American citizen hijacks small plane . . . killed by legal gun owner

On one hand the report states "The hijacker was fatally shot in the chest by a passenger who had a licensed firearm, police said."
And then goes on to report "It is not yet clear how the hijacker was able to get on the plane with a knife, police said."

Together they imply either there would have been no issue with boarding with a knife if it had been "licensed" or that there should have been questions about how the passenger was able to board with a firearm.

"The suspect was refused entry to the country over the weekend and officials are investigating how he was able to get in, according to police."

Hmm.
 
Even in the United States often no searches are conducted for scheduled flights on smaller aircraft like Cessna Caravans. My guess is that the police were not thinking about the logical implications of their statement.

I gather that permits to carry a gun are very much attainable in Belize. One could parse out whether having a licensed gun meant this individual could carry it on a Caravan conducting a scheduled flight. Or perhaps the armed passenger was allowed to bypass security for various reasons -- that is an option for some in the US of course for various reasons.

Though the likelihood is that they are disinclined to target the guy who saved everyone, this is not in the US after all.
 
Which illustrates why the law banning carriage of firearms onto airplanes in the first place was likely negative in its effects. Those may include the increase in hijackings in the late 60s (which starting decreasing prior to mandatory metal detectors btw).

So far as I can tell there was never any serious debate about the constitutional implications of that clause of the law. It was just included as part of one large bill which federalized all sorts of crimes in the air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top