Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Executive Protection, A Crock Of ..  
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5689 posts, RR: 44
Posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1233 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

.. or is it just the hubris of the rich and powerful.

A series airing here in Australia at the moment called Dangerous Drives, tonights episode is about "executive protection", the vehicles and techniques used to protect the VIP "principals"
One of the highlighted operations is a company called Delta One and their client, a property tycoon, in South Africa. The episode focuses on the driving techniques, vehicle armour etc and the measures they might take like ramming a cyclist who, most likely just stopped too close at a traffic light.
All this attention to threats yet the principal, his wife and three children all sit unrestrained in the back seat, the toddlers on the parents laps(and at times held by the older child). How does that make sense?
A simple driver error or a deliberate ramming by a medium truck will have the vehicle off the road and the occupants just as dead as an explosion or machine gun attack.

Perhaps nothing was learned from the Diana & Dodi fiasco in Paris.


If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3967 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1192 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It's a valid point, but at the same time, in certain situations, seat belts are considered an impediment to a quick exit from a vehicle. What is the bigger risk? That the car might roll over a few times and toss its passengers around, or that the car might come under attack, be stranded, and have to be evacuated as fast as possible...

[Edited 2013-01-20 04:07:30]


I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3910 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1143 times:

The example yu give, South Africa, makes a difference to the context - have you ever driven around South Africa? I have, Ive been carjacked three times, shot once and had another three attempts.

And I'm a basic joe.

South Africa is a world apart when it comes to personal protection.


User currently offlineswissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1063 times:

Quoting moo (Reply 2):
The example yu give, South Africa, makes a difference to the context - have you ever driven around South Africa? I have, Ive been carjacked three times, shot once and had another three attempts.

And I'm a basic joe.

South Africa is a world apart when it comes to personal protection.

Never was there and have no desire to go there... Our neighbour is a plumper by trade and he just left his home country South Africa because of severe safety concerns for his wife and kids... has been robbed to many times, some of the stuff is quite shocking. He prefers to freeze his bu.. off over the bs down there any day.

Cheerios,


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21442 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1063 times:

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 1):
It's a valid point, but at the same time, in certain situations, seat belts are considered an impediment to a quick exit from a vehicle. What is the bigger risk? That the car might roll over a few times and toss its passengers around, or that the car might come under attack, be stranded, and have to be evacuated as fast as possible...

No, the biggest risk is a crash, or even just a sharp deceleration to avoid one, which would already send the passengers flying.

Not using a seat belt in a moving car is utterly stupid and reckless.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6591 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1025 times:

Besides unless you also have an armed escort of several vehicles I doubt getting out of an attacked car is a good idea.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12464 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 910 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 1):
It's a valid point, but at the same time, in certain situations, seat belts are considered an impediment to a quick exit from a vehicle.

Which circumstances?

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 1):
What is the bigger risk? That the car might roll over a few times and toss its passengers around, or that the car might come under attack, be stranded, and have to be evacuated as fast as possible...

I can guarantee the evacuation decision-making process will take longer than the time required to undo a seat belt. Plus, the evacuation will be significantly hampered if the occupants have been injured because they weren't wearing seatbelts.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
Not using a seat belt in a moving car is utterly stupid and reckless.

It is.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
Besides unless you also have an armed escort of several vehicles I doubt getting out of an attacked car is a good idea.

Indeed.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13073 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 888 times:

Politicians are the same too. About 6 years ago, the then Governor of New Jersey (and later financial crook with MF Global) Jon Corzine got seriously injured when his SUV/official vehicle, operated at well over (90 MPH/150 KMH) on the Garden State Parkway where the speed limit of I think 60 MPH (100 KMH) when his State Police Officer driver hit a slower car/light truck causing a serious accident. He was not wearing his seat belt and was in the hospital for several weeks due to those injuries. It also changed the policies of operations of the Governor's vehicles that they were to obey the speed limit and all passengers in such vehicles have to wear seat belts per the state law. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265741,00.html

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
EU Pushes For Protection Of Food Names posted Wed Sep 10 2003 19:42:43 by Travelin man
Other US Industries In Need Of Protection. posted Thu Mar 7 2002 10:48:51 by Eal401
Story Of Manti Te'o Dead Girlfriend A Hoax posted Wed Jan 16 2013 23:27:04 by mke717spotter
City Of Phoenix To Stop Buying LNG Transit Buses posted Tue Jan 15 2013 19:50:59 by 1337Delta764
Surprising Reveal Of The Next-Gen Ford F-150 Truck posted Tue Jan 15 2013 15:01:13 by stasisLAX
Al-Q Militants Post Pics Of French Commando Chief posted Mon Jan 14 2013 06:44:05 by MadameConcorde
We Are Raising A Generation Of Narcissists posted Wed Jan 9 2013 10:05:29 by Starbuk7
What Kind Of TV Do You Have? posted Sat Jan 5 2013 07:28:05 by RussianJet
Ever Wonder What Two Feet Of Snow Looks Like? posted Wed Jan 2 2013 22:41:38 by Geezer
State Of Pennsylvania Suing The Ncaa posted Wed Jan 2 2013 09:33:02 by JetBlueGuy2006