Do You Believe That American Citizens Should Be Able to Carry a Loaded Handgun on Commercial Airlines?

[IJ1981]

It was possible for over 40 years until the Cuban Hijackings began in 1967.

Can this ability be resumed in today's world?

 

[tws3b2]

I voted no. Because, I just think it would be easier to keep a bad guy with a gun off the plane if no one is allowed to have agun. But. What the heck do I know? Just gotta think what you think.
But I do think all politicians should be handcuffed, gaged, deported, put on a slow rockeship and sent off to the furthrest unknown comet moving in the opposite direction from earth.

 

[silicosys4]

Violent hijackings went from nonexistent to a major problem almost overnight as soon as guns were outlawed on the passenger decks of commercial flights.

 

[CapnMac]

This is a subtle thing.
And generalities do not suffer specific subtleties well at all.

Ok, so, while more Americans than ever are legally carrying. Are they trained to anywhere near what I would consider a minimum? Well, no--but my training situation is significantly different than average. I cope with this that the mean remains greater than the average. Or, at least I hope and pray it remains so.

Specifically to this topic, the fact that I can't just check my EDC into my carry-on when I'm making a day trip by plane. Mind, I fly to go visit construction sites, and they sometimes are in less desirable neighborhoods (not that the average airport seems to be in "good" parts of town).

And, I want no part in a flight with either gunplay nor gunfire, as all the outcomes are likely poor.

 

[papajim2jordan]

Once upon a time, people seemed to have more self restraint. Now days, a disagreement about the outcome of a sporting event can lead to gunfire. Maybe if the food were better, and a decent in-flight movie...

 

[sgt127]

A shootout in an airplane would be like shooting a blue ballon in a torrential downpour of 300 red ballon’s. With the fan on.

IF everybody stayed in their seat and ducked. Maybe. And, If the bad guy was nice enough to remain standing.

I consider myself about a tier 2.75 operator. Now retired after 35 years from being maybe a tier 2 or 2.5 operator.


That’s about the most horrendous situation I could imagine.

Unless he’s seated next to me when he leaps up and yells Aloha Snackbar. I’m screwed.

 

[Slamfire]

As if all passengers are safe with a loaded firearm. I talked to a "Ramp Rat" before the heightened security due to 9/11. The Ramp Rat had stories of firearms discharges in luggage tossed into planes. Knuckle heads left chambered rounds in striker fired crap pistols such as Jennings and Raven Arms. Today, striker fired pistols are all the rage, and it does not take much searching to find owners shooting themselves holstering, or just sitting down with a striker fired pistol. Like this negligent discharge due to a worn leather holster. Enough passengers get shot, and enough air craft spring a leak (catastrophic or otherwise) and that will end the practice.

Is anyone aware of aircraft brought down by suicidal individuals? I remember an Air Disasters episode where a suicidal airline employee used his 44 Magnum to kill the pilots and crash the plane. Sometimes, the pilots just crash aircraft, and take everyone with them. ‘Suicide by plane’ has killed 393 people in just 4 years

And the fun does not have to be in the airplane. Search for the Utube videos of Social Justice Warriors having knock down drag out fights in the terminal. Now they get to carry loaded weapons! Wheee! It will be worse than a war zone!!!

Better give this guy the window seat

 

[toivo]

No effin' way. The risks to the entire aircraft are incredibly high. The cure could be worse than the disease: crashes caused by attempts to deter hijackings. Airport screening keeps all guns off planes. That should be enough.

Violent hijackings went from nonexistent to a major problem almost overnight as soon as guns were outlawed on the passenger decks of commercial flights.

I believe that's a post hoc fallacy; the ban went into effect in '61, but the real spike in incidents wasn't until the late '60s through the '70s, during which time there was a lot of political turmoil internationally: PLO, Baader-Meinhoff gang, Carlos the Jackal, etc. In any case, you could argue the other way around: incidents causing the ban rather than the ban causing incidents.

 

[Pudge]

Sure, but I think there should be a dress code, and you should board first come first served. Nobody cares what I think...

 

[bangswitch]

Well the 2A says, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Taken to its literal limits, a citizen should be able to carry 24/7/365, wherever he wants. But with rights come responsibilities and duties that most people don't want to discuss. Sure, I think an American Citizen should be able to carry a loaded firearm on a commercial airliner, but it's a sure bet that eventually someone would misuse or abuse the right, and shoot themself, someone else, or put a hole in the airplane for no reason except their own stupidity. In an ideal world, the whole plane could be filled with people carrying a loaded firearm, but nobody on the plane would know that everyone else was armed. Sadly, we're far from ideal.

 

[Elkins45]

I didn't vote because it doesn't seem like a realistic question.

Commercial aviation is a private business and therefore they get to set their own rules. I have an absolute right to freedom of religion but I can't sacrifice a goat on a commercial flight, nor can I sing hymns and distribute Bible tracts.

 

[AlexanderA]

Two ways to go on this: either nobody should be armed aboard an airliner, or else everybody should be armed aboard an airliner. (In the latter case, if they didn't bring their own gun, they would be issued one for the duration of the flight.)

In the old days, it was the disparity of force that made hijackings possible. If hijackers knew that all the passengers were armed, they wouldn't have tried anything. So, deterrence would have prevailed, and armed shootouts would have occurred seldom if at all.

Still, I don't think I would be flying under those conditions.

 

[jmr40]

As much as I want to say yes I can't. Too many irresponsible people out there that I don't trust.

 

[wayneinFL]

Either way, I think commercial airline pilots should be required to be armed. Probably freight pilots, too.

 

[Bazoo]

I voted no. I think anyone should be allowed to carry a firearm without ammunition in the carry onluggage, and those that have a valid CCDW license should be able to carry a loaded firearm. However, if the choice was that no one carried, or everyone carried, I would go with everyone.

 

[shafter]

I voted no. At 30k feet above the ground I don't want anyone doing any shooting at all. The older I get the more unimpressed I am by the horrifically low skill level of most gun owners.

 

[luv2safari]

No effin' way. The risks to the entire aircraft are incredibly high. The cure could be worse than the disease: crashes caused by attempts to deter hijackings. Airport screening keeps all guns off planes. That should be enough.

I believe that's a post hoc fallacy; the ban went into effect in '61, but the real spike in incidents wasn't until the late '60s through the '70s, during which time there was a lot of political turmoil internationally: PLO, Baader-Meinhoff gang, Carlos the Jackal, etc. In any case, you could argue the other way around: incidents causing the ban rather than the ban causing incidents.

It is a post hoc fallacy, yes.

Guns are now banned on airplanes. The Baader-Minhoff Gang, Cubans, and PLO terrorists are hijacking planes, so the gun ban Must have caused all this hijacking.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Good call.

 

[Meeks36]

Not no but heck no! I’ve been to public ranges seen the nonsense. Saw holes in counters at LGS.

 

[General Geoff]

Can this ability be resumed in today's world?

If they met the same stringent training, qualification, and background check standards as federal air marshals, maybe.

 

[nettlle]

No. When the airlines come up with a scanner that checks for idiots? Maybe.

 

[Pudge]

As much as I want to say yes I can't. Too many irresponsible people out there that I don't trust.

And so many of them fly on aircraft. So much footage of unacceptable behavior.

 

[GRIZ22]

Two ways to go on this: either nobody should armed aboard an airliner, or else everybody should armed aboard an airliner. (In the latter case, if they didn't bring their own gun, they would be issued one for the duration of the flight.)

In the old days, it was the disparity of force that made hijackings possible. If hijackers knew that all the passengers were armed, they wouldn't have tried anything. So, deterrence would have prevailed, and armed shootouts would have occurred seldom if at all.

Still, I don't think I would be flying under those conditions.

IDK about this. I remember an episode of All in the Family where Archie Bunker advocated giving everyone a gun as they boarded the aircraft.

The problem if you do this has everyone been trained.

 

[Outpost75]

Law enforcement traveling on official business only, escorting prisoners, etc. Must be coordinated with TSA, US Marshalls, etc.

 

[wayneinFL]

Law enforcement traveling on official business only, escorting prisoners, etc. Must be coordinated with TSA, US Marshalls, etc.

Only if they can shoot better than me.

 

[balin]

In the grand scheme if it was legal ir would be up to each individual airlines decision as it is their plane. And I am sure they would all not allow it