It's not the PC politicians and security agency chiefs that put their ass on the line everyday. They sit in their safe offices very detached from the reality situation. After all, these are the same people responsible the mess we're in now.
I say again. I don't need to be a marksman to hit an intruder trying to break through a reinforced door at 4 feet, especially with warning. With a moderate training program in weapon handling and ROE, pilots could be taught to handle weapons, especially since many are already familiar. I dare say that a single hit to any part of the body would significantly slow the breaching process. The second hit would most likely stop it altogether.
A jam? In the very unlikely event of a jam, there's another weapon instantly available from the other pilot. Any weapon is only most effective when warning time is available -- that is what the reinforced door does -- it buys time. When the time is up, the door is breached and you're facing down determined terrorists, what do you want to be holding, a .40 cal. or your d**k?
In case you're not informed, Mr. Magaw, head of the TSA, is a former BATF type and is fevently anti-gun. I guess as long as his butt isn't in the sling everyday, it's easy to hold his opinion. Further, if lethal cockpit defense is such a bad idea why haven't they even tried to explain and give their reasoning behind their ruling, aside from "we don't support it." The reason is THEY DON'T HAVE ANY LOGICAL REASONS EXCEPT THAT THE ATA AND ANTI-GUN LOBBY ARE AGAINST IT.
These guys are betting with our lives that 9/11 won't happen again. Gross buffonery comes to mind as a pertinent descriptions.
I'M SURE 9/11 WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH WORSE HAD THE COCKPIT HAD LETHAL DEFENSE.