Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Pilot arrested with gun (merged)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Pilot arrested with gun (merged)

Old 23rd Jan 2003, 19:57
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
> The two preceding posts show me, at least, what is wrong
> with our world post 9/11. Two states of mind seem to have
> become permanent; ignorance and fear.

Mine being one of these two posts I thought I might come back..

I've had basic firearms training and have fired 9mm pistols and 303 single shot and automatic rifles. Had I not got into other hobbies I might have continued to be intrested in shooting (I currently have no involvement in the sport).

When taught correctly you develop a healthy respect for firearms that seems to be seriously lacking in some. Firearms maybe inanimate objects incapable of acting on their own - but you would be wise to treat them as if they were! I for one would prefer not to be around guns unless under the controlled conditions of a well organised shooting club/range. Allowing even responsible people to carry guns and ammunition in public is asking for trouble. There will be accidental shootings, it's just a matter of time. I'm sure the airlines will get sued and then we will see how long the policy lasts.

Out of interest... Where would you stand if you refused to fly with someone carrying a gun?
cwatters is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2003, 21:11
  #22 (permalink)  
I had an arsehole transplant but the arsehole rejected me, which is why I write such rubbish
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Permits

On the news today in N.Y, it turns out the pilot had a permit to carry the gun. Northwest is not going to pursue any charges or actions as the pilot had the permissable paperwork.

Andy
whatshouldiuse is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2003, 21:26
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hoschton, GA, USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Beardy...

"An aircraft is no place for a shoot out, it is no place for a firearm."

You're forgetting what my friends Vince Saracini, Jason Dahl, and Leroy Homer found out the hard way.

Some people will take your airplane and fly it thru a building to further their own cause.

Try to remember in this thread why the subject of arming pilots came up. It was a non issue prior to 9/11.......

R.I.P., Vince.
A-V-8R is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2003, 22:06
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whenever guns come up it polarises people into those who accept them as what they are, tools, and those who hate and fear them. Logic goes out the window.

In the US (for example) there are around 30,000 gun deaths (with a population of 275,000,000), including legal shootings, suicides and murders. There are only 1,200 accidents, most in the home ('only' does not mean that it is not important or that we should not do all that we can to prevent such accidents. The NRA has a good safety program aimed at kids but the gun haters refuse to promote it because of the source). I am not aware of any such accidents in public places such as airports or airplanes, and I am sure if such an accident did happen the liberal press would shout it loud and clear. Sure one accident would be one too many, and I am not advocating that everyone should carry a gun on a flight. My point is that if one was to be carried, it would not increase the danger to those who flew on the same flight. They would never even know that the gun was there.
Of course, if some nutter did attempt to take over the airplane in the same manner as 9/11, it might be nice to have that gun, wouldn't it?

I am not a gun owner, but I did have my 12 years military and served in combat. For what that is worth. I do believe that gun control is anti rights and freedoms and is aimed at eventual gun confiscation, as was the case in Aus, UK and soon Canada. And in every one of those cases gun crime has skyrocketted. Even if I hated guns I would have to see, using logic, what was really happening.

Step back from fear and look at the situation logically.
boofhead is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 02:02
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have Gun Will Travel

I doubt that this gun toting pilot will be back on the job anytime soon. For one thing, the FAA Aeromedical Branch will first insist on having his head examined before revalidating his current or next medical certificate. This guy must be either dumb, stupid or close to retirement.
GlueBall is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 05:01
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Down south, USA.
Posts: 1,594
Received 9 Likes on 1 Post
Arrow

I just heard a theory, which might explain (but not justify) how a very forgetful person could have a gun in their baggage.

The pilot has a Michigan permit to carry the gun. In most cases, any US pilot can get an extra airport ID badge (by watching a two-hour videotape), which allows us to totally bypass security at one airport-our crewbase. This guy could have carried his gun - through the bypass- from DTW to LGA etc, and legally, regarding the Michigan regulations. But why did he not somehow go through his bag later, at whatever home or hotel he stayed in? Something really strange will emerge during this investigation, but might not be released to the media. The guy I just flew with today spoke to the weird guy recently, having been already acquainted, and only got an odd, blank stare...................

By the way, our FOs all have a crash axe next to their seats in the cockpits. They therefore have a deadly weapon which can knock out anybody, or worse, with one blow, and IN EVERY COCKPIT in this fleet.

Do the flying public and media realize that we [and most other airline employees] can physically bring anything we want onto the airport ramp, various ops areas, or other airport locations, at most or all US flightcrew bases, if it is our crewbase? No x-ray machine is there to check us next to baggage claim etc. We just push buttons and/or swipe the card through a small box, and poof! There we are, walking around airplanes, fuel trucks, "sensitive cargo" etc..
Ignition Override is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 13:31
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree that this is degenerating into the same old gun control debate and deserves to be dropped. But if yours was a cry for this, why add the phrase "make gun control safer"? Surely you mean "make guns safer", or has your real agenda slipped out?
boofhead is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 13:55
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good Morning Mike,

May I clear up to misstatements please

It is fact that the NRA has an excellent gun safety program designed for children. It gets limited hearing in some parts of the USA because of an anti-gun bias. Having recognized the program, ultimately, I believe it is the resposability of the parents to teach their children and themselves to respect the potential danger in a gun just as we acknowledge the potential danger in an automobile.

The NRA is not against federal regulations to make guns safer. (I took the liberty of editing your post to reflect what I think you meant to say, pardon me if I'm wrong.) The NRA resists the movement to register gun owners, limit gun ownership or to eliminate gun ownership. The existing gun laws in the US if PROPERLY enforced would be more than enough to reduce gun related crimes and accidents.

Having said all that I return to the original topic, this pilot and Mrs. Lou Dobbs commited an unforgivable sin IMHO. They forgot where their loaded gun was. These people probably remember turn off and lock their car when they aren't using it, but they can't remember to store a loaded weapon safely. I believe they may have violated some federal regulations in doing so. If I am wrong please cite the relevant law for my education. If I'm correct someone please charge them under the appropriate statute and lets get on with it.

Thanks

The pavlovian reaction of anti gunners to the NRA and its supporters reflects an unwillingness to see the real issues and address them.
T_richard is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 17:10
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This last post looks as though it is from someone who has never had formal firearms training from an expert.
I've had about 160 hours of formal firearms training (4 times what a police cadet gets in most police academies in the state of Massachusetts).

I'm a firearms instructor certified by the NRA to teach Basic Pistol, Home Firearms Safety, and Personal Protection. I'm certified by the Massachusetts State Police to teach firearms safety. I'm a certified range safety officer and not too long ago was permitted by the US Army to act as range safety officer/officer in charge at the small arms ranges at Fort Devens. I'm also the Chief Range Safety officer of the gun club that I belong to. I know my way around a firearm.

For the most part, I agree with boofhead. I personally support having trained pilots carry firearms. I believe the added risk to passengers would be slight and that the risk of an accidental discharge would be quite low. A holstered gun is a safe gun -- the only way for a holstered gun to go off is if it is removed from the holster and the trigger is pulled. A handgun will not simply go off by itself -- someone has to be messing with it for it to go off. Modern design handguns won't go off if dropped. They will go off only if someone loads it and pulls the trigger.

boofhead said:
An automatic, by its design, cannot be fired unless it is grasped correctly, something a small hand cannot do. A revolver has a heavy trigger action and is difficult for a child to fire.
I have to disagree with you a bit here.

A few models of semi-automatics, like the M1911 (used by the US military for decades) and the more recent Steyr series, have grip safeties, which are a device on backstrap. These guns will not go off unless the grip safety is depressed, even if you try to pull the trigger. The grip safety is depressed when you take a proper firing grip. But most semi-autos these days do not have grip safeties. Some semi-autos have manual safeties (e.g., Berettas, S&W third generation), but many others do not (e.g., Glock, Sig). Small hands can sometimes fire a semi-auto -- it might take them some ingenuity, but kids are pretty ingenious.

The double-action pull on a revolver is relatively stiff (usually 10-12 lbs these days). While that may be beyond the strength of a smaller child, they probably can pull the trigger by bracing the gun against an object (say a chair). The single-action trigger pull of a revolver is usually much lighter (< 4 lbs). Single-action does require that the revolver be manually cocked, which may or may not be beyond the knowledge and strength of a particular child.

I strongly recommend that one never depend upon a particular feature of a gun to keep it safe from a child. Instead, I recommend that the guns be kept locked up when not in use (something that is required by law in some countries and some states of the US). I also recommend that you educate your child on firearms safety, starting with the Eddie Eagle message -- "stop, don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult."

Are planes a bad place for a gunfight? Any place is a bad place for gunfight. Sept. 11 also showed us they are a bad place for a knife fight, particularly when the terrorists are the only ones with the knives.

To get back a bit closer to the main thread, no, I don't support having passengers carry guns. I do support trained pilots having guns and being trained to use them solely to protect the cockpit.

The Allied Pilots Association has a video on their web site illustrating how easily Tasers are defeated:

http://www.alliedpilots.org/Public/I...ming_media.asp

Having said all that I return to the original topic, this pilot and Mrs. Lou Dobbs commited an unforgivable sin IMHO. They forgot where their loaded gun was. These people probably remember turn off and lock their car when they aren't using it, but they can't remember to store a loaded weapon safely. I believe they may have violated some federal regulations in doing so. If I am wrong please cite the relevant law for my education. If I'm correct someone please charge them under the appropriate statute and lets get on with it.
They certainly violated federal law by trying to bring their guns into the secured area of an airport (even if they did so inadvertently). I am not aware of any US federal law or regulation regarding storage of firearms. Some US states do have laws regarding storage of firearms, but I'm unaware of any such law on the US federal level.

Most state storage laws would probably not apply anyways, since, in this case, the guns were not "stored." Instead, the guns were under the direct control of the pilot and Mrs. Dobbs, in their carry-on bags. They might have forgotten that the guns were there, but that doesn't meet the definition of being stored. Storage implies that the guns were left somewhere, out of their direct control, which was apparently not the case.
OFBSLF is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 17:46
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good Afternoon OFBSLF

I am sure you are right about the absence of federal law re: storage, we have one here in RI. I believe that my main point was that these individuals "forgot" or misplaced their personal firearms. I hope we can agree that that is an irresponsable form of behavior for a gun owner. I cannot claim your pedigree but I've been around firearms all my life too, and I can't conceive of "losing" my pistol.

End of point
T_richard is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2003, 20:25
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
T_richard: Indeed I do agree. Their behavior was irresponsible. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is responsible.
OFBSLF is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2003, 03:34
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Down south, USA.
Posts: 1,594
Received 9 Likes on 1 Post
Question

As for odd things happening, how about a crewmember finding a pistol round (one shell, containing the bullet) in the empty overhead baggage space in the passenger cabin, soon after everybody has walked off of the plane? This was probably the airplane's third or fourth flight that day.

This happened recently right after one of my flights, and according to the gate agent who waited onboard for the TSA person to show up, no Federal Marshals had flown on it that day. Maybe a postal inspector (a Dirty Harry wannabe) had lost the round, but why was the thing loose, in the first place?
Ignition Override is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2003, 03:48
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I/O

As weird as it may seem, its more likely someone lost their"lucky" round. Or they went to the pistol range and that round got lost in the bottom of a pocket.

Getting an unspent round out of a pistol clip takes technique or an act of Congress. Typically if there is one in a revolver there are six, so this was probably a stray. A girlfriend gave me a keychain made out of an unfired 9 mm (gunpowder is drained). Needless

to say, that stays home when I travel.
T_richard is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2003, 21:30
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Down south, USA.
Posts: 1,594
Received 9 Likes on 1 Post
Yep, that was apparent to me to, but I'm against anyone on the plane having a gun, except FBI, an Air Marshal, Secret Service or a pilot with good training (whereby no passenger can go steal his gun when he goes out for a bite or byte).

No other agencies, unless traveling with a prisoner, for example to Kansas City (federal and military prisons nearby in Leavenworth), should be allowed to get on the plane with a gun.

Last edited by Ignition Override; 28th Jan 2003 at 03:59.
Ignition Override is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2003, 00:34
  #35 (permalink)  
jetsy
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US for now
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Givem guns will travel.. on agenda again

Better NOT


From the AP:


Thursday January 30, 2003 12:20 AM
The recent arrest of a Northwest Airlines pilot found with a loaded handgun in his carry-on luggage raises the question of how airport security workers can identify those pilots authorized by the government to have a gun.

Congress gave the Transportation Security Administration until Feb. 25 to develop a plan to train those passenger airline pilots who volunteer to be "federal flight deck officers.'' The agency also must come up with rules by then that govern when and where those pilots may carry weapons.

"There are still some policy questions that need to be answered,'' agency spokesman Robert Johnson acknowledged.

Among the questions: How does the gun get into the cockpit? Does the pilot carry it through the airport? If so, what happens in countries with stricter gun-control laws than the United States? Who supplies the weapon? What kind of weapon will be issued? And how much training should be required?

The largest pilots' union, which favors arming pilots, is concerned the government may be looking for ways to limit or delay the program, which the Bush administration only embraced after Congress expressed overwhelming support.

"They want to restrict it as much as they can,'' said Capt. Steve Luckey, chairman of the Air Line Pilots Association's national security committee.

Money is another unknown. The agency assembled $500,000 from various accounts for a test program for 50 pilots in the spring.

But with perhaps 30,000 or more of the estimated 100,000 commercial pilots interested in participating, far more dollars will be needed.

The agency's chief, James Loy, estimated in November it would cost $900 million to start the full program and about $250 million a year to maintain it. The agency has backed off those figures, saying it will cost less, but has provided no updated estimates.

Airlines, still reeling from the Sept. 11 attacks and losing billions of dollars, do not want to cover any of the cost.

"The pilots don't want to pay for it, the airlines don't want to pay for it and the government doesn't want to pay for it,'' said Paul Hudson, executive director of the Aviation Consumer Action Project, which advocates airline safety and security.

Polls have shown most people want to allow pilots to carry weapons. The airlines strongly oppose the idea, fearing a weapon could fall into the wrong hands, accidentally injure a passenger or cause a plane crash if a stray bullet struck a fuel line or navigational equipment.

The big airlines' trade group, the Air Transport Association, argues that stronger cockpit doors and the presence of air marshals provide protection against hijackings.

Capt. Fred Bates, an American Airlines pilot who heads a group of pilots working with agency to put the program in place, said the training requirements are pretty obvious because a cockpit is such a limited jurisdiction.

"It's really not about guns, it's about no more 9/11s,'' Bates said.

Agency spokesman Johnson said the agency is likely to go along with the pilots' recommendations for five days of training, including marksmanship.

The pilots want to be trained at federal facilities around the country so it is more convenient for them. The agency has not decided whether to limit the training to federal law enforcement training centers in Georgia and New Mexico.

Also unanswered is what kind of gun will be allowed and whether pilots can carry them or be required to leave them in the cockpit.

Pilots want to carry semiautomatic pistols, not revolvers, so they can fire multiple rounds in case more than one hijacker tries to commandeer a plane. They also do not want to keep the guns in lockboxes in the cockpit, an idea the government is considering. Pilots say it is safer to carry guns because they know where they are at all times.
jet_noseover is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2003, 02:46
  #36 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,792
Received 39 Likes on 24 Posts
The recent arrest of a Northwest Airlines pilot found with a loaded handgun in his carry-on luggage raises the question of how airport security workers can identify those pilots authorized by the government to have a gun.
How about doing it the same way that Air Marshalls and other armed LEOs are IDed and handled? No need to reinvent the wheel.

Among the questions: How does the gun get into the cockpit? Does the pilot carry it through the airport? If so, what happens in countries with stricter gun-control laws than the United States? Who supplies the weapon? What kind of weapon will be issued? And how much training should be required?
See above......

Money is another unknown. ............ "The pilots don't want to pay for it, the airlines don't want to pay for it and the government doesn't want to pay for it,'' said Paul Hudson, executive director of the Aviation Consumer Action Project, which advocates airline safety and security.

How about reducing the cast of the "Greatest Security Show on Earth" by a few thousand? Do we really need that many overpaid, ex Burger King workers standing around the pilot errrr, passenger screening checkpoints?

The airlines strongly oppose the idea, fearing a weapon could fall into the wrong hands, accidentally injure a passenger or cause a plane crash if a stray bullet struck a fuel line or navigational equipment.
The airlines don't seem to worry when Barney Fife, Dept of Education, Postal workers, Dept of Agriculture and the myriad of other folks (most with dubious reasons), carry firearms on the aircraft.

The big airlines' trade group, the Air Transport Association, argues that stronger cockpit doors and the presence of air marshals provide protection against hijackings.
What happens when there are no marshalls aboard, and a fraction of the amount of C-4 that Richard Reid had removes the "stronger" door from it's mounts?

Airport security does not necessarily equate to airplane security.
Tripower455 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.