Some folks seem to be forgetting that a tiny sharp object is still likely to get through airport security no matter how tight the screening surely? I mean, are we going to take our security measures to the stage of strip searching before being allowed to take a seat on board an aircraft? One can never be 100% safe just from increased airport security. It comes down to money at the end of the day like it always has done. Increased security at the airport means longer getting through security, delays, increased costs for the airline and the authorities and ultimately less passengers and less airlines in operation.
I must admit I haven't read all of this thread as it's 12 pages long! But I have read a few posts from the last couple of pages and some in between and in my view Earl had some good points as do the anti-gun side obviously.
I believe after talking to pilots in the US about this very issue in some depth that having pilots carry some form of self defence weapon has to be a good idea as a deterent against hijacking by terrorist organisations.
If the terrorists know that they'll get a bullet in the head as soon as they enter the flight deck before they have time to achieve another 911 then would they bother hijacking another aircraft ever again? Would seem very pointless to me but then again who knows how their heads work.
An armed pilot sat behind the flight deck door flying the aircraft has in the unlikely event that all security measures have failed, the last chance, end of the chain, buck stops here card in his hand - a gun. The fact that 99.9999% of flights he/she would never even need to get it out of it's holster is enough for me to realise that the arguments over the safety of having it aboard are for the most part redundant. One has to point out the bleedin' obvious here and say that the guys flying the AA flights on 911 would have wanted one would they not? Sorry to put it so blunt.
It really is a blunt deterent/message against having some nutter forcing their way into the flight deck and take control of the aircraft. To look the other way and shout "no guns please, we're British" to me sounds like some form of denial is going on.
Changes most definately need to be made to security in the airports first, I would not deny that for one second. These improvements need to be made now. But at the end of the day the responsibility for a flight will, as it always has done, land at the Captains feet.
It would sound a good idea to make it a Captain decision whether to carry a gun or not but if they're to be stored in a locked safe in the cockpit then this isn't possible is it?
VFE.
Last edited by VFE; 22nd May 2003 at 00:33.