into cooperating, and that cooperation is what gives them a chance to succeed.
    - bmelton 14y ago
      Ah. Sorry, I was thinking the reference to the rubber band might have thrown you off, as it originally did me. Fair point.
    - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
      >"The most such an attacker could hope to accomplish [...]" // I think you're lacking imagination there. "If pressure was lost at that altitude, everyone aboard would have been incapacitated almost immediately. Autopsies will tell if they died before the crash or from the impact." http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/golf/stewart/stewfs05.htm http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/golf/stewart/stewfs05.... It seems like a rapid/explosive depressurisation event would be possible to create from inside the cabin with an explosive weapon. I'm not saying that's going to down the aircraft but it seems it would create more of an incident than your imagined scenario.
      - Pinckney 14y ago
        Bullets shouldn't be sufficient to produce even rapid, much less explosive decompression. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontrolled_decompression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontrolled_decompression The pilots should have time to don oxygen masks unless pressure is lost very rapidly at very high altitude. I'm doubtful that just shooting the plane is an effective way to accomplish this.
- reeses 14y ago
  Why would you be on the plane? This is getting it through security. Get enough of them through security and one can eliminate security. What happens next is no longer constrained by "what one can get through security." But to answer your question more directly, an airplane is one of the few places where a zip gun could actually be effective as a firearm. The cockpit door is fortified. Is the galley bulkhead or the wall of the lavatory? What about that period of time when one of the pilots has to use the lavatory and the 5'2" FA is guarding the front of the plane during egress and ingress? At that point you're relying on human tissue to prevent access to the cockpit.