ALPA to Ask for Cockpit Guns - CNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you use a gas there are a couple of problems:
a) it would have to be EXTREMELY quick - or you have a dead flight crew.
b) if someone bursts in and you set off the gas then you have one sleeping flight crew as well, they wouldnt have time to put on their masks (which would presumably be provided), if a) holds true.
Think stun guns are the best idea I have seen put forward on here.
Julian.
a) it would have to be EXTREMELY quick - or you have a dead flight crew.
b) if someone bursts in and you set off the gas then you have one sleeping flight crew as well, they wouldnt have time to put on their masks (which would presumably be provided), if a) holds true.
Think stun guns are the best idea I have seen put forward on here.
Julian.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviator - Lethal defense for the purpose to "deter" terrorist? No, just as last ditch cockpit defense to kill them when they try and break the cockpit door down and commandeer the aircraft. No door is unbreakable, but a hardened door would provide time and prevent the cockpit crew from being surprised. It give them time to draw weapons, form a hasty plan, and defend the cockpit.
Tuckunder - Training is an issue, but a majority of major airline pilots in the US are from military backgrounds and have small arms training already. If a pilot is so incompetent as to be unable be trained to handle a simple handgun with frangible ammunition, I've got serious questions about his ability to command or fly an aircraft as well. We're not trying to defend the prime minister against a varity of threats from any direction, just that 2 foot wide opening to the cockpit. If someone's trying to smash down the cockpit door, I've got a pretty good idea they ain't tryin' to bring us coffee.
Julian - Any weapons should be considered aircraft equipment and locked in a quick access safe at each pilot position. In practicality, they'd never be touched except for an amourer (for routine mx) or the crew in an extreme emergency. There could even be a dead drop through the floor, if for some reason, there needed to be an emergency disposal method.
Abnormal Law - "Pommy"? - I've spent a lot of time in the UK, but haven't heard that one before. Please translate into "American."
But then again, maybe you still think I'm just a Hollywood-brainwashed, kill-crazed, Bruce Willis wannabe gun-nutter. But when YOU'RE in that airplane making a cell phone call to your wife to say a final goodby, like many in our hijacked aircraft did, I'll bet you'd change your mind obout providing the pilots with a last-ditch lethal defense.
I understand most Englishmen's aversion to weapons, but I live out here in "wild west" were almost everyone has some type of firearm. We have a remarkable polite society out here, with no memory of any murders via firearm. We view them as respected tools, and consider self-defense and the defense of others as a personal responsibility, as well as that of the Sheriff and Municipal police. Not using all means available to defend yourself and others when faced with a clear and present threat is immoral, IMHO.
[ 26 September 2001: Message edited by: Roadtrip ]
Tuckunder - Training is an issue, but a majority of major airline pilots in the US are from military backgrounds and have small arms training already. If a pilot is so incompetent as to be unable be trained to handle a simple handgun with frangible ammunition, I've got serious questions about his ability to command or fly an aircraft as well. We're not trying to defend the prime minister against a varity of threats from any direction, just that 2 foot wide opening to the cockpit. If someone's trying to smash down the cockpit door, I've got a pretty good idea they ain't tryin' to bring us coffee.
Julian - Any weapons should be considered aircraft equipment and locked in a quick access safe at each pilot position. In practicality, they'd never be touched except for an amourer (for routine mx) or the crew in an extreme emergency. There could even be a dead drop through the floor, if for some reason, there needed to be an emergency disposal method.
Abnormal Law - "Pommy"? - I've spent a lot of time in the UK, but haven't heard that one before. Please translate into "American."
But then again, maybe you still think I'm just a Hollywood-brainwashed, kill-crazed, Bruce Willis wannabe gun-nutter. But when YOU'RE in that airplane making a cell phone call to your wife to say a final goodby, like many in our hijacked aircraft did, I'll bet you'd change your mind obout providing the pilots with a last-ditch lethal defense.
I understand most Englishmen's aversion to weapons, but I live out here in "wild west" were almost everyone has some type of firearm. We have a remarkable polite society out here, with no memory of any murders via firearm. We view them as respected tools, and consider self-defense and the defense of others as a personal responsibility, as well as that of the Sheriff and Municipal police. Not using all means available to defend yourself and others when faced with a clear and present threat is immoral, IMHO.
[ 26 September 2001: Message edited by: Roadtrip ]
Moderator
Just to throw some grist to the mill here ...
Given that these terrorist groups are all rather well funded, what's to stop them buying a cheap B747 - ostensibly for some iffy charter operation based in, oh, let's say SHJ - and then fly it with theior own crews into whatever buildings they want without having to go through the whole hijack process in the first place?
Lowers the potential casualty numbers slightly - but you'd have a far higher chance of success!
Given that these terrorist groups are all rather well funded, what's to stop them buying a cheap B747 - ostensibly for some iffy charter operation based in, oh, let's say SHJ - and then fly it with theior own crews into whatever buildings they want without having to go through the whole hijack process in the first place?
Lowers the potential casualty numbers slightly - but you'd have a far higher chance of success!
What you've proposed is exactly what went through my mind as I watched what I thought to be a 737 fly into the second WTC tower on the 11th! I really hadn't considered that they were hijacked airliners! With all the oil money floating around the mideast, I figured that some deranged millionaire financed a few 737s, and had them flown into the WTC.......I was OBVIOUSLY wrong!
BTW, are you any relation to Brian May?
Paxing All Over The World
I repeat a reply (edited down) that I made to an almost identical thread running in Aircrew Notices. Please note I am PAX not crew.
...
You would have to KNOW that there is a problem. DRAW the weapon (from secure container not smooth leather holster). TURN to look over your shoulder. ASSESS the situation, consider who is standing beside/behind/in front of atacker. DECIDE on action.
Ooops, they just bopped you on the head/sprayed MACE/knifed the hostie etc.
Further, we have seen many remarks about the low ebb that crew reach when they are near the end of a long sector. Let's say you have been on duty for ten hours - since briefing.
Although you have not been in the driving seat all the time, you are going to be bright and ready to take the above kind of action when Mr Nasty arrives to disturb your view of the dawn.
Aren't you?
[ 26 September 2001: Message edited by: PAXboy ]
...
You would have to KNOW that there is a problem. DRAW the weapon (from secure container not smooth leather holster). TURN to look over your shoulder. ASSESS the situation, consider who is standing beside/behind/in front of atacker. DECIDE on action.
Ooops, they just bopped you on the head/sprayed MACE/knifed the hostie etc.
Further, we have seen many remarks about the low ebb that crew reach when they are near the end of a long sector. Let's say you have been on duty for ten hours - since briefing.
Although you have not been in the driving seat all the time, you are going to be bright and ready to take the above kind of action when Mr Nasty arrives to disturb your view of the dawn.
Aren't you?
[ 26 September 2001: Message edited by: PAXboy ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I just luv the idea of a gun battle on the flight deck, fits right in with President Bushes wildwest theme, as long as no instruments are hit or there isn't a bullet shot through the windows leaving a gaping hole I suppose we'll be alright 
though I hear they've got guns that fire cardboard bullets now? I would have thought the best strategy is preventing hijackers ever reaching the flightdeck in the first place cause once they've gained entry you're in a very dangerous scenario and the crew and the safety of the aircraft are at a serious disadvantage so either a reinforced door with a specialised locking system (dead locking I think they call it, not sure how it works), totally separating the cockpit from the cabin or skymarshals is the answer.
I 'd much rather also that
Proper screening of staff as well as pax needs to be done with staff history researched as well. Looks like staff were in cohoots with the hijackers & some of the weapons were hidden abroad the aircraft before the pax boarded.
The banning of hand luggage in the cabin I feel is also necessary as FR has done & there's no point in confiscating plastic razors etc as they did to one pilot & then hand out complimentary ones on board. Come to think of it I can't think of a better weapon than a bottle of duty free would make a great weapon as well to smash someone over the head with but I forgot forbiding that might affect profit margins. Silly me!
Emerald
though I hear they've got guns that fire cardboard bullets now? I would have thought the best strategy is preventing hijackers ever reaching the flightdeck in the first place cause once they've gained entry you're in a very dangerous scenario and the crew and the safety of the aircraft are at a serious disadvantage so either a reinforced door with a specialised locking system (dead locking I think they call it, not sure how it works), totally separating the cockpit from the cabin or skymarshals is the answer. I 'd much rather also that
Proper screening of staff as well as pax needs to be done with staff history researched as well. Looks like staff were in cohoots with the hijackers & some of the weapons were hidden abroad the aircraft before the pax boarded.
The banning of hand luggage in the cabin I feel is also necessary as FR has done & there's no point in confiscating plastic razors etc as they did to one pilot & then hand out complimentary ones on board. Come to think of it I can't think of a better weapon than a bottle of duty free would make a great weapon as well to smash someone over the head with but I forgot forbiding that might affect profit margins. Silly me!
Emerald
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LTN
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tripower - yeah you're right - you weren't quoting out of context, you were twisting everything like hell - 5 stars for me - golly thanks.
<<<quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as the Americans are incapable or unwilling to examine the reasons why they are so hated by some they are blind to this insane love affair with guns they seem to have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahh, we are fortunate that we have you to enlighten us! We are hated because of our insane love affair with guns? A gun is a tool, despite what your socialist education might have led you to believe........I can be accused of having a love affair with my car, but not a gun.......>>>
The quote does not say you are hated because of your insane love affair with guns - would have thought that basic qualification in written english was a requirement for obtaining a pilot's licence.
Let's not forget that the planes that were hijacked WERE american, a) because of lax security on domestic flights, b) because the US has made itself a targets by its escapades since the end of WW2.
Please note that just because I think that the US has made some terrible decisions on the world stage doesn't mean I support the actions of these fanatics.
In terms of the issue of guns on planes, don't think it is a solution for pilots to carry them - Trained Air Marshalls or similar is another matter - in the world of the two person cockpit would like to think that the pilots are driving.
Following your logic about our right to defend ourselves then we should be working for an industry where EVERYONE on a plane carrys a gun.?
<<<quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as the Americans are incapable or unwilling to examine the reasons why they are so hated by some they are blind to this insane love affair with guns they seem to have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahh, we are fortunate that we have you to enlighten us! We are hated because of our insane love affair with guns? A gun is a tool, despite what your socialist education might have led you to believe........I can be accused of having a love affair with my car, but not a gun.......>>>
The quote does not say you are hated because of your insane love affair with guns - would have thought that basic qualification in written english was a requirement for obtaining a pilot's licence.
Let's not forget that the planes that were hijacked WERE american, a) because of lax security on domestic flights, b) because the US has made itself a targets by its escapades since the end of WW2.
Please note that just because I think that the US has made some terrible decisions on the world stage doesn't mean I support the actions of these fanatics.
In terms of the issue of guns on planes, don't think it is a solution for pilots to carry them - Trained Air Marshalls or similar is another matter - in the world of the two person cockpit would like to think that the pilots are driving.
Following your logic about our right to defend ourselves then we should be working for an industry where EVERYONE on a plane carrys a gun.?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: N. Ireland U.K.
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone previously said - "You are just amazing you guys/gals".
You presumably opted for a career in aviation for your enjoyment of flying primarily yet few of you seem to be complaining about how your career has been 'hijacked' (pardon the pun) by people intent on changing the goalposts and your lives amongst the rest. I just marvel (as a PPL student) how you can deal with this threat in the way you are. Congratulations on sticking with all of these horrendous issues and not 'bailing out' in a sense - we pax like to know our pilots are more than just 'bus-drivers' in anyone's eyes. Your expertise is taken far too much for granted - to add in firearms training may perhaps make people a little more appreciative of your immense workload etc. Not sure, mind you, as a pax that I like the idea of the pilots being armed, but at the end of the day things are happening now as never before and all situations have to be considered in their light.
TR
You presumably opted for a career in aviation for your enjoyment of flying primarily yet few of you seem to be complaining about how your career has been 'hijacked' (pardon the pun) by people intent on changing the goalposts and your lives amongst the rest. I just marvel (as a PPL student) how you can deal with this threat in the way you are. Congratulations on sticking with all of these horrendous issues and not 'bailing out' in a sense - we pax like to know our pilots are more than just 'bus-drivers' in anyone's eyes. Your expertise is taken far too much for granted - to add in firearms training may perhaps make people a little more appreciative of your immense workload etc. Not sure, mind you, as a pax that I like the idea of the pilots being armed, but at the end of the day things are happening now as never before and all situations have to be considered in their light.
TR
Moderator
The quote does not say you are hated because of your insane love affair with guns - would have thought that basic qualification in written english was a requirement for obtaining a pilot's licence.
What does our reasonable approach to civilian gun ownership have to do with our actions on the world stage? Should we have stopped supporting Israel? Sent MORE aid and weapons to third world countries?
The hoplophobic rhetoric is getting old and has little to do with the topic at hand.....
It sure seemed as if you were, if not condoning the attack, at least trying to justify it, as if somehow American civilians are responsible.
Thanks for the english lesson!
Besides, here in the states, it's spelled licenSe........
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check McCampbell's Aces Squadron newsletter FLIGHT LINE for the latest opinions on this and other newsworthy topics not found in the mainstream media.
Use the link.
Ace 1
FLIGHT LINE
Use the link.
Ace 1
FLIGHT LINE
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Celtic said:
" I just luv the idea of a gun battle on the flight deck, fits right in with President Bushes wildwest theme, as long as no instruments are hit or there isn't a bullet shot through the windows leaving a gaping hole I suppose we'll be alright <http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/rolleyes.gif> though I hear they've got guns that fire cardboard bullets now? I would have thought the best strategy is preventing hijackers ever reaching the flightdeck in the first place cause once they've gained entry you're in a very dangerous scenario and the crew and the safety of the aircraft are at a serious disadvantage so either a reinforced door with a specialised locking system (dead locking I think they call it, not sure how it works), totally separating the cockpit from the cabin or skymarshals is the answer."
Personally, I'm among the many SLF who aren't flying at the moment. I'd prefer to have 1) multiple sky marshals on every flight, 2) much better pax screening at airports, and 3) reinforced cockpit doors. The reality is that it will take at least a year plus before we have reinforced cockpit doors. It will take several years before we could have multiple sky marshals on every flight in CONUS, and that's provided we're willing to pay for them. Pax screening is now slightly better but still not up to par. Until security improves, I will do everything I can to avoid air travel.
So what do we do in the meantime? Do I like the idea of gunfight in the cockpit. No. What I like a whole lot less is the idea of being in the situation of my late colleague, Anna Allison, who was on AA flight 11. I'm going to her memorial service this Sunday.
Regarding the bullets, they're not cardboard. They're called frangible bullets, usually made out of powdered metal (typically copper), pressed together under high pressure. Would it be bad if a bullet hit an instrument? Sure would. Would you rather that the hijacker got hold of the plane instead?
Regarding sleeping gas being dispensed into the aircraft, I think some folks have been watching too many Bond movies. First, any such agent takes time to work. How long would it take to kick through the cockpit door? How would you control the dosage so that you quickly knock out the terrorists, but don't kill the infant sitting on her mummies lap in seat 23A? What if you have an accidental discharge of the sleeping agent? How long would it take to come up with such a system and get it installed on aircraft? I strongly suspect that we can get reinforced doors certified long before we can get sleeping gas systems certified.
Aviatr:
If a pilot used the cockpit gun to "shoot a nervous flyer," then he gets charged with at least manslaughter or possibly murder 2. The pilots would be required to stay in the cockpit in the event of a disturbance. Anyone breaking down the cockpit door is unlikely to be a nervous passenger and will be met with lead. Yes, it would be awfully hard for the pilots to stay there while the terrorists are in the cabin, saying they will kill the cabin attendants and passengers one by one until you come out.
Regarding an attack by multiple terrorists, just keep shooting. The cockpit door is a narrow fatal funnel. I'm not saying that the pilots would always be successful. Rather that this way they would have a fighting chance, which they don't have now.
Regarding storage of firearms while overnighting in other countries, there are several solutions to this, including having each airline install an armory in its secure area of the airport.
Are there major issues that would have to be worked out? Sure there are. But I suggest that you don't dismiss it out of hand.
Something has to be done quickly if you want to get folks like me back into airplanes again.
OFBSLF
" I just luv the idea of a gun battle on the flight deck, fits right in with President Bushes wildwest theme, as long as no instruments are hit or there isn't a bullet shot through the windows leaving a gaping hole I suppose we'll be alright <http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/rolleyes.gif> though I hear they've got guns that fire cardboard bullets now? I would have thought the best strategy is preventing hijackers ever reaching the flightdeck in the first place cause once they've gained entry you're in a very dangerous scenario and the crew and the safety of the aircraft are at a serious disadvantage so either a reinforced door with a specialised locking system (dead locking I think they call it, not sure how it works), totally separating the cockpit from the cabin or skymarshals is the answer."
Personally, I'm among the many SLF who aren't flying at the moment. I'd prefer to have 1) multiple sky marshals on every flight, 2) much better pax screening at airports, and 3) reinforced cockpit doors. The reality is that it will take at least a year plus before we have reinforced cockpit doors. It will take several years before we could have multiple sky marshals on every flight in CONUS, and that's provided we're willing to pay for them. Pax screening is now slightly better but still not up to par. Until security improves, I will do everything I can to avoid air travel.
So what do we do in the meantime? Do I like the idea of gunfight in the cockpit. No. What I like a whole lot less is the idea of being in the situation of my late colleague, Anna Allison, who was on AA flight 11. I'm going to her memorial service this Sunday.
Regarding the bullets, they're not cardboard. They're called frangible bullets, usually made out of powdered metal (typically copper), pressed together under high pressure. Would it be bad if a bullet hit an instrument? Sure would. Would you rather that the hijacker got hold of the plane instead?
Regarding sleeping gas being dispensed into the aircraft, I think some folks have been watching too many Bond movies. First, any such agent takes time to work. How long would it take to kick through the cockpit door? How would you control the dosage so that you quickly knock out the terrorists, but don't kill the infant sitting on her mummies lap in seat 23A? What if you have an accidental discharge of the sleeping agent? How long would it take to come up with such a system and get it installed on aircraft? I strongly suspect that we can get reinforced doors certified long before we can get sleeping gas systems certified.
Aviatr:
If a pilot used the cockpit gun to "shoot a nervous flyer," then he gets charged with at least manslaughter or possibly murder 2. The pilots would be required to stay in the cockpit in the event of a disturbance. Anyone breaking down the cockpit door is unlikely to be a nervous passenger and will be met with lead. Yes, it would be awfully hard for the pilots to stay there while the terrorists are in the cabin, saying they will kill the cabin attendants and passengers one by one until you come out.
Regarding an attack by multiple terrorists, just keep shooting. The cockpit door is a narrow fatal funnel. I'm not saying that the pilots would always be successful. Rather that this way they would have a fighting chance, which they don't have now.
Regarding storage of firearms while overnighting in other countries, there are several solutions to this, including having each airline install an armory in its secure area of the airport.
Are there major issues that would have to be worked out? Sure there are. But I suggest that you don't dismiss it out of hand.
Something has to be done quickly if you want to get folks like me back into airplanes again.
OFBSLF
Guest
Posts: n/a
See: Bush to Announce Aviation Security Measures Thursday
Most importantly:
So it's "no" to the cowboys, then! 
Most importantly:
The sources said the administration also will embrace new measures, both short-term and long-term, designed to improve cockpit security. But the White House firmly opposes the idea of letting pilots carry hand guns in the cockpit, according to several sources who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: California, USA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said from http://www.avweb
<<<...ALPA GRABS THE SPOTLIGHT...
All the news media snapped to attention when Air Line Pilots Association President Duane Woerth testified that pilots should be allowed to carry weapons in the cockpit.
Woerth said all pilots should have stun guns,
plus the option to get firearms training and pack the real thing.
If a pilot can get past the sensitivity training, the placards, the trigger-lock and the hijacker-friendly bullets, this one might have a chance.>>>
<<<...ALPA GRABS THE SPOTLIGHT...
All the news media snapped to attention when Air Line Pilots Association President Duane Woerth testified that pilots should be allowed to carry weapons in the cockpit.
Woerth said all pilots should have stun guns,
plus the option to get firearms training and pack the real thing.
If a pilot can get past the sensitivity training, the placards, the trigger-lock and the hijacker-friendly bullets, this one might have a chance.>>>
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have discussed the fact of securing the cockpit in great depth on this forum (some good points from both sides of the argument I think!), but how do you deal with the fact that the hijackers apparently got the crew to open the flight deck door by attacking passengers/cabin crew?
I think this one is a toughie! If the crew comes out (even if armed) and is faced with a hijacker holding a hostage then there isn't a lot they can do. I wouldn't like to sit up front refusing to come out whilst a crazy is in the rear of the aircraft gradually reducing the numbers of crew and pax...
Julian.
I think this one is a toughie! If the crew comes out (even if armed) and is faced with a hijacker holding a hostage then there isn't a lot they can do. I wouldn't like to sit up front refusing to come out whilst a crazy is in the rear of the aircraft gradually reducing the numbers of crew and pax...
Julian.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: abroad
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't had time to read all these posts so apologies if repeating others ideas or offending the have-a-go guys, but come on let's not allow our outrage to colour judgement. I believe the USA pilot's union head has requested this - presumably without trawling his members for their thoughts first. Makes a good soundbite but is ridiculous.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a gun on the flight deck you presumably need to be checked every six months on your proficiency to use it. It would be logical to do this with a sim check, and would probably best be done before the check in case relations become a little strained whilst in the box.
Would this refresher be a quick ten minutes potting sparrows on the roof of the sim block during a meal break, or would it be something more formal, say a range attached to the canteen using last weeks pies for targets.
Do you get graded on your marksmanship? Could you fail a check for poor shooting? Who pays for the ammo if you have to resit?
Would this refresher be a quick ten minutes potting sparrows on the roof of the sim block during a meal break, or would it be something more formal, say a range attached to the canteen using last weeks pies for targets.
Do you get graded on your marksmanship? Could you fail a check for poor shooting? Who pays for the ammo if you have to resit?
Guest
Posts: n/a
The points that most of the anti-gun (mostly european) people are missing are;
No crewmember is going to be forced to carry or use a firearm. If a person wishes to be selected to carry a firearm they should be prepared to initially train and then attend recurrent training at their own time and expense.
The selection and training procedure for personnel wishing to be armed should be the same as for the sky marshals. Since not many people are objecting to sky marshals why should one object to a similarly selected and trained pilot. To ease the legalities such as firearm possession on layovers etc. the person should be sworn in as a deputy sky marshal. A whole host of federally approved personnel are allowed to legally carry their firearm around the country, why not selected pilots.
Issued firearms in this country are no big deal. Nearly every shopping mall car park has its armed security late at night. Many banks have armed security. There are various armed federal employees all over the place, immigration, drug-enforcement, fish and wildlife rangers, not to mention hundreds of different state and local government employees down to the lowest level.
This is a firearm oriented country. Many, many people feel perfectly comfortable with firearms. Millions of people hunt one quarry or another. Many people target shoot every weekend. Many of these fire literally hundreds of rounds every weekend. I know from personal experience that many members of the pistol section of the gun club to which I belong regularly outshoot the normal police officers. (The basic training groups - not the keen pistol shooters who happen to be police officers).
Firearms could not be taken by pilots on international flights but the fact that there are a number of armed pilots would reduce the number of sky marshals required on domestic flights. These sky marshals would then be able to cover more international flights.
I have been aproached by many passengers who have told me they think the pilots should be armed.
BY THE WAY. The US government approved of shooting down commercial aircraft that appear to have been hijacked. Note they did not say "US AIRCRAFT", just aircraft. It is going to be a weird feeling as you drive your aircraft towards New York with the hijacker sitting behind you waiting for the missile to hit. Bet, at that point, you will wish you had been able to do something to stop your imminent death - like fighting back and shooting the hijacker.
[ 28 September 2001: Message edited by: BOING ]
No crewmember is going to be forced to carry or use a firearm. If a person wishes to be selected to carry a firearm they should be prepared to initially train and then attend recurrent training at their own time and expense.
The selection and training procedure for personnel wishing to be armed should be the same as for the sky marshals. Since not many people are objecting to sky marshals why should one object to a similarly selected and trained pilot. To ease the legalities such as firearm possession on layovers etc. the person should be sworn in as a deputy sky marshal. A whole host of federally approved personnel are allowed to legally carry their firearm around the country, why not selected pilots.
Issued firearms in this country are no big deal. Nearly every shopping mall car park has its armed security late at night. Many banks have armed security. There are various armed federal employees all over the place, immigration, drug-enforcement, fish and wildlife rangers, not to mention hundreds of different state and local government employees down to the lowest level.
This is a firearm oriented country. Many, many people feel perfectly comfortable with firearms. Millions of people hunt one quarry or another. Many people target shoot every weekend. Many of these fire literally hundreds of rounds every weekend. I know from personal experience that many members of the pistol section of the gun club to which I belong regularly outshoot the normal police officers. (The basic training groups - not the keen pistol shooters who happen to be police officers).
Firearms could not be taken by pilots on international flights but the fact that there are a number of armed pilots would reduce the number of sky marshals required on domestic flights. These sky marshals would then be able to cover more international flights.
I have been aproached by many passengers who have told me they think the pilots should be armed.
BY THE WAY. The US government approved of shooting down commercial aircraft that appear to have been hijacked. Note they did not say "US AIRCRAFT", just aircraft. It is going to be a weird feeling as you drive your aircraft towards New York with the hijacker sitting behind you waiting for the missile to hit. Bet, at that point, you will wish you had been able to do something to stop your imminent death - like fighting back and shooting the hijacker.
[ 28 September 2001: Message edited by: BOING ]
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now we have a situation where nothing material has changed since 11 Sep, pilots will not be allowed to have cockpit defense weapons, hardened cockpit doors will take years to deploy, and now our gub'ment is putting fighters on alert to shoot down aircraft that look threatening.
Tell me this gentlemen, if we had another set of suicide fanatics overpower the flightdeck and crash an airplane into a densely populated area tomorrow, do you think last-ditch lethal cockpit defense would still be a bad idea?
Bizzare.
Tell me this gentlemen, if we had another set of suicide fanatics overpower the flightdeck and crash an airplane into a densely populated area tomorrow, do you think last-ditch lethal cockpit defense would still be a bad idea?
Bizzare.