Well said llamas and Capt.Crosswind.
KISS (keep it simple stupid) this isn't about the latest in gun technology and image but the basic requirement to add another layer of defense without overwhelming the present duties and responsibilities of the pilots. Every air force officer in the past 50+ years has had basic training and proficiency checks using the humble .38, and carried them on board his or her aircraft. The naysayers in the arming of the pilot’s seem to think that we have to be trained as counterterrorism experts, whereas basic, safe gun handling and proficiency is all that is required. An armed pilot will not leave the flight deck in pursuit of bad guys in the back, but fortify the flight deck so as to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP.
Drawing from the many threads on security, arming, pilot decisions regarding safety issues on board the aircraft etc., there appears to be a common thread from the naysayer:
-piloting is about glamour and pay
-computers can fly the airplane anyway
-someone can fly the aircraft from the ground
-a gun would just boost a pilot’s ego
I do not mean to discredit naysayers whom are pilots, as I stated earlier this is about a balanced debate. As there are many reasons to arm the flight deck there are equal reasons not to arm it. What I will vehemently defend is our professionalism, responsibility, authority and the fact that yes; a pilot can be trained to handle a simple tool such as a firearm.
The recent release of the actions taken on the AA flight with the shoe-bomber give vivid and chilling detail of what the crew of a flight can encounter (congratulations to the entire crew on a job well done). At the crew level, we will study this scenario and train for it in the years to come, the same as when wind shear was first identified. We identify problems; prepare solutions and prevention strategies then train, train and train. Anyone who believes you can leave this to a computer should stick their head back into their Buck Rogers comic book and enjoy their take on reality.
As some may have astutely observed, an armed flight deck would not have helped in the case of the shoe bomber. However, an armed flight deck armed with pertinent intelligence (which was out there and known by the FBI and other security agencies), up to-date threat training and re-stated positions of authority and responsibility would be a big step in hi-jack /aircraft threat prevention.
Everything is at the political level at this point (this includes the unions which in my view are as politically charged and inept as our federal masters).
In the meantime, the crews will continue to relinquish their shoes and finger nail clippers at screening in the interest of "aviation security".