Pilots say TSA disrupting gun training


PDA






2dogs
June 7, 2003, 10:15 AM
HELLO! Does anyone now still think the gummint wants armed pilots, or armed citizens? What a freakin' joke.

Oh yeah, "key members of Congress" are mighty mad- and so it goes after almost 2 years- a waste of dollars.




http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2003/06/06-pilot-guns.htm

Pilots say TSA disrupting gun training

By Fred Bayles, USA TODAY

Two pilots groups and key members of Congress are blasting the Transportation Security Administration for moves they fear could delay arming pilots.

Last week, the TSA fired Willie Ellison, the head of the TSA academy, despite high praise by the pilots who received firearms training. This week, the TSA revealed plans to move the training from Georgia to New Mexico.

"It's one more bureaucratic disaster devised by those who want to make this more complex and expensive than it has to be," said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., head of the House aviation subcommittee. "I don't know what their ulterior motive is, but it is very frustrating."

Congress authorized guns in cockpits last fall over the objections of the Bush administration and the airline industry. The law provides training for airline pilots in firearms, hand-to-hand combat and legal issues. Pilots are then deputized as federal officers and allowed to use deadly force in defense of their cockpits. The first class of 44 pilots graduated in April.

TSA officials told the 50 people who provide the training that the program would be moved from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga., to a facility at Artesia, N.M., in a remote southeast section of the state.

Both centers, on former military bases, provide training in firearms and tactics to law enforcement personnel from 74 federal agencies. The Georgia facility has seen enrollment grow by 30% a year since 2001.

The TSA training staffers, many of whom moved to Georgia in the past year, were offered the chance to relocate to New Mexico.

TSA spokesman Robert Johnson said courses would resume in Georgia in July as scheduled. Then the training would move to New Mexico in the fall because of "a surge of other training" in Georgia. "They are running out of space there," Johnson said. He said attempts will be made to find other jobs for the trainers, but many fear they will be laid off soon.

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., the ranking Democrat on the aviation committee, complained that the changes came as a surprise to Congress. "No attempt was made to rationalize the waste of money spent setting up the program in Georgia and then moving it to New Mexico," he said. "It's just another attempt by the administration to disrupt the program at the behest of the airlines who have always opposed arming pilots."

Johnson declined to comment on Ellison, citing privacy issues. Ellison also declined to comment.

Pilots worry about what the shake-up means for those awaiting training.

Bob Lambert, the head of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance, an organization of pilots who have campaigned for the right to arm themselves against the threat of terrorist attacks, charged that the changes were a "delay tactic" by TSA officials opposed to arming pilots.

Lambert and other pilots also questioned the reasons given for firing Ellison, a firearms expert and former deputy assistant director with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. They said the TSA removed Ellison for "unacceptable performance and conduct," but that the specific reasons listed made no sense to them.

Ellison's bosses criticized him for holding a dinner for the pilots, providing them with baseball caps with the program's logo and asking them to evaluate the course — all standard practices for training seminars, the pilots said. "The reasons they fired him do not reflect what I observed in the program," Stephen Luckey, the chairman of the Air Line Pilot Association's national security committee, said. "Someone was obviously unhappy with the program, but there's got to be more to it than this."

Mica said his staff is investigating Ellison's firing. He also will push for changes in the program that will take it from TSA authority and use private training companies instead.

If you enjoyed reading about "Pilots say TSA disrupting gun training" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hammer4nc
June 7, 2003, 11:58 AM
I'd like to see the TSA expense reports for custom-designed kevlar reinforced shoes...they are taking "foot dragging" to new levels. Let's see:

1. Requiring costly, intrusive pilot psychological profiling, in addition to background checks for armed pilots.

2. Requiring "lock boxes" for firearms transport outside the cockpit (rather than concealed carry)

3. Requiring special rules for armed pilots who are deadheading, that are at best inconvenient, at worst violation of other federal laws.

4. Relocate the training center in mid-stream.

5. Fire the training director.

These are just the items I discovered on just a five minute internet search. Its rare that both the repub and demo leaders of a subcommittee come out in agreement, and so harshly, on any issue. So I'm asking myself, "Is this just the action of a screwball agency director (James Loy), or, his he acting at behest of Pres. Bush, in stonewalling this issue?" I'm leaning toward the second choice.

I probably defend the Bush administration as much as anybody, but he's lost me on this one.

Other Bush supporters feel free to explain how Bush is just playing smart politics, appealing to moderates, or some other semantic device that would explain this? I stand ready to be convinced...

stevelyn
June 7, 2003, 12:07 PM
I don't think anyone should be surprised. TSA has been dead-set against arming pilots from the begining. Inspite of the demands of the "People", Congress, and the pilots' unions TSA has stonewalled getting pilots trained and armed. John "Waco" Magaw had to step down because of his opposition. James Loy was appointed with the understanding that TSA would get the program going in a reasonable amount of time. That hasn't happened either. A token amount was trained with enough headlines to give the appearance that pilots were steadily being trained and armed. The truth is, TSA has further crippled the program with unreasonable requirements and unnecessary high administrative costs to discourage pilots from participating in the program. They had no intention of complying with the demands of the people, Congress, and the pilots themselves.
Why? Two possible reasons. A successful armed pilots' program may prove that TSA's role may not be necessary or at the very least the agency dosen't need their current budget and personnel levels to ensure airline security. The other is perhaps these asses are pompous enough the believe they know better than the people, pilots, and Congress what's needed for airline security. My guess is that it's the former.

STW
June 7, 2003, 01:37 PM
The other is perhaps these asses are pompous enough the believe they know better than the people, pilots, and Congress what's needed for airline security.


My guess

Peter Gun
June 7, 2003, 06:21 PM
I think its all the airlines holding things up and pulling strings.
They have calculated that the miniscule possibility of a ND or a pilot shooting will result in huge liability for them. They are more concerned about this small possibility than about the larger probability that terrorists will kill passengers. Precedent seems to have convinced then they are immune from liability in he second case. This is the only clear motivation I can see for the administration to be against arming pilots.

Waitone
June 7, 2003, 08:02 PM
I'd be interested in seeing the pedigree of second level management. There exists a lot of Clintoon holdovers and I wonder how many still hold to the true religion.

I still maintain there are those who desperately want the experiment in arming pilots to fail. I can think of no more guarded and protected environment in the US. If big.gov can't protect everyone in an airliner how will they protect Joe and Martha Sixpack on Elm Street.

In the run-up to the bill's approval the holders of true religion pulled every bureaucratic trick in the book and lost. So whaddaya do? Why you retreat to the next set of barracades and defend from there. Now you control the program so you can kill it with procedure.

Classic bureaucratic combat.

Leatherneck
June 8, 2003, 08:56 AM
I'm with STW: believe they know better than the people, pilots, and Congress

Don't forget, the TSA is an assemblage of civil servants who wanted to move and prosper in the DC area. HQ pukes with the typical anti-gun attitude of the Beltway crowd. Bah.

TC
TFL Survivor

longeyes
June 8, 2003, 02:06 PM
Mineta has to go.

Okay, which crony has the NM contract?

Erik
June 8, 2003, 06:51 PM
FLETC is running over capacity as it is.

There are constant schedualing conflicts.

Training pilots is important, but not as important as training the FLEOs assigned here. FLETC stands for Federal Law Enforcement Training Center after all.

So someone points out that Artesia is experiencing less of a capacity issue, and that it would be easier for everyone to move the pilot's program there. Big deal, right?

Apparently so...

tyme
June 8, 2003, 11:04 PM
Petergun, if they think that, they're morons.

ATTENTION AIRLINES: Compare the very very small probability of a judgement against you for a pilot's ND that kills a passenger, vs the billions you're loosing because a bunch of idiots with boxcutters hijacked your planes.

This is not rocket science, this is econ 101.

Slotback
June 8, 2003, 11:50 PM
TSA stands for Transportation Security Administration. I think that they are "stonewalling" for lack of a better term at the moment for one important reason: that is once the airline pilots are armed, then the truckers and train engineers will want to be armed with little to no hassle. Of course, most truckers I know are almost always armed. I've never been on a train, but it seems to me that a train would be an inviting target for terrorists of any ilk.

Also, they are trying to justify their existence. Frankly, I am having a hard time figuring out how they will survive beyond the next 3 years.

stevelyn
June 9, 2003, 07:44 AM
FLETC is running over capacity as it is.

Uhmm.........this really wouldn't be a problem if the gummint took Frontsight up on their offer to train pilots or if the pilots could attend Frontsight on their own and be given credit for the course.
The training received at Frontsight/Gunsite/Thunder Ranch/LFI is immeasureably of higher quality than the FLETC or any other LE program.

Training pilots is important but not as important as training FLEOs here.

Yeah, as if we have a shortage of FLEOs and need to fill all those empty JBT slots.

....once airline pilots are armed then truckers and train engineers will want to be armed with little or no hassle.

So? And what's your problem with that?:scrutiny:

Slotback
June 9, 2003, 11:14 AM
Steve:
I don't have any problem with truckers or train engineers being armed. In fact, given some of the stuff that are hauled every day on trucks and train, the only sane course of action is to have those folks armed against would be terrorists.

My point was simply that TSA is trying to justify its existance. Why would they be needed if all of those pilots, truckers and engineers were armed? They wouldn't be needed.

stevelyn
June 9, 2003, 11:50 AM
Sorry, I guess I misinterpreted what you were saying. It looks like we agree on TSA's justifying their existence.
Truckers and railroad workers should get themselves armed and their respective agencies/companies should have a policy in place outlining standards and requirments before the government can jump in and block it or screw it up with their own burdensome bureaucratic drivel.

Erik
June 9, 2003, 05:50 PM
"Yeah, as if we have a shortage of FLEOs and need to fill all those empty JBT slots."

There are 76 or so federal law enforcement outfits which receive training at FLETC. Most are under-staffed. The ones which deal with border issues in particular.

Now I wonder how many of the 76 or so outfits have folks that even vaguely fit the JBT label? For that matter, I wonder how many of the five or six agencies most can probably name of the top of their heads do? (Not really an invitation, just throwing it out there.)

Sergeant Bob
June 9, 2003, 07:14 PM
I don't have any problem with truckers or train engineers being armed. In fact, given some of the stuff that are hauled every day on trucks and train, the only sane course of action is to have those folks armed against would be terrorists.

I doubt that would ever happen, (although I agree) and most truck drivers I know are not armed (I know ALOT of them). The government's solution to that problem is to require criminal background checks on all commercial drivers (complete with fingerprinting for the FBI) hauling said materials (i.e. Hazardous Materials endorsement) at a cost of about $75 a pop. Likely increasing the cost of my driver's license to about $135 (it costs me $60 now, I doubt this will be a freebie).
Bet you feel safer now don't you?

foghornl
June 10, 2003, 09:24 AM
The TSA is holding up pilot trraining because they are too busy stealing things from private citizens at airports.

If you enjoyed reading about "Pilots say TSA disrupting gun training" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!