In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Armed Pilots Would Deter Hijackers
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Armed Pilots Would Deter Hijackers
Wednesday, July 24, 2002
In a stunning reversal, California's liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer has come out in favor of allowing airline pilots to carry guns if they wish, while the Bush administration opposes it. Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has passed a bill to permit pilots to carry guns by a vote of 310 to 113.
Although Sen. Boxer is a staunch supporter of gun control, on this particular issue she clearly understands that it is better to have an armed pilot than to have to order a military plane to shoot down one of our own commercial airliners, full of innocent people, because hijackers have taken it over and are ready to do a repeat of last Sept. 11.
We can only hope that the administration is as willing as Sen. Boxer to re-think its position of opposing the arming of pilots. But the Department of Transportation remains closed-minded on the issue. When asked by Congressman Don Young, "Do you really think that 9/11 would have happened if our pilots had been armed, as they should have been armed?" a spokesman for the Department of Transportation replied: "Our position remains unchanged." It was like being told to shut up, he explained.
Opponents of allowing pilots to be armed have portrayed horror movie visions of pilots and terrorists shooting it out in the aisles of airliners. But the main reason for arming pilots is not so that they can re-enact the gunfight at the OK corral. The main reason for having guns for self-defense anywhere is deterrence.
In John Lott's landmark scholarly study titled More Guns, Less Crime, he points out that most instances of the successful use of a gun in self-defense do not involve actually firing it. Just showing an aggressor that you have a firearm is usually enough to make him back off. Having it widely known in advance that people in certain places have guns is a huge deterrent to those who might otherwise be inclined to start trouble in those places.
Even mass killers labeled "irrational" by the media and by shrinks almost invariably start shooting in places where other people are unarmed, like schools or offices. And they stop when they encounter someone else who is armed. If not, they get stopped, like the assassin at Los Angeles International Airport on July Fourth.
Depending on armed marshals aboard airplanes might be an alternative to arming pilots -- if there were any realistic prospect of putting marshals on even half the vast numbers of planes that are flying every day. But hypothetical marshals are no substitute for real pilots with real guns.
Depending on stronger cockpit doors might be another alternative -- if all these doors on vast numbers of airliners could be strengthened faster than pilots can get guns. But hypothetical doors are no more protection than hypothetical marshals. Tests have also repeatedly shown that the effectiveness of security screening at our airports is also largely hypothetical.
Part of the reason for the knee-jerk reaction to firearms may be that we now have a whole generation of people -- especially in politics and among opinion-makers in the media -- who have never served in the armed forces and have no experience with guns. Fear from ignorance is understandable. But that it should be presumptuous ignorance is not.
Are there any possible dangers to arming pilots? Of course! Nothing on the face of this Earth is 100 percent safe. We already know that flying on a plane with no one on board who is armed to resist terrorists is not safe.
The only meaningful question is which danger is greater. The swiftness with which the idea of arming pilots was dismissed suggests no serious interest in weighing one danger against another. It may be understandable that the Bush administration does not want to buck the media on this emotional issue in an election year. But will the widows and orphans of those who lose their lives, because there was no armed person on board to thwart terrorists, be understanding?
http://www.sltrib.com/07242002/commenta/755972.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Wednesday, July 24, 2002
In a stunning reversal, California's liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer has come out in favor of allowing airline pilots to carry guns if they wish, while the Bush administration opposes it. Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has passed a bill to permit pilots to carry guns by a vote of 310 to 113.
Although Sen. Boxer is a staunch supporter of gun control, on this particular issue she clearly understands that it is better to have an armed pilot than to have to order a military plane to shoot down one of our own commercial airliners, full of innocent people, because hijackers have taken it over and are ready to do a repeat of last Sept. 11.
We can only hope that the administration is as willing as Sen. Boxer to re-think its position of opposing the arming of pilots. But the Department of Transportation remains closed-minded on the issue. When asked by Congressman Don Young, "Do you really think that 9/11 would have happened if our pilots had been armed, as they should have been armed?" a spokesman for the Department of Transportation replied: "Our position remains unchanged." It was like being told to shut up, he explained.
Opponents of allowing pilots to be armed have portrayed horror movie visions of pilots and terrorists shooting it out in the aisles of airliners. But the main reason for arming pilots is not so that they can re-enact the gunfight at the OK corral. The main reason for having guns for self-defense anywhere is deterrence.
In John Lott's landmark scholarly study titled More Guns, Less Crime, he points out that most instances of the successful use of a gun in self-defense do not involve actually firing it. Just showing an aggressor that you have a firearm is usually enough to make him back off. Having it widely known in advance that people in certain places have guns is a huge deterrent to those who might otherwise be inclined to start trouble in those places.
Even mass killers labeled "irrational" by the media and by shrinks almost invariably start shooting in places where other people are unarmed, like schools or offices. And they stop when they encounter someone else who is armed. If not, they get stopped, like the assassin at Los Angeles International Airport on July Fourth.
Depending on armed marshals aboard airplanes might be an alternative to arming pilots -- if there were any realistic prospect of putting marshals on even half the vast numbers of planes that are flying every day. But hypothetical marshals are no substitute for real pilots with real guns.
Depending on stronger cockpit doors might be another alternative -- if all these doors on vast numbers of airliners could be strengthened faster than pilots can get guns. But hypothetical doors are no more protection than hypothetical marshals. Tests have also repeatedly shown that the effectiveness of security screening at our airports is also largely hypothetical.
Part of the reason for the knee-jerk reaction to firearms may be that we now have a whole generation of people -- especially in politics and among opinion-makers in the media -- who have never served in the armed forces and have no experience with guns. Fear from ignorance is understandable. But that it should be presumptuous ignorance is not.
Are there any possible dangers to arming pilots? Of course! Nothing on the face of this Earth is 100 percent safe. We already know that flying on a plane with no one on board who is armed to resist terrorists is not safe.
The only meaningful question is which danger is greater. The swiftness with which the idea of arming pilots was dismissed suggests no serious interest in weighing one danger against another. It may be understandable that the Bush administration does not want to buck the media on this emotional issue in an election year. But will the widows and orphans of those who lose their lives, because there was no armed person on board to thwart terrorists, be understanding?
http://www.sltrib.com/07242002/commenta/755972.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Comments
By JONATHAN D. SALANT
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The incoming head of the Transportation Security Administration has been asked by Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta to take a fresh look at whether to allow pilots to carry guns.
Retired Coast Guard Adm. James Loy's predecessor, John Magaw, decided not to arm pilots. The House earlier this month voted to allow trained pilots to carry firearms, and a bipartisan group of senators has been pushing for a vote in that house as well.
"The secretary expects Admiral Loy, with a new set of eyes, to take a look at everything we're doing," Mineta spokesman Chet Lunner said.
Mineta's announcement was welcomed by proponents of arming pilots.
"Right now, the only armed pilots in America are flying F-16s," said Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont. "Secretary Mineta's comments signal his agency's recognition that American missiles shooting down American planes cannot be our government's answer to hijackings."
One issue is cost. Mineta said it would cost $860 million to set up a training program, plus another $250 million to retrain the pilots every year.
Loy also will look at whether to equip pilots and flight attendants with nonlethal weapons such as stun guns. Magaw had not made a decision before he resigned under fire last week.
At the same time, Mineta and lawmakers traded blame Tuesday on Capitol Hill over cuts to the Transportation Security Administration's budget.
The secretary complained about the $550 million reduction in the administration's original $4.4 billion request. Another $445 million was allocated to specific programs, including airport renovations, new metal detectors and port security improvements.
Mineta said the reductions could prevent the agency from hiring enough passenger screeners and buying enough explosive detection equipment to meet deadlines later this year to improve airline security. Without the screeners and equipment in place, the only way the agency could meet the deadlines is by allowing long lines at airports, Mineta said.
"The amount of money Congress is about to approve simply will not support the mandates and the timetables for aviation security that Congress set last fall," Mineta said.
Members of Congress blamed the Bush administration for the budget cuts.
"This White House needs to come clean with the American people and explain that the long lines at airports and the lack of screeners reflect their budget priorities, not those of Congress," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations transportation subcommittee.
Office of Management and Budget spokesman Trent Duffy said Congress, not the administration, cut the airline security budget.
"The White House requested $4.4 billion. The Congress provided $3.8 billion. Do the math," he said.
Mineta said he would attempt to make up the reductions by asking for more money in the new budget year that begins Oct. 1. TSA so far has asked for $4.8 billion.
Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, said the administration needs to show how it will spend the money.
"We've been saying that all year long, 'Give us your justifications for your budget request,'" Rogers said. "You can't say, 'Give us the money, we'll tell you later.' If they can justify the expenditures, I'm sure we'll be there."
http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/politics/3724648.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
on armed-pilot issue
Transportation chief orders study
of 'lethal weapons' in cockpits
Posted: July 24, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jon Dougherty
c 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
In a dramatic turnaround, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta has ordered the new head of the Transportation Security Administration to study options for arming the nation's 70,000 commercial pilots with "lethal force" capabilities.
"It is under discussion in terms of should we take another approach," Mineta told the House Transportation Committee's aviation subcommittee during testimony on Tuesday. "I have asked [TSA Administrator James Loy] to take a look at this to see whether or not there is some alternative, even if it is lethal weapons."
Loy, former head of the U.S. Coast Guard, replaced John Magaw as head of TSA last week.
"We're pleased to see the sea change that the Department of Transportation is undergoing and their new willingness to consider arming pilots with lethal force," said Capt. Tracy Price, head of the Airline Pilots' Security Alliance, an industry group that supports allowing pilots to carry guns. "This common sense measure has overwhelming support in both houses of Congress, among professional airline pilots and with the American people."
"We're considering this an endorsement of all the work we've been doing" on legislation that would permit pilots to fly armed, said Brian Darling, a spokesman for Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H.
Mineta, a Clinton appointee held over by Bush, historically has opposed allowing pilots to fly armed. But his change of heart comes at a time when many on Capitol Hill and in the administration were becoming frustrated with the TSA's slow progress towards improving airport security - its primary function.
Besides facing charges by some lawmakers that the TSA has frittered away much of its resources on bureaucracy building, sources in Washington say some inside the Bush administration are becoming exasperated with the TSA's seeming inability to meet a November deadline to have all airport security screeners in place, as promised by Mineta and Magaw.
Magaw also had come under fire from lawmakers and pilots' groups for deciding in April not to implement a provision of aviation security law that allowed pilots to carry guns. The law, passed last fall in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, created the TSA and outlined its core mission.
Earlier this summer Smith introduced a bill bypassing Transportation bureaucracy and directly authorizing qualified pilots to fly armed. Smith's bill also absolved U.S. air carriers of any legal liabilities, should passengers be injured or killed during the course of a pilot defending his plane against a hijacking.
The House has already passed a bill that would implement many of the provisions of Smith's bill.
The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled hearings for Thursday to discuss the issue of arming pilots. The committee's chairman, Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., has been opposed to allowing pilots to fly armed.
But First Officer Robert Sproc, a spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association, said, "We are very pleased that Secretary Mineta has validated what we have been saying all along." He added, "We are going to continue to press Congress to move ahead with efforts" to pass armed pilot legislation. The Allied Pilots Association is the pilots' union for American Airlines.
Mineta said a program to train and arm pilots could cost up to $850 million to develop and around $250 million a year to maintain.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28383
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
From wire reports
Guns in cockpits to be reconsidered
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is taking a new look at whether to allow airline pilots to carry guns, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said Tuesday.
The Transportation Department also hopes to develop a program to allow frequent fliers to pass more quickly through airport checkpoints, Mineta said. The incoming head of the Transportation Security Administration, retired Coast Guard Adm. James Loy, will consider both issues.
Mineta testified before the House Transportation aviation subcommittee Tuesday. Afterward, spokesman Chet Lunner said Mineta was not responding to congressional pressure to arm pilots, but simply asking the new head of the Transportation Security Administration to review an old policy.
ONLINE: Transportation Department: www.dot.gov
Communications called a problem in attack
ARLINGTON, Va. - Firefighters, medics and police performed well after the Sept. 11 attack on the Pentagon but poor communication is one of several areas that needs to be fixed, according to a report released Tuesday.
The authors also warned that firefighters and others who went to the scene without notifying those in charge sometimes caused more problems than they solved.
Titan Systems Corp., a San Diego technology and defense company, prepared the report at Arlington County's request. The report team interviewed about 475 people who responded after a plane was crashed into the Pentagon.
"Almost all aspects of communications continue to be problematic, from initial notification to tactical operations," the report said.
Cellphones didn't work in the hours after the attack, and radio channels were oversaturated. Pagers worked best, but most firefighters do not carry them, according to the report.
ONLINE: Report: www.co.arlington.va.us
5 Abu Sayyaf leaders indicted in killings
WASHINGTON - Five leaders of the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group were indicted in Washington Tuesday in connection with the killings of three hostages in the Philippines, including the death last month of a Kansas missionary during a chaotic rescue operation.
The federal indictment charges five rebels, including the group's spiritual leader, with conspiracy resulting in death, hostage-taking and three counts of hostage-taking resulting in death. None of the defendants is in U.S. or Filipino custody.
But Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson said the United States would seek to extradite any suspects caught by the Philippine government. http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/nation/3723398.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By JONATHAN D. SALANT Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The incoming head of the Transportation Security Administration has been asked by Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta to take a fresh look at whether to allow pilots to carry guns.
Retired Coast Guard Adm. James Loy's predecessor, John Magaw, decided not to arm pilots. The House earlier this month voted to allow trained pilots to carry firearms, and a bipartisan group of senators has been pushing for a vote in that house as well.
"The secretary expects Admiral Loy, with a new set of eyes, to take a look at everything we're doing," Mineta spokesman Chet Lunner said.
Mineta's announcement was welcomed by proponents of arming pilots.
"Right now, the only armed pilots in America are flying F-16s," said Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont. "Secretary Mineta's comments signal his agency's recognition that American missiles shooting down American planes cannot be our government's answer to hijackings."
One issue is cost. Mineta said it would cost $860 million to set up a training program, plus another $250 million to retrain the pilots every year.
Loy also will look at whether to equip pilots and flight attendants with nonlethal weapons such as stun guns. Magaw had not made a decision before he resigned under fire last week.
At the same time, Mineta and lawmakers traded blame Tuesday on Capitol Hill over cuts to the Transportation Security Administration's budget.
The secretary complained about the $550 million reduction in the administration's original $4.4 billion request. Another $445 million was allocated to specific programs, including airport renovations, new metal detectors and port security improvements.
Mineta said the reductions could prevent the agency from hiring enough passenger screeners and buying enough explosive detection equipment to meet deadlines later this year to improve airline security. Without the screeners and equipment in place, the only way the agency could meet the deadlines is by allowing long lines at airports, Mineta said.
"The amount of money Congress is about to approve simply will not support the mandates and the timetables for aviation security that Congress set last fall," Mineta said.
Members of Congress blamed the Bush administration for the budget cuts.
"This White House needs to come clean with the American people and explain that the long lines at airports and the lack of screeners reflect their budget priorities, not those of Congress," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations transportation subcommittee.
Office of Management and Budget spokesman Trent Duffy said Congress, not the administration, cut the airline security budget.
"The White House requested $4.4 billion. The Congress provided $3.8 billion. Do the math," he said.
Mineta said he would attempt to make up the reductions by asking for more money in the new budget year that begins Oct. 1. TSA so far has asked for $4.8 billion.
Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, said the administration needs to show how it will spend the money.
"We've been saying that all year long, 'Give us your justifications for your budget request,'" Rogers said. "You can't say, 'Give us the money, we'll tell you later.' If they can justify the expenditures, I'm sure we'll be there."
----
On the Net:
Transportation Security Administration: http://www.tsa.dot.govhttp://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1152/7-24-2002/20020724021500_21.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Bush spokesman answers 'maybe, maybe not' to WorldNetDaily query
Posted: July 25, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Each week, WorldNetDaily White House correspondent Les Kinsolving asks the tough questions no one else will ask. And each week, WorldNetDaily brings you the transcripts of those dialogues with the president and his spokesman. If you'd like to suggest a question for the White House, submit it to WorldNetDaily's exclusive interactive forum MR. PRESIDENT!
By Les Kinsolving
c 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
Presidential Press Secretary Ari Fleischer fielded questions in yesterday's White House news briefing about new developments in the continuing issue of U.S. airline pilots being prevented from arming themselves.
On Tuesday, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta told the House Transportation Committee that the agency in charge of airport security, the Transportation Security Administration, would reconsider its opposition to arming the nation's commercial airline pilots.
At the briefing yesterday afternoon, Fox News Channel's Ken Angle noted to Fleischer:
Q: Secretary Mineta yesterday talked about taking another look at arming pilots. My impression had been that the administration was against the idea of giving pilots - arming pilots. Is there a second look at this issue now?
FLEISCHER: Well, Secretary Mineta, as your question pointed out, indicated yesterday the Transportation Department will take a look at this, will review the matter. Given the constraints that they're under, there are some real limitations to any type of training, which is something that has always been talked about as part and parcel of this. And the president from the beginning has said that he was going to be guided by safety considerations and would listen to his safety experts to determine if there was a way that this could be achieved or not. And he'll take a look at that review when the Department of Transportation completes it.
Q: But I thought that those experts had suggested that this was not a good idea, that it would not be safe to have pilots firing weapons on airplanes in mid-air.
FLEISCHER: I think what the secretary wants to take a look at in concert with his security experts, if there's any way that some type of lesser measure can be accomplished - instead of arming each and every pilot who would be in a cockpit, at great cost to the taxpayers, a cost which is clearly not in the budget provided by the Congress - whether or not there's any alternative routes that would also provide for safety as a result of the equipment the pilots would carry, the standards that they would be held to, the training that they would receive. I think those are the areas that he's looking at to see if there's some type of in-between.
Later in the briefing, WND came back to the issue:
WND: In your answer to the question as to why the president wanted airline pilots disarmed, you said, "because he's been listening to the experts" - whom you didn't identify. And my first question is how many experts did the president listen to besides John Magaw, who the Washington Post and the New York Times both reported was fired?
FLEISCHER: The president is going to listen to the experts that work for the Department of Transportation, who report through the secretary. And the president has always indicated that his focus is on safety. And I indicated just what Secretary Mineta said yesterday.
WND's next question wrapped up the daily briefing:
WND: Ari, on Friday, the deputy chairman of the Republican National Committee, Jack Oliver, sent out a widely circulated e-mail saying, "It's time for Democrats to put their partisan stonewalling aside and help pass real corporate reform. Make sure your community knows about the Democrats' hypocrisy by calling your local talk-radio shows today. Call talk radio today." The president doesn't disagree with that, does he, Ari? (Laughter.)
FLEISCHER: Let me guess, do you work for a talk-radio station?
WND: Several.
FLEISCHER: The only thing you're missing is your 800 number dangling around your neck.
WND: I mean, would he add the Internet - check the Internet, as well as talk radio? Like WorldNetDaily? Would he, Ari?
FLEISCHER: You know, Lester, I just - maybe, maybe not.
WND: Maybe, maybe not? Thank you, Ari.
FLEISCHER: Thank you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28398
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878