Guns in Cockpit Test Approved - AP
 

Like the locked cockpit door and drug testing, if this goes through in the U.S., it will likely filter over to the UK. I'm not really crazy about the idea myself but a lot of my coworkers want to bring their guns to work.

Don't shoot the messenger...

_________________________________________________


Bush Administration Plans Test Program of Guns in Cockpit

By Scott Lindlaw Associated Press Writer
Published: Sep 4, 2002

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration plans to adopt a small-scale test program of arming commercial pilots, reversing its previous opposition to guns in the cockpit.

The administration is modeling its plan after similar proposals that circulated in Congress this summer. One such plan would have armed as many as 1,400 pilots, about 2 percent of those flying.

One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration was on the brink of announcing the decision.

Transportation Undersecretary John Magaw, who headed the new Transportation Security Administration until July, said in May he would not allow pilots to carry guns. Reinforced cockpits and armed air marshals provide enough protection against terrorists who try to take over an airplane, Magaw said.

"The responsibility of the pilot is to control the aircraft," Magaw said. "The use of firearms aboard a U.S. aircraft must be limited to those thoroughly trained members of law enforcement. Our position is make that cockpit as safe as we can, control that plane and get it on the ground."

Having thousands of armed pilots in airports would mean thousands of weapons that could fall into the wrong hands, Magaw said at the time. "We just don't want to subject the transportation system to additional firearms," he said.

But the House in July voted 310-113 to allow commercial pilots to carry guns, giving the proposal momentum, and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said soon afterward that he was re-examining the issue.

The administration is striving to reach a compromise between two camps - those who strongly oppose arming pilots, arguing, as Magaw did, that the government has already strengthened cockpit doors, bolstered airport security and is adding air marshals - and those who want all pilots armed, a government official said. NBC first reported the administration plan Wednesday night.

The airlines generally opposed plans to arm pilots, while the pilots' union and the National Rifle Association backed such proposals.

It wasn't clear Wednesday night how the government would decide whether to expand the program.

AP-ES-09-04-02 2016EDT

___________________________________________

Of course, the strident flight attendant union, AFA, has already branded guns in the cockpit as sexist:

"...in one of the most blatant displays of sexism perpetrated by a Congressional Committee in decades, the third crucial component, protecting the passengers and cabin crew in the event a terrorist attack, has been completely ignored.

“The Arming Pilots against Terrorism Act, marked up by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee today, once again gives further protection to the 99 percent male pilot workforce. Yet, House Committee Members refuse to support an amendment by Rep. Steve Horn (R-CA) that would adopt the same comprehensive approach to aircraft security that is detailed in the much more thorough Senate bill.

“The Senate cabin defense program, which would require all carriers to provide the 85 percent female flight attendant workforce with the training and tools necessary to lead the fight against terrorism in the aircraft and protect themselves and their passengers, has been neutered.



http://www.afanet.org/PressReleases/..._guns_bill.htm

I wonder whether stun guns ever have been considered? These could also be available for some or all of the cabin staff. And what a nice solution for annoying passengers, all or not under influence of alcoholic beverages.

cApT.KAos

I have been told it is due to American legislation that I have to eat my cereal at work with a plastic spoon, and yet it will be OK for me to fly into the land of the free with a gun in my flight bag?



Let's look at it another way. My dear old mum on the jump seat is considered a breach of security but me with a gun isn't.



How about tweezers? Apparently I am supposed to develop the Brooke Shields look while on a long trip. Maybe I could just blow my hairy brows away instead of plucking them out?



And another thing. There have been a lot of tales recently of flight bags being stolen from supposedly secure areas. Pilots have lost wallets, passports and company and airside ID. Yep, things even get taken from the aircraft. How long do you think these guns will remain with their rightful owner for?

Kaos,

Stun guns have been examined here is video of a LIVE fire test of stun guns inside an aircraft. Pretty useless if you ask me. Police don't use em unless they already have 6 guns pointed at the guy.

Cheers
Wino

Was this a consequence of all the knives etc that some reporters managed to get aboard a bunch of commerical flights?

Should just arrest all the idiot journolists trying it on. Notice the 'gun' in today's evening standard was a plastic toy gun, wrapped in a box. Obviously not going to show up as a hard metal outline then is it?

Ah... Pandora (why do I get images of Adrian Mole springing to mind every time I hear that name?) the woes of having to suffer the "Brooke look"! :( How do you cope?

Valid question re stolen property though. This rash of spinal reflex "thinking" has got to stop somewhere....doesn't it?

Guess you could always have one of the f/a's bite pull out your extra follicles with their teeth, if that doesn't work, give me a call, I'm sure I'lll be able to think of something :D

With the gun laws that we have here in the UK, I can see Special Branch going bezerk over this one!

US Senate passes guns-in-cockpit bill
 

From CNN (21:42 UTC)

"Senate passes guns-in-cockpit bill, 87-6; House had passed version earlier. Details to come. "

What I love about this topic is the total irrationality of the arguments that are so passionately put forward. One US politician's comment today.

"If a group of terrorists broke into the cockpit they might be able to take the pilot's gun away." Of course, completely losing sight of the fact that if a group of terrorists broke into the cockpit stealing the pilot's gun would be the least of the problems they created. Stupid!

What intrigues me about this is the characterization of it as a 'trial'.

I wonder what the success criteria are. Perhaps...

The trial is a success if all the following are true:
a) No member of a flight crew blows a hole in the airplane
b) No member of a flight crew accidentally shoots himself
c) No member of a flight crew shoots another member
d) No member of a flight crew shoots a passenger
e) No firefights between flight crews and air marshals occur
f) No member of a flight crew blows the head off a screener for confiscating his Leatherman
g) A flight crew succeeds in facilitating a meeting between a terrorist and the 72 virgins....

Well, that's my mind well and truly boggled.

I thought you neutered cats not defense programmes. So in the land of the neurotics the cabin crew think they should be 'tooled up' (no fellas not that tool). Pandora is right, we have lost it!!

Today we have flight crews in the US being stopped for possessing nail clippers - now with an impending new law, they will be able to carry hand guns onto the a/c??? Imagine the security screeners faces when the same person they confiscated a nail clipper from two weeks earlier now returns with a .357...and is allowed through.

As mentioned in previous posts, theft is going to be an issue and what about crews dead heading??? OK, so maybe they'll have to introduce more elaborate identification techniques such as biometric scanning, however for US crews travelling internationally, what are they going to do when going through security or better still, commuting on another carrier? And out of uniform...

I'm just amazed at how the apparent "world's leading country" can be so backward when it comes to aircraft security. With all the money being spent on enhanced pax screening and reinforced cockpit doors, surely its better not to have ANY gun on an a/c. And from recent reports, any person even remotely attempting to unlawfully enter the flight deck is being pounded by concerned pax before being “restrained”.

I can see the accident report now...flight crew bored, were showing each other their weapons when one of the guns accidentally discharged, fatally wounding one crew member and puncturing the fuselage, leading to a rapid de-pressurisation...(now think about the possible outcomes). No matter what the rules will say, I have no doubt there will be some pilots on longer segments that will want to talk about/show-off their "piece".

Of course, not growing up in a country where it is a "right" to bear arms has no doubt affected my sense of normality. Then again, what’s the crime rate in the US with guns vs a country like Australia?

In my opinion, not the greatest saftey measure to be put forward.
:(

But don't you all see? It makes perfect sense. Remember it all comes down to statistics. Let's face it, the likelyhood of a person bringing a gun on board is statistically very low. The likelyhood of two people bringing a gun on board at the same time is approaching a statistical impossibility. Furthermore, three bringing a gun onboard will happen once every billion years or so. Therefore, by both pilots bringing a gun onboard, they are preserving the safety of the aircraft as no-one will bring another gun onboard until the flight-deck is commanded by Captain James T. Kirk. ;)

I can't remember the article exactly - it was about a month ago. The article was about the causes of deaths of British soldiers in Afghanistan,and may be out of date now. However at the time the article was written, 6 British soldiers had been killed. 3 by our friends the Americans, 1 in a bizarre gun training exercise, and 2 in an argument who had pulled their guns on each other and shot each other simultaneously. None by the enemy.

Now these people are psychometrically tested for their suitability to carry weapons as part of their job before they get the job. They are trained in their use on a daily basis and are well practised in the carrying of arms. They are on the front line of a war. So let's take a little look at the verdict. Of all British soldiers on the front line;

1. Three were killed accidently by Yanks in unspecified circumstances of friendly fire. Do we really trust this country?

2. One accidental death by gun. Accidents happen. Do we want one happening over the Atlantic on the flight deck of an aircraft with over 400 pax?

3. Two deaths due to angry isolated men having an argument. I can just see it now; "I want the chicken. you have the smelly fish." "No, I want the chicken." Bang.

4. Pilots already have their jobs. Will there be retrospective testing for the suitability of each individual to cary guns? What will hapen to those deemed not up to it?

5. Will the carrying of guns be compulsory? If it isn't will pax refuse to fly if their pilot is/ isn't carrying one?

I don't know the answer to the problem, but it would appear the people who are pushing this through haven't got a clue either. Until there is a spark of intelligence evident from the people in charge, I will remain sceptical.

Why don't we issue a gun to every passenger as they board? That way we're all equal. Any potential terrorist no longer has any advantage and knows that he's outnumbered by an equally well armed opposition........

Absolutely Diesel, we can get them issued at the gate. I want the pink rocket launcher :p

Diesel; since 9/11 pax have seen a certain crash seems the only option today, they won't need guns to jump into action, remember the UA93 heroes......

Or is it all a CIA conspiracy: http://www.geocities.com/subliminals...ion/olson.html

TacP.ASOK

Squawk 7777,
Senator Brewers horse is dead !
Senator Brewer's dead ? Who told you that ?
I got it from the horses mouth !
Sentor Brewer's a Horse ?
No! Senator Brewer's not a horse.
Senator Brewer's got a horse ?
No Senator Brewers "Horse" is dead...........


Pandora ,
as far as I am aware Joe Squaddie is not Psychometrically tested.

DomeAir, good post.

Dead heading crews ... hmmmmmm...not their own airline.....hmmmmm ...airline uniforms freely available along with Fake ID's... de boyes fram d falls an d shankhill wud fairly rattle yer bollox just !

But then again all our friends on board from the sub continent could protect us from the ensueing carnage with their Kirpans !!!

Shaakin aal together.

Given that the US arm their custom's bureaucrats I don't
understand the problem you seem to be having with
armed pilots...I know who I would trust more!

-- Andrew

This is an excellent thread with some very good posts. I must say I agree with those against the carriage of weapons by pilots, other than those weapons they were born with. Just what you need is a fire fight in an enclosed space in a pressurised cigar tube (aluminium one or worse) about 37 000 feet from good old terror firmer. There are other non-lethal weapons available other than stun guns. Once again this is a knee jerk reaction from the idiots who purport to run the world. Terrifying in their stupidity and arrogance they are. I mean pollies not septic tanks, before you start attacking. Anyway, this would mean yet another 'test' for pilots. Surely we would have to prove we could care for our new babies and actually point them at least in the vague direction of a target. In my experience most pilots would fail that. No anecdotes, but from my experience a pilot with a gun is only a threat to himself and his friends. Scary thought.

You just know that this is all going to lead to a ghastly accident at some point. An over-reaction to a minor incident, the pilot decides to play "safe" and unlocks the gun...fill in the blanks yourself...some passenger ends up dead. Even with no terrorist in sight.

Saturday, September 07, 2002

Pilots welcome gun option

Group confident of law's passage

By James Pilcher, [email protected]

The Cincinnati Enquirer

Now that Congress has overwhelmingly approved allowing commercial airline pilots to carry guns, advocates say armed pilots could be flying by early next year.

“It's a done deal now,” Anderson Township airline pilot Marc Feigenblatt said Friday. Mr. Feigenblatt is vice chairman of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance, a group of pilots which has fought for the right to be armed on duty. “We could have a bill signed within a couple of weeks and have armed pilots by early next year.”

The Senate voted Thursday 87-6 to allow guns in the cockpit. The House

passed an almost identical bill 310-113 on July 10. The only obstacle now is a veto by President Bush, whose administration initially opposed the idea but has since softened.

Mr. Feigenblatt and others don't think a veto is likely because the Senate version was attached to a homeland security bill that the White House is trying to get passed.

A previous aviation security law, passed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, allows for guns in cockpits, but only with the approval of the airline and by the head of the Transportation Security Administration. This new legislation would remove those barriers.

Administration officials have previously come out against arming pilots, but Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta recently asked for a review of the issue.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Friday that many issues still need to be worked out, such as where guns are stored, and how airlines would handle the absence of pilots for firearms training. The Transportation Security Administration has raised similar concerns.

Still, “the president understands Congress's intent here (and) wants to work with Congress to provide this safety to passengers,” Mr. Fleischer said.

The Senate and House versions call for a voluntary program that would turn pilots into federal officers who would use the guns only as a last resort if the cockpit were under attack.

Those who volunteer and pass a rigorous background check would undergo federal training. The federal government also would pay for the guns.

The transportation administration estimates the program could cost up to $900 million.

Not all airline pilots endorse the idea, including Susanne Dortch of Mount Lookout, who said a gun would make the cockpit an even more tempting target.

“It would just make us more vulnerable,” Ms. Dortch said.

Airlines also remain opposed to the idea, even though both versions of the bill provide liability exemptions for pilots and airlines. Top executives of the nation's largest domestic carriers — including Delta Air Lines' chairman and chief executive officer Leo Mullin — sent a letter to every senator earlier this week raising safety concerns.

“How often are firearms utilized by trained law enforcement officers lost, misplaced, stolen, fired accidentally or used against the officer carrying the weapon?” he asked in the letter.

But Mr. Feigenblatt said he's confident that all the issues can be resolved.

A Royal Marine once said that only two things frightened him; an officer with a map and a sailor with a rifle.

For "sailor" and "rifle", read "pilot" and "handgun". I think the argument is still valid.

pilots and guns
 

if pilots and indeed cabin crew wish to carry guns why dont they join the military? or if they dont wish to do that why not make them do a firearms handling course at least that might reduce the chances of an nd. on a final note i was under the impression that the sky marshals ammunition was less powerful than normal ammo is this true?

Canberra, many of the US pilots are in the military.

Some, as I am, have also become part time police officers in addition to flying.


Sky Marshals have started showing up on some of my flights. At first they wouldn't talk about their armament, but some have showed me their clips........bullets appear to be .40 Cal, and are standard issue, no reduced charges.

When I was a cop we called them Black Talons. They are black painted hollowpoints that have grooves down the outside so they split into a star on entry.

Because of that, they grew notorious in the medical profession for the wound channels they create.

Then the color was dropped they were renamed Silvertips, and it's what most cops use today, although some cops have the first two rounds ball ammunition in case they have to shoot thru a car door.

Training will be required.

There is a humorous .wav file floating around about a cockpit pa describing how the crew is armed today. If anyone can tell me where I can post it for your consumption, I will.

I was also totally opposed to having Guns on the flightdeck.

I have changed my mind only because I couldn't stand the thought of having to make ATC aware that I had a (potential or real) hijacking or terrorist situation on board and while we are trying to deal with the situation (if that was possible) someone in a F-16 is lining up to shoot me down, because we happen to be heading in the general direction of a critical target. At least with a Gun I have one more very deadly means at my disposal to postpone meeting my maker.

I am not sure how this Gun issue can be handled safely, I'd hate to be the one supplying some a**hole with a gun due to inattention or negligence on my part, if that should happen, the F-16 scenario would be preferable.

in the states a large proportion of the public have guns for personal protection...these are not criminals/drug dealers bad people etc etc.plus they actually know how to use them.

i reckon the way to go is sky marshalls.one in the jump seat and more in the cabin.the main reason this is not happening is cost....how much do you think another repeat of 9/11 would cost the airline industry?and while your at it why not let the pilots have one as well.we have to deter these guys somehow and as long as they perceive our ground security to be suspect,which appears to be the case, they will continue to attack us.

the head of security at Baa admits that only 90 pct of 'generated'
guns are spotted by screening staff at major uk airports, the explanation given is that we are only human...great...with each x- ray machine having at least 1 spoof gun generated every 20 minutes 24 hrs a day.do the maths yourself.this is a serious problem.

this reminds me of the old argument against arming our police forces...sounds great but in reality the bad guys have a field day!

wake up and smell the coffee..we need positive action and fast.

I am 33, live in Wales and I have NEVER even seen a gun. I dont know anyone that owns a gun and for my personal protection I use a high pitched scream and fast running shoes. :D
The point of this post is........em...dunno.
Maybe I should move from the Welsh Hills to London,, then again maybe not.
Walt,,

Hang on there is a point. Guns Aint The Answer. Make everyone board the flight naked and not allow any luggage on board. Then tie everyone to the seat and not release them until safely back at the gate at the destination.

ok, so you are on a flight from cardiff to civilisation with your pet sheep,and a terrorist pops up..whaddya do?

a: run up and down the aisle screaming.

b: set the sheep lose to do his thing.

c: leave it those horrible men with the guns.

d: ask the audience.
;)

Sheep....or a Ram ?:D

How many terrorists and what are they armed with?
1 terrorist with a safety knife = Ripped limb from limb.
6 terrorist with sub-machine guns and hand grenades = 2 dead gun toting pilots and an out of control plane.

There are a lot of operational problems to be ironed out but non of them are insoluble, many already have a working precedent.

For example, Air Marshals must have an approved procedure for securing their firearms between flights, pilots should use the same procedure. Many armed passengers of various organisations fly on our aircraft each day (for example, the other day I had and armed Housing and Urban Development officer on board). There is no reason why armed pilots should operate under any more stringent rules than applied to these other armed passengers.

There will be at least two other restrictions imposed on armed pilots. First, no firearms on international flights. Second, no alcohol AT ALL , ANYTIME, THE WHOLE TIME AWAY ON DUTY whilst possessing a firearm. As a practical matter, the carrying of firearms by pilots will be used as a means of reducing the need for hiring many more air marshals. The government will save money in the end. The air marshals "freed up" by pilots carrying firearms will then be assigned to the uncovered international flights.

The present ideas imply that pilots will be trained and then given federal officer status. This status solves most of the difficulties associated with the carriage and use of a firearm. Whether operating a flight or dead-heading makes no difference. A pilot wishing to board an aircraft with a firearm will need to go through the same indentification and documentation as any other person approved to carry a firearm in flight. They would also be subject to the same restrictions as other armed passengers.

28th. You forgot a combination:
6 terrorist without firearms = 6 terrorists unable to enter cockpit because of armed pilot.

No guns on board
 

Do not introduce wepons into a sterile enviroment. This includes air marshalls. If you are going to put an armed air marshall into the cabin, why not give him a high powerd automatic rifle, exterior body armour, pepper spray, gas-mask, flex-cuffs and sit him directly in front of the cockpit door facing rearward. It boggles my mind as to why we are trying to prevent, cure or deal with a situation at mach .85, flight level 350 rather than with the wheels chocked, ground power hooked up and the air bridge attatched to the aircraft. Airport screening needs to be beefed up dramatically. Screeners need to be trained, re-trained and tested continually. We need more technology to detect bombs and guns.
And we need more hands to frisk, un-pack and search.

Deal with the threat at the gate , in the airport concourse, or at the security gate, not while in-flight.

The only problem is, Apollo, that many people are complaining about the system we have now. Imagine what it would be like to have ever more intrusive and time consuming inspections than the ones we have at present. Recently there was an idea, which thankfully seems to have been rejected, of feeling metal zips to ensure there was no weapon hidden behind! The airline industry does not need more reasons to discourage pax to fly.

Your idea would also inflate the already burgeoning TSA payroll. The TSA could actually buy the three major US airlines with its start up budget. This budget has not brought us security, 40% of test firearms continue to get through security screening. If a firearm can get through security the terrorists win. I know the securing arrangement on our cockpit doors would not stand up to a few rounds of FMJ 9mm. In this situation only a round going the other way will make any difference. By the way, a high power rifle in an aircraft is a REALLY stupid idea.

Yes we need better trained screeners and equipment but while weapons can still be smuggled through security and while they can still be pre-positioned on aircraft by minimally screened ground staff the armed pilot is the best back-up system. 68% of the US public agree.

Some of my best acquaintances turned out to be sheep in the long run, silly old them.

"28th. You forgot a combination:
6 terrorist without firearms = 6 terrorists unable to enter cockpit because of armed pilot."

Which leads to another combination. 2 dead terrorists, 2 unarmed and now dead pilots. 4 previously unarmed terrorist now armed with dead pilots guns.
Do you honestly believe that in any "god fobid" future terrorist attack that they would go aboard unarmed? They would be sat on by the fattest woman before they got 10 feet.
What about the pilots firearm training? Would it be a refresher course every 6 months shooting at bits of cardboard? Or would it be a training scenario where 6 unarmed men storm the cockpit and see how long it takes to disarm the pilots?
This is a very interesting topic with endless "what ifs".
Walt,,

"BOING" says he had an armed Housing and Urban Developement Officer on his flight recently.
And we are arguing the toss about firearms with people who see nothing unusual about this.
Sweet Jesus/Allah/Budha/omnipresent non gender specific controlling entity!

"Violins in the Middle East", why are peoples so consumed with cultural problems over there when we have pilots with no arms. The sooner we arm the pilots, the smoother the flying!

Oh, my...!

NEVER mind...


:D




RIP - Gildna Radner

LAZYB.

Very Funny (for an American) :D :D :p :D :D

Walt,,