Kennedy 0 #1 December 14, 2004 So with everything about the TSA, the terrorists, and anything else you think might be relevant, what do you think?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #2 December 14, 2004 I think it is a great idea.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #3 December 14, 2004 QuoteI think it is a great idea. Me too. I think, given recent events and the predictability of the intentions of terrorist plane hijackers, the cockpit is the last stand. The pilot should be able to use lethal force to defend it at all costs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
killler 2 #4 December 14, 2004 As long as they can shoot better then cops.. Only the cops can have a shoot out at point blank range and fire 13rounds and not hit anything.... Like the shoot out in LA..... All that was needed was a head shot.... Hell, One guy had to do it himself Killer..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #5 December 14, 2004 note to self: don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls, don't feed the trolls....witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
killler 2 #6 December 14, 2004 Not a troll.... Just pointing out the facts.... We don't need pilots firing in aircraft without being able to hit the person.... Killer.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #7 December 14, 2004 Quote Not a troll.... Just pointing out the facts.... We don't need pilots firing in aircraft without being able to hit the person.... Killer.... Recent terrorist events have shown that the people in that airplane are dead anyway. It's just a matter of time. More than likely, there will be a whole lot more deaths than just the people on that plane also. I think the risk of rapid depressurization is of lesser concern than the other possibilities. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #8 December 14, 2004 The only plus I would see is that it would be a deterrent to hijackers if it was well known that most pilots were armed. The minuses: 1. It only works as a deterrent if most pilots are armed, and I would be against arming all pilots (i.e. even pilots who could not handle weapons.) A good pilot does not a good marksman make. 2. Cypres use result in more cypres saves, because people are more likely to do stupid things thinking "hey, that's why I have a cypres." I would not want a gate agent to let a suspicious looking guy on a plane because "hey, that's why our pilots have guns." 3. If there is a gun on the plane, there is a possibility it will end up in the hands of the hijacker. I like the idea of armed, unidentified air marshals on most flights a lot better, because they can be selected for their crowd-control and weapons skills instead of their ability to fly an NDB approach. I think the best 'weapon' pilots have right now is the cockpit door. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #9 December 14, 2004 What I find odd is that the thought seems to be that the pilots shouldn't be trusted to handle deadly weapons. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #10 December 14, 2004 Isn't the entire purpose of the TSA to _prevent_ weapons from being on the plane? Seems like a really poor idea to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #11 December 14, 2004 QuoteA good pilot does not a good marksman make. How do you know that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #12 December 14, 2004 >How do you know that? Because the training required to become a good pilot has nothing to do with the training required to be a good marksman. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #13 December 14, 2004 Quote 1. It only works as a deterrent if most pilots are armed, and I would be against arming all pilots (i.e. even pilots who could not handle weapons.) A good pilot does not a good marksman make. You changed fom most to all. Why? I'm not for arming all pilots either, but I strongly advocate allowing any pilots who want to the right to carry aboard their aircraft. Besides, he wouldn't be doing room-clearing. He'd secure the door and head for the nearest airport, having the gun only for a cockpit breach. Shooting someone outlined in a door is easier than you might think. It focusses your vision on the target. Quote2. Cypres use result in more cypres saves, because people are more likely to do stupid things thinking "hey, that's why I have a cypres." I would not want a gate agent to let a suspicious looking guy on a plane because "hey, that's why our pilots have guns." Well, let's lay aside the fact that you can still get weapons on aircraft right now. Your hypothetical breaks down when you apply your own suggestion. Why wouldn't a screener let someone suspicious on when he knows there are air marshalls? (if he would do so for a FFDO) Quote3. If there is a gun on the plane, there is a possibility it will end up in the hands of the hijacker. Do you think five hijackers could take a gun from a pilot but fifty passengers couldn't take it from the hijackers? QuoteI like the idea of armed, unidentified air marshals on most flights a lot better, because they can be selected for their crowd-control and weapons skills instead of their ability to fly an NDB approach. Yeah, well, you let me know when they come up with the billions to recruit and train enough marshalls. ps - more than a few marshalls have done some pretty scary things on duty. Things that pilot drinking seem down right insignificant.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #14 December 14, 2004 Quote>How do you know that? Because the training required to become a good pilot has nothing to do with the training required to be a good marksman. I think his point is that the two are not mutually exclusive. e.g. how many pilots are ex-military?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
killler 2 #15 December 14, 2004 A armed air marshel in the back of a aircraft unknown to others has the better chance of taking out a highjacker then the pilot.... He has the upper hand..... The pilot is better off behind a locked door and in control of the aircraft.... The training needed is to keep the door locked at all cost.... I think a pilot should be able to carry if he can shoot without missing.... Killer.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #16 December 14, 2004 Quote What I find odd is that the thought seems to be that the pilots shouldn't be trusted to handle deadly weapons. That's what Mineta said. Yeah, I mean they're only driving the things that brought down the WTC. Heaven forbid they should be allowed a sidearm to prevent misuse of high speed, explosive feuled flying metal thing. Come on man, guns are evil.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #17 December 14, 2004 QuoteBecause the training required to become a good pilot has nothing to do with the training required to be a good marksman. You don't have to me a good marksman at point blank. As for others possibly getting shot. Well if an attacker is going to try and enter the cockpit...The chances of anyone living don't seem very good. As for the plane being damaged....Not a real big threat. The CAG group and others have done testing. And its not like they are going to pass out a pistol with the keys to the plane. We have an Armed Crew Member program here at work. The crew members that carry have to go through a training program. They also have to remain proficiant with the weapon. I like the idea. I like the idea that even if there is not a marshal on board that the cockpit is secure. The Armed Crew are told that it is not their job to become an officer and try to stop the hijacker. Their job is to land the damn plane as fast as they can while calling ahead to get the law there. They have a weapon to protect the cockpit ONLY. They are not to open the door until the plane has been landed and the situation in the back secure. As long as they follow that, I think it is a good thing."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #18 December 14, 2004 Quote Isn't the entire purpose of the TSA to _prevent_ weapons from being on the plane? No. The job of the TSA is to keep the plane safe.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #19 December 14, 2004 >I'm not for arming all pilots either, but I strongly advocate allowing >any pilots who want to the right to carry aboard their aircraft. If: a) their employer agreed b) they had a way to carry it safely (i.e. a secure place in the cockpit) c) training was available to them and c) there was no pressure on them to do so then I'd agree with you. >Yeah, well, you let me know when they come up with the billions to >recruit and train enough marshalls. If we need them, we pay the money. How much will another 9/11 cost us? >ps - more than a few marshalls have done some pretty scary things >on duty. Things that pilot drinking seem down right insignificant. If pilots begin carrying guns, I'm sure we'll hear the same sorts of stories. Pilots are people, just as air marshals are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #20 December 14, 2004 Quote>How do you know that? Because the training required to become a good pilot has nothing to do with the training required to be a good marksman. And being a good shot has little, if nothing to do, with being a good cop. But, training for cops ensures their ability to meet minimum standards of firearm proficiency. Dontcha think it'd be a fairly simple process to train a pilot and have him qualify every six months? Why not have that as part of the simulator training? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #21 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuote Isn't the entire purpose of the TSA to _prevent_ weapons from being on the plane? No. The job of the TSA is to keep the plane safe. Right, and a large part of that entails preventing weapons from being on the plane. The pilots should be sealed in the cockpit before passengers board and the door should remain locked until all passengers exit. Air marshalls can worry about the passengers during the flight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #22 December 14, 2004 Quote>How do you know that? Because the training required to become a good pilot has nothing to do with the training required to be a good marksman. It needs to now, though. By the way, I can do both pretty well. We're not talking about hitting an object from 300 meters away. We're talking about hitting a target less than 10 feet away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #23 December 14, 2004 Quotea) their employer agreed Can you imagine what would happen to an airline if they turned down a FFDO pilot and one of their planes was hijacked? Quoteb) they had a way to carry it safely (i.e. a secure place in the cockpit) The safest place is on their hip, concealed. Anything else is outside their immediate control, and thus less safe. (many potential FFDOs turned away form the program bacause of some ridiculous "lock up your safety" regulations) Quotec) training was available to them Training would be available if the TSA would follow the will of congress instead of doing as they damn well please. Quoted) there was no pressure on them to do so Only their conscience.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #24 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote Isn't the entire purpose of the TSA to _prevent_ weapons from being on the plane? No. The job of the TSA is to keep the plane safe. Right, and a large part of that entails preventing weapons from being on the plane. Wrong. Weapons do not necessarily make a plane less safe. You said so yourself by advocating Air Marshals. QuoteThe pilots should be sealed in the cockpit before passengers board and the door should remain locked until all passengers exit. Uh huh. You're going to say that to pilots flying NYC to LA? LA to Honolulu? "Sorry boys, no drinks, no piss breaks, just fly." Good luck with that one. QuoteAir marshalls can worry about the passengers during the flight. But do you advocate raising your own taxes to pay for hiring and training ten times the number of marshalls hat we have now? And that would only be a start. Until we have a FAM on most planes, why would you be against FFDOs? Hell, I'd want both on my flights.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
killler 2 #25 December 14, 2004 Hitting a person is not like shooting at a range... Ever see the video on "cops" with the white suv and the two cops firing at less then 15ft away and not even hitting the suv or the bad guys.... 23 rounds fired and they hit nothing... Thats the norm, A cop in my town fired 13rds at point blank range (3feet) and missed every shot, The bad guy hit the cop with two out of three rds fired from a stub-nose 38.... Killer.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
