AllAmerican
Member
Everyone on the plane should be armed.
There, problem solved.
There, problem solved.
Administration secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns
- Thread starter user3214
- Start date
- Status
Flyboy
Member
TAB, you don't have a concealed carry permit and you're not a pilot.
Why don't you try listening to the people around you who have the experience that you lack? Or at least try reading the article--your comment that there are "less than 200" FFDOs is off by almost two orders of magnitude.
Tactically, the cockpit is about the best situation you could ask for. There is only one point of entry, and it's so narrow that many of us have to turn sideways to get through it. Drop the jump seat and you have a ready-made obstacle to slow down the Bad Guy's ingress.
You may not be able to shoot somebody who is bound up in a known location from six-eight feet away, but I think most people can.
As for training, A) FFDOs aren't trained like police officers because they aren't police officers. They don't have to investigate crimes, they don't have to know traffic laws, they don't have to do the vast majority of things that police officers do every day. All they need to know is "there's somebody coming through that locked door and I didn't invite him. BANG!" and B) having discussed the firearms training with people who have actually been through it, it's quite thorough.
If Tam were still hanging around here, I think this is where she'd interject with "quiet, the grownups are talking." I can't snark like her, but I can say that you've demonstrated that you don't know what you're talking about, and that God gave you two ears and only one mouth so you can listen twice as much as you talk.
Why don't you try listening to the people around you who have the experience that you lack? Or at least try reading the article--your comment that there are "less than 200" FFDOs is off by almost two orders of magnitude.
Tactically, the cockpit is about the best situation you could ask for. There is only one point of entry, and it's so narrow that many of us have to turn sideways to get through it. Drop the jump seat and you have a ready-made obstacle to slow down the Bad Guy's ingress.
You may not be able to shoot somebody who is bound up in a known location from six-eight feet away, but I think most people can.
As for training, A) FFDOs aren't trained like police officers because they aren't police officers. They don't have to investigate crimes, they don't have to know traffic laws, they don't have to do the vast majority of things that police officers do every day. All they need to know is "there's somebody coming through that locked door and I didn't invite him. BANG!" and B) having discussed the firearms training with people who have actually been through it, it's quite thorough.
If Tam were still hanging around here, I think this is where she'd interject with "quiet, the grownups are talking." I can't snark like her, but I can say that you've demonstrated that you don't know what you're talking about, and that God gave you two ears and only one mouth so you can listen twice as much as you talk.
JImbothefiveth
Member
I'd rather be hit by a stray bullet than have be flown in to the world trade center. I'm less likely to die that way, and if I do, at least most of the other passengers will survive.
Then you would die when the plane crashed, gauranteed, or you could risk getting hit by a stray bullet and even if that happened, have a very good chance of surviving. (I think around 80% of handgun wounds are survived.)
Birddog1911
Member
Considering the fact that there are on average around 5,000 flights PER DAY in the continental US, one ND by one pilot since the programs inception is a pretty damned good statistic. Bad that it happened, yes. I wonder how many LEO have accidental discharges per year.
Also consider the fact that a large number of airline pilots are also current serving reservists, or are former military.
I'll take armed pilots every time, and yes, I'll take the bullet, should it come to that. But considering the width of those doors, the chances of Tab's flying lead, I reckon the bad guy is gonna take all of the hits.
And yes, I fly a lot, and flew in the military as enlisted aircrew.
Also consider the fact that a large number of airline pilots are also current serving reservists, or are former military.
I'll take armed pilots every time, and yes, I'll take the bullet, should it come to that. But considering the width of those doors, the chances of Tab's flying lead, I reckon the bad guy is gonna take all of the hits.
And yes, I fly a lot, and flew in the military as enlisted aircrew.
lead-inspector
Member
+1 Bill2e Very poor design of holster and almost criminal rules re: handling the weapon.
Harley Fixer THANK YOU for going through all the BS required to become a armed pilot.
Pilots were required to be armed until sometime in the '60s and NOTHING bad happened. One pilot stopped a armed hijacker with his handgun.
The TSA has from the very beginning thrown roadblock after roadblock into the path of this program. It is a good thing and should be properly run>
Steve
Harley Fixer THANK YOU for going through all the BS required to become a armed pilot.
Pilots were required to be armed until sometime in the '60s and NOTHING bad happened. One pilot stopped a armed hijacker with his handgun.
The TSA has from the very beginning thrown roadblock after roadblock into the path of this program. It is a good thing and should be properly run>
Steve
My brother is an FFDO and I tell you the level of training he recieved and detail of the background check was very impressive. You should know the Pilot is not allowed to leave the cockpit for any reason in the event of an attack. His cockpit is his fortress and that is the reason for the program. If some guy breaks into the cockpit i for one want the pilot to drop him asap.
The reason for this was two fold. The FFDO removed the weapon from the holster. The ND occured when he reholstered the weapon. The holster that the FFDP carries is BS. A pad lock secures the weapon to the holster behind the trigger. He had the lock infront of the trigger and it ND when it was fully holstered. If that makes sense.
The reason for this was two fold. The FFDO removed the weapon from the holster. The ND occured when he reholstered the weapon. The holster that the FFDP carries is BS. A pad lock secures the weapon to the holster behind the trigger. He had the lock infront of the trigger and it ND when it was fully holstered. If that makes sense.
Deanimator
Member
So I take it your (sic) volunteering to have your family flown into the side of a building by a terrorist?
That's INFINITELY better than the REMOTE possibility of one of them being WOUNDED in the course of that terrorist act being foiled, huh?
Thank goodness none of the pilots on 9/11 had guns. Somebody might have been accidentally shot!
Have you asked the families of the people working in the tall buildings?
Deanimator
Member
How many cops had NDs last year?
When do we disarm the police?
Baron Holbach4
Member
Imagine if the 9/11 pilots had been armed.
the pain of my mom, dad, or myself dying from a stray bullet beats the hell out of dying when the pilot decides to crash the plane and kill everyone in order to prevent a terror attack, or worse: crashing the plane into an area where hundreds to thousands of others could be killed, including all the air passengers.
I don't know, but there is a pretty funny video of one that happened in a classroom...after realizing that nobody else was hurt, it is funny especially considereing the dialogue prior to the nd.
Tab: Back in CA in the central valley there was a shootout in a parking lot...a stray bullet went through an Arby's window and struck a man in the head while eating. So because of that one incident, we should disarm the police. I'll let you attempt that one.
+1 That is exactly the alternative, isn't it? Tabs thinking on the public carrying concealed is directly inline with those who would take away all of our gun rights, so I'm really unsure of why he/she has a firearm to begin with. If pilots shouldn't carry because of the chance of someone getting accidentally shot, then nobody at all should be carrying.
I think the Washington Times is jumping to baseless conclusions. All I read was that $2 million was transfered from the training program to supervision activities. How is that killing the FFDO program? What percentage of the total budget is that? Maybe the number of new people who want to be armed pilots is declining because everyone that was interested already took the training, so TSA is moving some funds to oversight of the existing armed pilots?
NavyLCDR
member
Could it also be that the huge increase in CPL applications has caused a backlog in investigations and the program is delayed due to that? I am so tired of every little thing being shouted as an Obama administration conspiracy to ban guns. I wish someone would ban tin foil hats.
But, at least this thread has exposed another closet anti, closely related to the key just above CAPS LOCK...
ServiceSoon
Member
What happened to Obama’s promise of transparency in government?
Is it me, or did TAB just recycle every argument given by the antis to disarm all of us?
Look! A negligent discharge!
Look! Someone, somewhere, could possibly, maybe, potentially do something that could be construed as stupid!
Just in case, let's take everyone's guns!
Look! A negligent discharge!
Look! Someone, somewhere, could possibly, maybe, potentially do something that could be construed as stupid!
Just in case, let's take everyone's guns!
deerhunter61
Member
TAB,
I know one of the pilots that does carry. I also fly quite a bit. And I would take a pilot with a pistol over one without and accept any and all risks that come with it over not having one and having the jet I am flying in hit a building or a field killing everyone on board because no one on board has the ability to stop the BG or BGs.
Frankly in light of Sept 11 your statements and arguments are pretty shallow.
I know one of the pilots that does carry. I also fly quite a bit. And I would take a pilot with a pistol over one without and accept any and all risks that come with it over not having one and having the jet I am flying in hit a building or a field killing everyone on board because no one on board has the ability to stop the BG or BGs.
Frankly in light of Sept 11 your statements and arguments are pretty shallow.
Lightninstrike
Member
Deleted.
Deanimator
Member
So if they manage to get through the locked door, the flight crew should just GIVE them control of the aircraft? Or should they all just bow to the Mikado in unison, shout "Tenno Heika Banzai!!" and dive the plane into the ground to prevent the terrorists from taking control?
If this thread is to continue to run it will stay on topic. The topic is the administration moving 2 million dollars from the training budget for the flight deck officer program to salaries for supervisory personnel.
We aren't going to debate NDs in the cockpit, armed passengers or any of the other off topic posts that have been made. Keep it on topic or it's shut down.
This thread is a perfect example of why there is no longer a Legal and Political forum here.
Confine yourselves to the topic at hand or see the thread locked.
We aren't going to debate NDs in the cockpit, armed passengers or any of the other off topic posts that have been made. Keep it on topic or it's shut down.
This thread is a perfect example of why there is no longer a Legal and Political forum here.
Confine yourselves to the topic at hand or see the thread locked.
Fisherman_48768
Member
So much for a transparent administration, bunch of crooks, thieves and tax evaders not to mention a prez with a questionable citizenship.
mgkdrgn
Member
Because $2Million is all that was there to begin with ... and the FFDO's require recurrent training. With no funds, there will be no new training, and no recurrent training, killing the program by starvation.
gretske
Member
The most disturbing part of this is, that there was no debate, no announcement of a policy change by the administration, no opportunity for public dialogue. The Obama administration obviously does not welcome opposition, and has little appetite for a public vetting of its closely held beliefs.
- Status