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 A needed security measure.
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Armed Pilots
A needed security measure.
By Eli Lehrer
ohn W. Magaw, a career federal law enforcer and head of the Transportation Security Administration, told a senatorial committee Tuesday that his agency wouldn't allow commercial airline pilots to carry guns in cockpits. While Magaw made reasoned decision, it isn't the right one for the long term.
At first blush, the case against letting pilots carry guns appears strong. After all, no major airline anywhere in the world allows it. While planes do not explode when bullets pierce their hulls, firing a projectile weapon on board an aircraft does pose some special risks: A bullet puncture would usually require a pilot to make a speedy and perhaps risky descent. In a crowded airplane cabin, likewise, a panicked individual with a gun could easily hit an innocent bystander. Storomza Tsahi, who directs security for Israel's famously safe state-run airline, El Al makes another good argument: "We do everything we can to secure the pilots. If they have guns, then the hijackers know where they can get them," he told me.
And, thankfully, the issue may never come up. The TSA will return the national government to its constitutional duty of protecting the people against piracy and, thus, correct the disastrous failure of private airline security. In many respects, the TSA promises to become a model law-enforcement agency: It will set high training standards, use the best technology, and has even retained high-powered consulting firms to develop customer feedback instruments. Like many of the best private companies, the TSA will constantly improve its performance by asking people how well (or poorly) it does its job. A larger air-marshal corps, better baggage inspection, and secure cockpit doors have already reduced the chances of hijacking.
In a post-9/11 environment it appears impossible that any successful hijacker would survive his crime: He could either repeat September 11, die at the hands of an air marshal, face a passenger lynch mob, or be blown up by an Air Force missile. If a terrorist actually made his way to a cockpit, he would have already left a long trial of bodies in his wake.
And that's exactly why pilots should have guns: Using one would represent a last-ditch effort to save lives. It would create significant danger but not as much as crashing an airplane into a building. Given the size of the American air-transportation system and the infinitesimal chances that terrorists would ever target a Des Moines-St. Louis puddle jumper, many pilots will make a reasoned decision not to carry guns; terrorists couldn't rely on finding one on board. Pilots couldn't use them indiscriminately either: Any well-run airline would fire an employee who brandished a weapon to quiet an inebriated customer. On the other hand, terrorists would have to plan for the possibility that pilots would have weapons. The greatly reduced chances of success could turn even the most dedicated martyrs to other acts of mayhem.
In recent years, the United States has become a much safer nation thanks to community-policing philosophies that rely on partnerships between citizens and law enforcement. Acknowledging that a security agency, even a very good one, cannot do everything itself is the first step towards effective policing. And letting pilots carry weapons is just the sort of modest acknowledgement of its own limitations the TSA ought to make. Congress should overrule Magaw's decision or, at the very least, require his agency to revisit it once it has hired a full staff. Safety demands it.
- Eli Lehrer is a senior editor at The American Enterprise. He is co-author, with former Attorney General Edwin Meese, of the upcoming Revolution in Blue: Seven Principles of American Community Policing.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-lehrer052202.asp
"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
A needed security measure.
By Eli Lehrer
ohn W. Magaw, a career federal law enforcer and head of the Transportation Security Administration, told a senatorial committee Tuesday that his agency wouldn't allow commercial airline pilots to carry guns in cockpits. While Magaw made reasoned decision, it isn't the right one for the long term.
At first blush, the case against letting pilots carry guns appears strong. After all, no major airline anywhere in the world allows it. While planes do not explode when bullets pierce their hulls, firing a projectile weapon on board an aircraft does pose some special risks: A bullet puncture would usually require a pilot to make a speedy and perhaps risky descent. In a crowded airplane cabin, likewise, a panicked individual with a gun could easily hit an innocent bystander. Storomza Tsahi, who directs security for Israel's famously safe state-run airline, El Al makes another good argument: "We do everything we can to secure the pilots. If they have guns, then the hijackers know where they can get them," he told me.
And, thankfully, the issue may never come up. The TSA will return the national government to its constitutional duty of protecting the people against piracy and, thus, correct the disastrous failure of private airline security. In many respects, the TSA promises to become a model law-enforcement agency: It will set high training standards, use the best technology, and has even retained high-powered consulting firms to develop customer feedback instruments. Like many of the best private companies, the TSA will constantly improve its performance by asking people how well (or poorly) it does its job. A larger air-marshal corps, better baggage inspection, and secure cockpit doors have already reduced the chances of hijacking.
In a post-9/11 environment it appears impossible that any successful hijacker would survive his crime: He could either repeat September 11, die at the hands of an air marshal, face a passenger lynch mob, or be blown up by an Air Force missile. If a terrorist actually made his way to a cockpit, he would have already left a long trial of bodies in his wake.
And that's exactly why pilots should have guns: Using one would represent a last-ditch effort to save lives. It would create significant danger but not as much as crashing an airplane into a building. Given the size of the American air-transportation system and the infinitesimal chances that terrorists would ever target a Des Moines-St. Louis puddle jumper, many pilots will make a reasoned decision not to carry guns; terrorists couldn't rely on finding one on board. Pilots couldn't use them indiscriminately either: Any well-run airline would fire an employee who brandished a weapon to quiet an inebriated customer. On the other hand, terrorists would have to plan for the possibility that pilots would have weapons. The greatly reduced chances of success could turn even the most dedicated martyrs to other acts of mayhem.
In recent years, the United States has become a much safer nation thanks to community-policing philosophies that rely on partnerships between citizens and law enforcement. Acknowledging that a security agency, even a very good one, cannot do everything itself is the first step towards effective policing. And letting pilots carry weapons is just the sort of modest acknowledgement of its own limitations the TSA ought to make. Congress should overrule Magaw's decision or, at the very least, require his agency to revisit it once it has hired a full staff. Safety demands it.
- Eli Lehrer is a senior editor at The American Enterprise. He is co-author, with former Attorney General Edwin Meese, of the upcoming Revolution in Blue: Seven Principles of American Community Policing.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-lehrer052202.asp
"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 BRYON OKADA
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
Commercial airline pilots under siege by terrorists will not be allowed to defend their cockpits with guns, federal officials said Tuesday.
In the clearest indication yet of the Bush administration's stance on arming pilots, John Magaw, the head of the federal Transportation Security Administration, said that pilots should concentrate on flying and that any in-flight combat should be left to federal air marshals.
"Pilots should not have firearms in the cockpit," Magaw told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee on Tuesday.
"These marshals are trained not only in the use of weapons but all the things that build up to that," he said.
During the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, hijackers commandeered four passenger jets and three of them were used as missiles. But instead of arming pilots to prevent similar takeovers, Magaw suggests pilots should use in-flight maneuvers to keep potential hijackers off-balance and use cabin cameras to determine whether the maneuvers worked.
Magaw also left open the option of arming cockpits with stun guns, which most pilots say are less effective and more difficult to reload than handguns.
The announcement brought an immediate reaction from pilots, who heavily favor arming themselves as a last line of defense.
"It's not a surprise, but very disappointing," said Capt. Bob Lambert, the author of a petition signed by 53,000 pilots in favor of guns in cockpits and a founding member of the Airline Pilots' Security Alliance. "The administration never really came out with an official word, but apparently, through John Magaw, it's pretty decisive."
An official announcement is expected this week, Magaw said.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and homeland security director Tom Ridge are also against arming pilots.
Pilots said they would focus on urging Congress to support House Bill 4635, authored by Reps. Don Young, R-Alaska, and John Mica, R-Fla., which would allow pilots to carry firearms in the cockpit by making them federal law enforcement officers. A similar bill is expected to be introduced in the Senate during the next two weeks.
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said President Bush fully backs the Transportation Department's decision, an indication that any gun bill that Congress passes might be vetoed.
"The position of the union and my position hasn't changed, and that is pilots are the last line of defense," said American Airlines Capt. Keith Shankland, a member of the American pilots union's Committee for Armed Defense of the Cockpit.
"If someone breaks into the cockpit, having probably already killed someone, their intention is not to fly to Havana," said Shankland of Southlake. "We know what their intentions are, and to not allow a pilot to completely take care of his passengers from start to finish, and, perhaps, to protect his country from a catastrophic event, I think, is unconscionable."
Supporters of arming pilots among the ranks of the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots, outnumber opponents by a 9-to-1 ratio. The Air Line Pilots Association, the nation's largest pilots union, said the Bush administration is "under the influence of opposition by the airlines."
But one well-known aviation expert, former AMR Chairman Robert Crandall, said Tuesday at a conference of airport executives in Dallas that arming pilots would be a wise move.
"I frankly would rather have the pilots have guns than to have federal air marshals," he said. "My guess is that pilots are at least as well-trained. ... If you're going to have any weapons on an airplane, it seems to me the pilot is the most responsible person on board."
The House Transportation Committee is scheduled Thursday to take up the House bill that would allow pilots to arm themselves. Young said he would quickly move the legislation as a result of Magaw's announcement.
"The events of Sept. 11 have dramatically changed how we must defend our planes and passengers," he said. "We now face a possible situation where the Department of Defense may be forced to make the difficult decision of having our own Air Force shoot down a plane full of innocent passengers due to a terrorist takeover. I strongly believe that under these new circumstances, that we must allow trained and qualified pilots to serve as the last line of defense against such a potential disaster."
Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., the Senate advocate for arming pilots, said he also intends to proceed with legislation.
"I will soon be introducing a bill with a bipartisan coalition, including Senator Zell Miller, Senator Conrad Burns and Senator Frank Murkowski, to create a voluntary program to arm pilots," he said. "This is the primary option to implement the program that was called for in the Aviation Security Bill.
"The pilots want this program, and the American people want additional means to be protected against future contemplated acts of terrorism," Smith said. "Armed pilots are the first line of deterrence and the last line of defense."
Staff writer Maria Recio of the Washington Bureau contributed to this report, which also contains material from The Associated Press and Hearst Newspapers.
Bryon Okada, (817) 685-3853 okada@star-telegram.com
http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/3311770.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
WASHINGTON, D.C.---The following statement was issued today by Capt. Duane Woerth, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, International, in response to statements by John Magaw, undersecretary for transportation security, that he would rule against pilots being allowed to carry firearms in the cockpit:
We are disappointed, but not surprised, by this announcement. The administration, under the influence of opposition by the airlines, has been telegraphing its intent for several months now.
ALPA has made a very strong case on the merits of our proposal, which I announced at Congressional hearings on Sept. 25. We have demonstrated the need to arm pilots against terrorist hijackers. We have examined the objections and have shown in each instance why the objections are misleading or wrong.
The government already has told us that if terrorists take control of one of our cockpits, they will send military aircraft to shoot down the airliner and all its crew and passengers. In the face of such choices, we do not understand why these same government officials refuse to give pilots a last chance to prevent such a tragedy.
On Thursday, the House Aviation Subcommittee will mark up H.R. 4635, the Young-Mica bill that would mandate a government program for selective training and arming of airline pilots. This bill contains all the necessary safeguards and elements for a responsible and effective method to add this urgently needed, final layer of defense of the cockpit. At this point, our only recourse is to call on Congress to reassert its wishes regarding firearms in the cockpit through the Young-Mica bill.
ALPA represents 62,000 airline pilots at 42 airlines in the U.S. and Canada. Its Web site is http://www.alpa.org. Click on the "Firearms in the Cockpit" graphic to go to a page with documents outlining ALPA's positions and actions on this issue. http://www.alpa.org/internet/news/2002news/nr02044.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
The federal government has decided against allowing commercial airline pilots to carry firearms as a last-ditch means of defense against would-be hijackers. The news came yesterday at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing. What are they afraid of?
"Pilots need to concentrate on flying the plane," said John Magaw, undersecretary of transportation for security. So, instead, the federal government has decided to place its faith (and the lives of airline passengers) in the hands of specially trained air marshals. "These marshals are trained not only in the use of weapons but all the things that build up to that," Mr. Magaw said. "They have to practice all of these things in a tight aircraft. . . . We don't want them shooting the firearm with the potential of bringing that airplane down" - a reference to the possibility of explosive decompression of the cabin at high altitude.
But there are several practical objections to the government's approach. In the first place, there is simply no current or envisioned plan that would place an air marshal on each and every commercial flight or even anything approaching a majority of them. Therefore, it will be a roll of the dice - with the odds in a would-be terrorist's favor - whether any given flight will have an air marshal on board. Second is the objection to the government's straw man regarding explosive decompression. Low-velocity ammunition is readily available, making that scenario next to impossible. Furthermore, if would-be terrorists hijack an airplane with the intent of repeating September 11, "bringing that airplane down" becomes a moot consideration. A bullet may be the only thing, in fact, that prevents the airplane from being brought down.
Given that many, perhaps a majority, of major commercial airline pilots have military experience and are already familiar with the safe handling and use of firearms - and leaving aside the fact that passengers are already entrusting these highly skilled professionals with their lives the moment they come on board - allowing pilots to carry weapons or keep them in the cockpit seems entirely reasonable. Most pilots agree, as several polls have confirmed. Once airborne, there's no way to dial 911 - no means of calling in the cavalry. An armed pilot capable of defending himself and his aircraft against a fanatical terrorist could very easily mean the difference between life and death, not just for those on the aircraft, but for the many on the ground who could find themselves the target of a flying bomb.
Sen. Conrad Burns, Montana Republican, urged Mr. Magaw to reconsider his decision. "Those who want to be armed will put themselves through the same training the air marshals go through," he said. It's difficult to imagine why the government would oppose this common-sense idea - unless it's out of politically correct fear of upsetting the gun-control lobby.http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20020522-880588.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
BELLEVUE, WA - Holding firm to a recommendation it made within hours of the Sept. 11 terrorist atrocities in New York and Washington, DC, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today supported a call by airline pilots on Congress to pass legislation allowing them to carry guns in the cockpit.
CCRKBA took the lead in calling for armed pilots to prevent further outrages like those that occurred Sept. 11, when defenseless pilots, flight crews and passengers were murdered by terrorists who took control of four airplanes with nothing more than box cutters.
John Magaw, undersecretary for transportation security, told a Congressional committee that he would rule against pilots being allowed to fly armed. Almost immediately, Capt. Duane Woerth, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, Intl., called on Congress to pass legislation creating a government program to train volunteer pilots, who would then fly armed and provide a last measure of security for their aircraft. That legislation is HR 4635, known as the Young-Mica bill.
"Capt. Woerth has the right idea, and certainly the more relevant perspective on guns in the cockpit than some career federal bureaucrat," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. "We join him in calling on Congress to pass that legislation."
Gottlieb also concurred with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) in urging Magaw to reconsider his decision. Burns is also co-sponsoring legislation to arm pilots.
"Mr. Magaw suggested that armed air marshals would 'lay down their lives' to protect the passengers and flight crews on commercial flights," Gottlieb said. "That's assuming there is an air marshal aboard in the event of a terrorist takeover. Magaw knows that there are only enough marshals for a fraction of commercial flights, yet he would deny pilots a last line of defense. That is incredibly short-sighted, if not downright cavalier."
Noting that the Air Travelers Association has also criticized Magaw's decision, Gottlieb stated, "One the one hand, you have a few officials including Mr. Magaw, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge opposing guns in the cockpit. On the other hand, you have 62,000 airline pilots and millions of airline passengers supporting the idea. Congress should do the math and take the appropriate action."
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
http://www.ccrkba.org/pub/rkba/press-releases/ArmedPilots4.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
Deborah Tate
Capitol Hill
21 May 2002 18:57 UTC
Listen to Deborah Tate's Report from Capitol Hill (RealAudio)
Tate Report - Download 169k (RealAudio)
The U.S. government has decided not to allow pilots to carry guns on commercial airliners. Tuesday's announcement is a blow to airline pilots, who had asked to be armed following the September 11 hijacking attacks on New York and Washington.
The decision was announced by Transportation Undersecretary John Magaw at a Senate commerce committee hearing on aviation security. "I will not authorize firearms in the cockpit," Mr. Magaw said.
Mr. Magaw said pilots should concentrate on flying the plane. Senator Fritz Hollings, a Democrat from South Carolina, agreed, saying "they are there to fly and not to fight."
Mr. Magaw said only trained air marshals should be allowed to carry weapons on planes. But Republican Senator Conrad Burns of Montana urged Mr. Magaw to reconsider his opposition to arming pilots.
"The majority of them that want to be armed will submit themselves to that training," Senator Burns said.
Senator Burns is co-sponsoring legislation authorizing pilots to carry guns in the cockpit. Similar legislation is pending in the House of Representatives.
The Airline Pilots Association is pressing Congress to pass the measure. In addition, lawmakers are considering legislation that would allow flight attendants to use non-lethal weapons - including stun guns - on flights.
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=33F8D914-FB0F-4BE9-AF62305E72FB1326
"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
U.S. Newswire
22 May 12:00
Giving Pilots the Arms to Fly; Magaw, Mineta, Ridge Wrong on
Arming Pilots: Traveling Public Demands Maximum Safety Says ACU
To: National Desk
Contact: Ian Walters of the American Conservative Union,
703-836-8602, ext. 16
ALEXANDRIA, Va., May 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The U.S. Department
of Transportation's position on arming pilots -- as expressed
Tuesday by John Magaw, under secretary for transportation security
-- puts the flying public at risk according to American
Conservative Union National Field Director Kerri Houston.
"In light of the increased number of terror threats being
revealed, one would think the government would embrace every
conceivable method of keeping Americans safe," stated Houston.
"As one who travels regularly with and without my family in tow,
I resent Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and Homeland
Security Director Tom Ridge standing in between maximum security
procedures and the safety of my children. They have no business
taking this potential safety net away from the traveling public,"
said Houston.
"I already trust the pilot with my family's lives. Why wouldn't
I want to give that pilot every opportunity to protect them?"
Houston believes Magaw's contention that only allowing the
arming of Federal Air Marshals is "ludicrous."
"Reports just a few months ago indicated that there are fewer
than 1,000 Air Marshals available for service and 35,000 flights a
day. Additionally, Air Marshals are required to travel in twos:
that's less than 1 percent of flights currently covered in this
country.
"That is not security. Preventing pilots -- most of whom are
already trained in firearm use and safety -- from completely
defending the integrity of an airplane's cockpit is nothing short
of negligence," stated Houston.
"We hope that Secretary Mineta and Director Ridge will quickly
re-think its position as the House Transportation Committee is
scheduled to take up legislation on arming pilots this week."
Houston adds, "anyone who travels -- including pilots -- just want
to go home to their families in one piece at the end of the day.
Let's give pilots the tools they need to accomplish this by making
them armed federal pilot officers. Future terrorists must not be
allowed any opportunities to commit further acts of murder in our
skies."
http://www.usnewswire.com
-0-
/U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
05/22 12:00
Copyright 2002, U.S. Newswire
"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