(08-07-2019 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:45 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Anyone gonna call out "Godwin's Law" here coming from the right? Thoughts?

Not when a candidate is actually wanting to use tactics employed by the Third Reicht against a populus...

Again.. You're probably projecting as do all lefties..

Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

(08-07-2019 11:51 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:45 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Anyone gonna call out "Godwin's Law" here coming from the right? Thoughts?

Not when a candidate is actually wanting to use tactics employed by the Third Reicht against a populus...

Again.. You're probably projecting as do all lefties..

Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

(08-07-2019 12:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:51 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:45 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Anyone gonna call out "Godwin's Law" here coming from the right? Thoughts?

Not when a candidate is actually wanting to use tactics employed by the Third Reicht against a populus...

Again.. You're probably projecting as do all lefties..

Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

(08-07-2019 12:08 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:51 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:45 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Anyone gonna call out "Godwin's Law" here coming from the right? Thoughts?

Not when a candidate is actually wanting to use tactics employed by the Third Reicht against a populus...

Again.. You're probably projecting as do all lefties..

Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

(08-07-2019 12:09 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:08 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:51 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Not when a candidate is actually wanting to use tactics employed by the Third Reicht against a populus...

Again.. You're probably projecting as do all lefties..

Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

(08-07-2019 12:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:09 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:08 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:51 AM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Harris is a garbage candidate and I suggest you read my posts before claiming "lefty" as soon as someone disagrees with you.

That being said, I believe DHS and the TSA were created while "righties" were in power, as was the no-fly list sans due process, so I'm not seeing the moral high ground.

Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

(08-07-2019 12:18 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:09 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:08 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:01 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Didn't say I was taking one.. You're flirting with "whataboutism"...

I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to use tactics employed by a failed regime, but yet will be the first to call others members of that regime.. That is all.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick. There have been plenty of court challenges to those agencies with mixed results at best, and oftentimes as with any federal agency they just do whatever they want anyway..

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

Fully agree with the 2A violation btw.. but I don't doubt Harris would ram this through if President (thank goodness she likely won't be). 4A hasn't been worth much to our government in a very long time.

(08-07-2019 12:21 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:18 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:09 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:08 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism" unless you're unwilling to criticize your own side.. I kind of wish John Oliver hadn't done that segment about it because now (the left mostly) just throws that word out in lieu of refuting an argument.

I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick.

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

(08-07-2019 11:40 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 11:07 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  The Democrats are salivating at the first opportunity they can get to recreate the Gestapo.

Funny the side that accuses another side of being Nazis, is actually using Nazi tactics

Hell, they've been using Nazi tactics. Antifa is the modern left's Sturmabteilung. The only difference is they wear black shirts instead of brown.

(08-07-2019 12:23 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:21 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:18 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:09 PM)gdunn Wrote:  I'm sorry we're talking about Harris and her wanting to confiscate guns, and you bring up TSA, yea that's apples to apples..

See what you did was an example of Godwin's Law, you just don't realize it.

We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick.

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

"Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

(08-07-2019 12:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:23 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:21 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:18 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:10 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  We're talking about Harris wanting to commit a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The agencies I brought up are also blatant violations of the 4th Amendment.

It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick.

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

"Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

(08-07-2019 12:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:23 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:21 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:18 PM)gdunn Wrote:  It's also a violation of the 2nd amendment..

If they were blatant violations of the 4th amendment, why hasn't it been challenged?

You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick.

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

"Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

(08-07-2019 12:35 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:23 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:21 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  You really don't think violations of the Constitution get through all the time? That's kind of Congress and our court system's gimmick.

DHS and the TSA faced little resistance because there was a recent tragedy and people were in an anti-terrorism frenzy. It's a tried and true method of taking people's rights away.

I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

"Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

(08-07-2019 12:39 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:35 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:23 PM)gdunn Wrote:  I might would give you HSA but TSA??? You mad cause you can't take a leaf blower on a plane or nail clippers?

Something had to be done for flights..

"Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgold...00ee182a38

I'm a little busy so I'll look for something more recent later if you insist..

And no, I'm saying there are commercial airline flights every single day that do not go through any TSA screening. I fly them every day in fact. Smaller planes, but still hijackable, much easier in theory in fact.

(08-07-2019 12:47 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:39 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:35 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  "Something has to be done" is also a well worn way to justify taking rights.. hear it from people on the 2A all the time don't we?

TSA is grossly ineffective at actually catching smugglers btw as proven over and over..

Millions of people fly around the country without going through TSA.. just as you'll never get rid of gun violence completely, you'll never get rid of people taking drugs and weapons aboard aircraft completely. I'd rather keep my rights.

I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgold...00ee182a38

I'm a little busy so I'll look for something more recent later if you insist..

And no, I'm saying there are commercial airline flights every single day that do not go through any TSA screening. I fly them every day in fact. Smaller planes, but still hijackable, much easier in theory in fact.

Are there planes that are not hijackable? Please tell me more about this new technology. Sounds 'spensive.

(08-07-2019 12:51 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:47 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:39 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:35 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  I've flown several times in the last year, I always have to go through TSA.. So I don't understand how you've come to that conclusion. Got a link?

As far as the catching of smugglers, again, I haven't heard any news about this, care to share a link?

Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgold...00ee182a38

I'm a little busy so I'll look for something more recent later if you insist..

And no, I'm saying there are commercial airline flights every single day that do not go through any TSA screening. I fly them every day in fact. Smaller planes, but still hijackable, much easier in theory in fact.

Are there planes that are not hijackable? Please tell me more about this new technology. Sounds 'spensive.

No, but some recent measures especially high security cockpit doors are definitely a deterrent on large airliners.

(08-07-2019 01:02 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:51 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:47 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:39 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:35 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Any commercial flight of an airplane under a certain passenger capacity (I don't remember the number off the top of my head but I think roughly 40-50) does not require TSA or any other screening. Neither do corporate flights or private flights. I've been an active commercial pilot for 7 years and not one of my passengers has ever been screened by TSA.

To your 2nd point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-test...d=51022188

Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgold...00ee182a38

I'm a little busy so I'll look for something more recent later if you insist..

And no, I'm saying there are commercial airline flights every single day that do not go through any TSA screening. I fly them every day in fact. Smaller planes, but still hijackable, much easier in theory in fact.

Are there planes that are not hijackable? Please tell me more about this new technology. Sounds 'spensive.

No, but some recent measures especially high security cockpit doors are definitely a deterrent on large airliners.

Agree, during flight. Problem is, they're usually wide open during boarding. There's nothing to say someone couldn't get after then take off. Obviously, the chances of being taken down prior to a successful hijacking increase, but it's not impossible.

Huge difference between an aircraft carrying 500 gallons or less of fuel and one carrying 16,000 gallons or more as well.

(08-07-2019 02:01 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Huge difference between an aircraft carrying 500 gallons or less of fuel and one carrying 16,000 gallons or more as well.

Lots of planes out there with wayyyyy more fuel capacity than that flying without TSA security, but that's actually not really the point. Given we have studies out there showing the ineffectiveness of TSA practices, any would-be terrorist is likely to go the airline route anyway.

What is your opinion on TSA? Do you feel it's a restriction of liberties in exchange for security?

(08-07-2019 01:49 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 01:02 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:51 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:47 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(08-07-2019 12:39 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Ok so you mean for private flights.. I can't attest to them, I fly commercial but always got through the TSA screening..

Also I'm not seeing in that 2 year old article anything relating to smugglers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgold...00ee182a38

I'm a little busy so I'll look for something more recent later if you insist..

And no, I'm saying there are commercial airline flights every single day that do not go through any TSA screening. I fly them every day in fact. Smaller planes, but still hijackable, much easier in theory in fact.

Are there planes that are not hijackable? Please tell me more about this new technology. Sounds 'spensive.

No, but some recent measures especially high security cockpit doors are definitely a deterrent on large airliners.

Agree, during flight. Problem is, they're usually wide open during boarding. There's nothing to say someone couldn't get after then take off. Obviously, the chances of being taken down prior to a successful hijacking increase, but it's not impossible.

Nothing is 100% bulletproof, but that seems like a pretty easy common sense method to decrease the odds. Many of the planes I was referring to in the quoted post have no doors at all.