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

[shafter]

There's some hoops to jump through but law enforcement can fly with firearms.

 

[silicosys4]

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.

I stated a fact. You are the one assuming causation.

 

[Old Dog]

On this one, gotta say negative, Ghostrider.

I've done armed prisoner escorts on commercial airliners and been nervous as ****. And I consider myself fairly well-trained.

No, I don't want Joe Sixpack carrying his handgun on any flight. Over the years, I've encountered way too much stupidity demonstrated by both "trained professionals" and (even legally) armed citizens (with no criminal records).

Not in today's world.

 

[Nuclear]

There is no restriction on carrying handguns onto a General Aviation (private or biz jets) aircraft, but I couldn’t find any record of one crashing due to internal gunfire or even an incident of gunfire inside of one. So I’m thinking it is the same as Constitutional Carry. It sounds like a horrible idea, but may not be.

 

[jmorris]

When I ride in an airplane and the guy that owns it doesn't have a problem with me carrying it, I do. If they want it with the rest of my stuff, that's fine too.

Do I have a problem with a business deciding how they want to run it? No. Do I frequent every business? No.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Did anyone question the Bader-Meinhof, Cuban or PLO hijackers about why they started hijacking in 1967 or so?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

My rule four is, before pulling the trigger, be aware of what that bullet may hit on the way to the intended target and beyond when I miss, and hold fire if there is any uncertainty of where the bullet will stop.

I have ridden in commercial airlines from Kingsport, Tennessee to Pensacola, Florida and back several times in the past decade. The passenger compartment of a commercial airliner is jam packed with potential unintended targets.

 

[kwguy]

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

Both groups (passenger and cargo airline pilots) have that option; however, international flying poses problems with that.

 

[skoro]

My daughter is a flight attendant.

She has all kinds of stories about drunk, psycho, or otherwise nasty passengers she's had to deal with.

Allowing these folks to be armed in flight would invite disaster.

I voted NO

 

[wayneinFL]

Both groups (passenger and cargo airline pilots) have that option; however, international flying poses problems with that.

Obviously the US couldn't require it on international flights, just domestic.

 

[wanderinwalker]

Obviously the US couldn't require it on international flights, just domestic.

Doesn't even work on all domestic flights either. I can legally carry a pistol in New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont, but if a flight ended up in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, or a few other states, I'm both no longer legal, and will be dealt with with extreme legal prejudice if I'm in possession of the firearm even if the flight was diverted to land in one of those states.

Also, I voted NO. Watch how the average person treats driving a car, now give them a gun in an airplane? No, please, no.

But also, for anybody worried about putting holes in the fuselage, it's an urban myth that shooting out a window will depressurize the cabin. Look at the incidents where doors have blown off or sections of roofs have come off airframes and the aircraft were able to descend and land safely (even if the ride is a bit uncomfortable for a while). A little .45-caliber hole isn't going to bother anything structural in a 95-ton airliner with redundant systems.

 

[wayneinFL]

Doesn't even work on all domestic flights either. I can legally carry a pistol in New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont, but if a flight ended up in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, or a few other states, I'm both no longer legal, and will be dealt with with extreme legal prejudice if I'm in possession of the firearm even if the flight was diverted to land in one of those states.

Also, I voted NO. Watch how the average person treats driving a car, now give them a gun in an airplane? No, please, no.

But also, for anybody worried about putting holes in the fuselage, it's an urban myth that shooting out a window will depressurize the cabin. Look at the incidents where doors have blown off or sections of roofs have come off airframes and the aircraft were able to descend and land safely (even if the ride is a bit uncomfortable for a while). A little .45-caliber hole isn't going to bother anything structural in a 95-ton airliner with redundant systems.

Pretty sure the federal government overrides New Jersey.

They let cops fly on planes armed and any of those cops could land or be diverted into another state. So why is the cop so special and not the pilot, who is in control of the entire plane?

Come to think of it, why are cops allowed to carry on planes for prisoner transport? I get corrections officers transporting prisoner by land- there are weapons everywhere outside the prison. But on a plane? You walk through the sterile area of an airport, then get on a plane that no weapons can get into in the air. That's as secure, if not more secure than the jail. Why doesn't the cop have to check his gun at some point before getting on the plane, so the prisoner can't take the gun?

 

[unclenunzie]

Whatever the outcome of our decision here , it must also apply to law-abiding resident non-citizens as well.

 

[7mmRLC]

Just plain no will do.

 

[AlexanderA]

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

Guns were outlawed, but in the early years there was no enforcement mechanism other than scare tactics. I remember taking a flight to Europe in 1969. There were posters all over the place warning about not bringing guns aboard, but there were no scanners or metal detectors. So it's possible that hijackers saw this and decided to take the risk.

Today, even with scanners and metal detectors, a large part of the effort still involves "security theater." But surely the risk of actually getting caught is greater.

 

[Hugger-4641]

I voted no. There is no place inside a plane that a bullet doesn't do unintended damage, regardless if it was fired intentionally or negligently. I would be in favor of a permit with thorough background checks to have it unloaded in your carry on rather than checked baggage. Flying on an airliner is a privilege, not a right, so I don't view it the same as other 2A environments.

 

[The Night Rider]

I think a handgun on an airplane could cause more problems than it solves.

I also think 911 changed the way that people react to hijackings. People understand that there's absolutely no value in compliance.

But even that goes back to my initial statement I think having armed passengers on an airplane would cause more problems than it solved.

 

[red rick]

I vote no , there are to many stupid people , or to many that lack common sense . At least if I see someone being reckless and unsafe in public areas I can walk away . You don’t have that option on a plane .

 

[lightman]

Due to the number of AD's we see at gun shows I voted no.

 

[unclenunzie]

I voted no. There is no place inside a plane that a bullet doesn't do unintended damage, regardless if it was fired intentionally or negligently. I would be in favor of a permit with thorough background checks to have it unloaded in your carry on rather than checked baggage. Flying on an airliner is a privilege, not a right, so I don't view it the same as other 2A environments.

Not entirely true - the constitution has already been recognized to protect a right to travel. Some restrictions on travel are permissible of course, and being a private enterprise they can decide what those restrictions are (except where those restrictions would offend the constitution). It probably becomes a balancing act where air carriers are required by regulations to maintain air travel safety with respect to their operations for all passengers and crew. Maybe this fits in with "no."

 

[shafter]

Pretty sure the federal government overrides New Jersey.

They let cops fly on planes armed and any of those cops could land or be diverted into another state. So why is the cop so special and not the pilot, who is in control of the entire plane?

Come to think of it, why are cops allowed to carry on planes for prisoner transport? I get corrections officers transporting prisoner by land- there are weapons everywhere outside the prison. But on a plane? You walk through the sterile area of an airport, then get on a plane that no weapons can get into in the air. That's as secure, if not more secure than the jail. Why doesn't the cop have to check his gun at some point before getting on the plane, so the prisoner can't take the gun?

Cops are covered by LEOSA. On or off duty they can carry in all 50 states although there's still some state specific regulations they have to follow.

 

[sgt127]

Only if they can shoot better than me.

Try it.

https://americanhandgunner.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Air-Marshal-Pistol-Qualification.pdf

 

[dogtown tom]

Poll fail.
The Second Amendment is a restriction on GOVERNMENT, not a private business.

Don't like the airlines policy on firearms, don't fly that airline.

 

[Kleanbore]

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

Basis for that?

 

[Glockpride]

Just arm every flight deck.