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.

FREE GUN TRAINING FOR COMMERCIAL PILOTS

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited September 2001 in General Discussion
Date: 9/13/2001 7:17:00 PM Written By: Front Sight FREE GUN TRAINING FOR COMMERCIAL PILOTSFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASESeptember 12, 2001CONTACT:Dr. Ignatius Piazza1.800.987.7719Fax: 831.684.2137e-mail: info@frontsight.com http://www.frontsight.com FREE GUN TRAINING FOR COMMERCIAL PILOTSLAS VEGAS, NEVADA: In the aftermath of the World Trade Center attack, Front Sight Firearms Training Institute, which claims to be the world leader in providing intensified courses in the defensive use of firearms for private citizens and law enforcement alike, feels they have the answer to stopping commercial airliners from being used as ballistic missiles. Front Sight will train every commercial pilot in the world FREE OF CHARGE in the defensive use of the handgun. Front Sight will accept for training all certified pilots and co-pilots from all commercial airliners that submit a request for training on commercial airliner letterhead, designating the pilot and co-pilot to carry a handgun in the cockpit to defend access to the airliner. The request for training letter must have the notarized signature of the airline's chief executive.Front Sight's Founder and Director, Dr. Ignatius Piazza understands that his offer may offend those who lack resolve in stopping terrorists from turning airliners into weapons of mass destruction. However, he is quick to point out that the World Trade Center attack is a new realm of terror, not previously witnessed in the world. Prior to the World Trade Center attack, terrorists were content to hijack planes and divert them to safe landings in exchange for negotiated release of imprisoned comrades. In extreme cases, terrorists have committed suicide by exploding the grounded plane. Airliners have also been targeted with bombs and possibly missiles to spectacularly explode in flight, killing all on board. The World Trade Center attack was a new form of terrorism, where the commercial airliner, loaded with fuel for a cross country flight is redirected from the cockpit and turned into an accurate missile of mass destruction. Front Sight knows this form of terrorism can be stopped immediately by arming all pilots and co-pilots and training them in the proper methods of defending their cockpits."Commercial airliners must be willing to take an uncompromising stand that will not allow anyone, under any circumstances to access the controls of an airliner," says Piazza. "The pilot and co-pilot, are responsible for the security of the cockpit. Without a handgun to defend it, the cockpit crew is easily defeated. However, when both pilot and co-pilot are armed and trained by Front Sight, they have the tools, ability, and will to defend themselves and repel the murderous intent of terrorists. In an emergency, the pilot can fly the plane to a safe landing while the co-pilot covers the door of the cockpit- ready and willing to use deadly force to prevent anyone from opening the door."Dennis Vied, a retired TWA Captain with 28 years of experience flying commercial airliners and Front Sight student fully agrees with Front Sight's solution. Captain Vied states, "The terrorists knew that they would face no opposition to the hijacking, once they managed to get on the airplane. All they had to do was threaten to do something to a passenger, and they would be allowed access to the cockpit. If that didn't work, then they just had to hurt somebody, which in this case they did. Apparently they cut the throats of two of the flight attendants. The terrorists knew they would face no armed opposition, because the airline screening process would insure that nobody on the airplane would be armed. We have such an abhorrence to guns that we fail to allow the good people to arm themselves for defense. Therefore they are at the mercy of bad people- in this case the terrorists. I sincerely hope that this is a wakeup call to America. I think they should arm the crews, or at least allow those that want to be armed to do so. Otherwise, you're at the mercy of some crazy son-of-a-* armed with a box cutter! How absolutely absurd! There is so much emphasis on prevention, and precious little emphasis on the ultimate lines of defense."Aaron Benedetti, a United Airline 747 co-pilot since 1990 is a Platinum member at Front Sight and has already attended Front Sight courses in defensive handgun, tactical shotgun, and practical rifle. Through Front Sight's training, Benedetti is ready, willing and able to defend the cockpit of his aircraft if given the proper tools and authority to do so. Benedetti states, "We get recurrent training regarding hijacking and security procedures, but the training centers around placating and negotiating with the terrorists to safely land the plane. We are told not to make any aggressive move and to work toward a calm outcome. The World Trade Center disaster is a real blind spot in our training. The attack reveals that perhaps the only way the pilots could have stopped it would have been to deny access to the cockpit and stop the terrorists from taking over the controls of the plane by any means possible. In the future, we should consider that with the cockpit doors locked and the co-pilot guarding the door with a handgun, calm negotiations can still take place via intercom to land the plane safely thus avoiding another World Trade Center scenario." Aaron Benedetti recommends all airlines to take advantage of Front Sight's solution and offer. He returns to Front Sight later his year for further training on his own.Lieutenant Bob Redmond, SWAT Commander of Nye County Sheriff's Department concurs that Front Sight's training is exactly what the commercial airliners need and that they should immediately begin sending their pilots to Front Sight. Redmond, who sends his SWAT officers to Front Sight for firearms and tactical training states, "Front Sight's training exceeds levels offered by most if not all law enforcement agencies throughout the country. Front Sight's training is so good that I want every officer we have in the department to attend every course Front Sight offers. If airlines sent their pilots to Front Sight, it would be like having SWAT officers in the sky."Mark Donovan, a pilot for Southwest Airlines, who has taken over ten Front Sight courses in the last two years finds the current situation of unarmed pilots rather incredulous. Donavan explains, "The political climate in commercial aviation prior to the World Trade Center attack has not been conducive to arming pilots. In fact, just the opposite has occurred. Airlines have disarmed pilots to the point where a terrorist with a box cutter can take over control of a plane because no one is armed to defend the plane or themselves. Yet, numerous federal agencies are allowed to carry a gun on commercial airlines, including such dubiously qualified agencies as, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, and the Smithsonian Institution! Why are federal agents from these obscure agencies allowed to carry a gun on board when a pilot with firearms training from Front Sight Firearms Training Institute is not allowed? My training at Front Sight far exceeds anything the federal government offers to these agencies." Donovan continues, "If we, as pilots are not given the means and authority to defend our aircraft as a last means of defense, then who will? It is apparent that time was not available to negotiate with the madmen in the World Trade Center attack. Clearly, a properly trained flight crew with a handgun could have saved countless lives. Front Sight offers this training. I urge all federal decision makers to seriously examine Front Sight's solution to the problem. I believe it is the only credible answer to stopping another horrendous tragedy." Front Sight is the Solution to Gun ViolencePiazza reiterates, "Front Sight is truly part of the solution to gun violence in this country. Everyone agrees that law enforcement should have the very best training available. Front Sight provides it. And everyone agrees, regardless of what side of gun control one stands, that if law abiding private citizens are going to own firearms they should be trained. Front Sight provides such training to levels that exceeds the law enforcement community. Front Sight now offers the solution to stopping and forever preventing another World Trade Center attack by training commercial airline pilots to be that last line of defense for their passengers, airline, and our country. Front Sight stands ready, willing, and able to serve."Dr. Ignatius Piazza1.800.987.7719Front Sight Firearms Training Institute http://www.frontsight.com Captain Dennis Vied, retired TWA Pilot(925) 455.0133Aaron Benedetti, United Airlines Co-Pilot(925) 454.5214Lt. Bob Redmond, Nye County SWAT Commander(775) 751.7002Mark Donovan, SouthWest Pilot(702) 270.3912
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Cut the throats of what two flight attendants? Where did you obtain those FACTS?Fly and shoot at the same time? Most aren't allowed to EAT and fly at the same time much less shoot and risk the loss of pressure in the cabin!You better get ready to "pay a little extra on ticket price" for better protection. Arming the pilots is just plain crazy!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • landislandis Member Posts: 230 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    As opposed to an armed sky marshal in the back? Whaat is the difference? Come on, if the crew was armed none of this would happened this way.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The difference is that the pilot is FLYING THE PLANE! Marshal is trained to react, but doesn't have to keep the damn plane up in the air besides. Piloting the plane requires concentration. So much that you can't even eat a sandwich and fly at the same time. Now you expect the pilot to react to a stressful hijacker/weapon and still keep the plane in the air? NO WAY! Pilots armed suggestion is a knee jerk reaction that puts the whole plane into double jeporady. Get REAL!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    Jesus, Brad. There's more people on the flight deck than just the pilot. Pilot flies the plane, co-pilot wastes the scumbags. I'm 100% in favor of armed pilots.Weren't you the one who said you'd call the cops on anybody you saw carrying a concealed weapon where it wasn't permitted by law?I'm not surprised by your reaction to the suggestion of armed flight crew members.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Lowrider, You just don't get it. Stressful situation, can you hit a paper nonmoving target in the x 100% of the time? Better be exactly in the x 100% of the time because 1% takes out cabin pressure. Now TRAINED, US SKYMarshalls are a GREAT option. Just like COPS out on the streets who carry guns to protect us from badguys. Also a system that gases passengers to sleep etc. along with a Marshall is even better. Now pilot has only plane to worry about.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • One shotOne shot Member Posts: 1,027 ✭
    edited November -1
    In a stressful situation Why in The hell would I want a group so small it would fit in the "X" ring. All you need to remember is "two to the chest, one to the head". If shocking the central nervous system does not work you have to overload it (one to the head). A good chest shot has to be placed in a zone that is about 12" by 24" depending on the body size of the target. The normal size of the "X" ring on paper will vary from 1" to four inches and bigger depending on target class and range.
    "This we will defend"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Oneshot,You must be nicknamed 'ol dead eye' as that is what the whole plane will be when one of your wayward slugs pierce the cabin wall at 40,000 feet and the cabin pressure rushes out. Shooting in the plane and missing or having the slug PASS THRU the body will both result in all dead also. But wait, the hijacker is going to be frozen, standing still with fear, while you pump "two to the body and one to the head" right? I hope never to be on any plane that is flying to the same destination as yours. Unless you leave your gun at home![This message has been edited by bradf111 (edited 09-14-2001).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mudgemudge Member Posts: 4,225 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Having worked for United for 34 years and done A LOT of cockpit time, I can assure you that arming the cockpit crew is a totallyWORKABLE idea. How many of you "nay sayers" have even been in the cockpit of a big jet.It's a relatively small space. The idea of an armed cockpit crew is not so they can come OUT with gun(s) blazing. It's so that if somegoblin tries to ENTER the cockpit through that 24"-28" wide door he/she can be stopped.ANYONE with a minimum of training could hose down the target from the distance between the door and the driver's seat (about 6-8 feet).Use a .45 with Hydra-Shocks or some other round the won't go through the "perp".Yeah, you're going to have a few wussy airplane drivers who say "I don't want the responsibility of a gun." I say, tell 'em it's part of their job description. Take the responsibility or go handle baggage.A Sky Marshall on EACH of the approx. 10,000flight a day across the U.S.? NOW you're really talking increased ticket prices. SOMEBODY'S gonna' have to pay for them. GUESS WHO? That's right, the travelling public.I vote for arming the cockpit crew!!!!Mudge p.s. Yo Bradf111.....Can you guarantee us that under the same stress situation that the Sky Marshall will hit that MOVING target 100% of the time. The fuselage doesn't know who fired that bullet. This is really a rhetorical question isn't it?
    Anyone who CAN carry, SHOULD carry!Let me update that.Anyone who CAN carry, BETTER carry.[This message has been edited by mudge (edited 09-14-2001).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • landislandis Member Posts: 230 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I can think of no other single course of action that might have drastically changed what happened than to have armed pilots.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • concealedG36concealedG36 Member Posts: 3,566 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hey Brad, I sure am glad you're still on this board (not). If you took one minute to actually think about this you'd realize that there are types of ammunition that could be used that WOULD NOT penetrate the airplane and cause rapid depressurization. But, they'd be enough to at least stun the hijacker until somebody could kick his * (though, I still think a good locked door and mace should be the first course of action). In any case, even depressurization would be better than allowing the aircraft to be taken over by terrorists!! Jet aircraft that fly at 30,000 feet have oxygen masks that fall incase of cabin depressurization, so the crew and passengers would likely survive EVEN IF THE CABIN LOST PRESSURE. Finally, how high does a jet get when it is hijacked within a few minutes of takeoff? Probably not to cruising altitude, and if so, see my previous statements.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • JudgeColtJudgeColt Member Posts: 1,790 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Regarding the loss of cabin pressure issue, it is my understanding that the typical airliner has lots of little leaks, and a single, or many, bullet holes will not result in sudden loss of cabin pressure. (Think of a nail in a tire. The loss of air is not sudden, but slow, and a tire has no new pressure being added like a cabin does.)I also believe that a trimed out airliner will fly itself for the time necessary to shoot at intruders in the cabin. Remember how long Payne Stewart's Lear flew with everyone dead inside. If I were a pilot, I would want to carry in order to protect myself and my passengers. Sky marshalls should also be added. Of course, if passengers could carry, that would add additional security at no cost, but that will never happen unless the country comes to a sudden common sense attack. Yes, we will have to pay for the added security. Some of it will be reflected in ticket prices, and the rest in taxes. There are no free lunches. The events of September 11, 2001 are a life-altering event. Many things will change. Air travel is just one of them.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IconoclastIconoclast Member Posts: 10,515 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Pretty obvious that bradley is a liberal troll w/ damn little knowledge of ammunition or aircraft. Leaving aside the obvious examples of commercially-available loads such as the Glaser, what do you suppose the Sky Marshalls carried in the 1970s? Corks? I've been in the cockpits of jumbo jets (on the ground) courtesy of a friend. Anyone who misses a bad guy coming through the door at those distances has no business handling a balsa wood toy, much less a real plane of any size. And bradley, have you never heard of autopilots? According to my contacts, on most flights it gets pretty boring between takeoff & landing - aircrew basically monitor controls and little else. Oh, yeah, also they are ready to act in an emergency. Not that hijacking would fall into that category . . . . I'd feel a lot safer in the air w/ an armed air crew than on the ground w/ you, pal. It is *exactly* this spineless wimpiness that brought on these attacks. Cowards don't attack the strong.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    PILOT!And I never would want to chance the fact that we all don't hit what we aim at every time! The Marshall would have much more experience than a quick course done by Gunsite Academy, of all places. Have you ever seen their LAME excuse for training? They have their training shown on the Outdoors Channel and it is a toot!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    I think Bradboy has seen too many Hollywood air-disaster movies.A bullet through the fuselage skin resulting in rapid decompression? Really? But that's just the start. Dozens of people are liquified as they're sucked out through that .40 caliber hole. Horrible! Huh? Huh, Brad?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • One shotOne shot Member Posts: 1,027 ✭
    edited November -1
    I am one that is all for an armed crew and also the reintroduction of the Sky Marshal's. as for you Bradboy, in my line of work I am 90% effective at ranges that will be incountered in an airliner. I am new to my job and still in the training fase but my skills will increase with time. I know with the propper training and ammo selection a man (or Gal) can be 100% effective in a high stress situation.
    "This we will defend"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    90% Start selling tickets! Don't worry I do not think I will join you on your flight though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IconoclastIconoclast Member Posts: 10,515 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'd take 90% - even .000009% - over the odds the passengers on those four flights had. From what you've posted here, I can't picture many voluntarily associating with you in any venue, but this being a free country, you are welcome to start your own airline, Bradboy. I don't know how much business you'll attract with the big target painted on the fuselage and complimentary body bags, but the yellow uniforms might be appeal to some (I can think of one in Plains, GA).
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • landislandis Member Posts: 230 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Are pilots too stupid to have a gun in the cockpit? I think it is absurd that they can be trusted with lives in doing their job, but can't be trusted with ... lives? They are held responsible for every other aspect of safety regarding the flight. Why handicap them against a plastic knife? Many have had experience with guns already, and certainly capable of the required training. Why not?Aeroflot pilots use to, and still may be armed. Sky Marshals are a hit and miss proposition, and will not cover all flights. Only one would be on board, and could end up outnumbered, overpowered, or his gun taken. And if the cockpit was rushed, where are they going to be shooting? Through the terrorists in front of a flimsey cockpit door, and into the pilots?? I am no expert, but wouldn't it be more secure if the pilots were armed behind a reinforced door, shooting back away from the controls and pilots who are necessary to land safely? I am finding it hard to escape this conclusion.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 218Beekeep218Beekeep Member Posts: 3,033
    edited November -1
    Do the numbers 219 ring a bell to anyone here?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • One shotOne shot Member Posts: 1,027 ✭
    edited November -1
    Hell, when I was in Germany The Army took care of airport security. They walked around with Uzi Machineguns and trusted no one.
    "This we will defend"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    You know Brad you really are not very smart,first of all there is frangable ammunition produced for the specific reason of in flight protection.Secondly,most of these major airlines pilots are former military,so I'd think they know enough about handling weapons as well as being able to use the force neccessary to diffuse any situation as long as they are supplied the correct equipment.[This message has been edited by Josey1 (edited 09-16-2001).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bradf111bradf111 Member Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I guess it goes right along with your facts on SUV rescues. Most commercial pilots USED to be from military training. Today, 20 years after your data, about 25% are military75% trained through flight schools and academies. You can check figures with CNN.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • diver-rigdiver-rig Member Posts: 6,338 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    did all of you miss the part about the terrorist's haveing pilots licenses? that they mabye could allready have been working for an air line? yeah, so let's give them guns in the plane with them. real intelligent.
    you squirrells had better have nuts in your mouths, or your going downtown!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dadroachdadroach Member Posts: 4 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Within minutes of seeing those planes hit the WTC, the thought of armed pilots came to my mind and hasn't left yet. Almost anything can be used as a weapon; you cannot ever guarantee that a planeful of people is nakedly unarmed. I, for one would feel much safer knowing the sober, well-screened professional pilot of my plane had the means to disable any attacker with an inferior weapon. Foolproof, no, but a NECESSARY deterrent in light of these recent events.ARM THE PILOTS!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dadroachdadroach Member Posts: 4 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Oh, yeah... and thanks for playing devils advocate in this thread, Brad...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RembrandtRembrandt Member Posts: 4,486 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well, here's a different approach, after seeing all these TV kick boxer kung fu types using their politically correct hands and feet, we just train all the flight steward's to handle those bad guys, might put a few dents in the fusalage but no holes...Maybe stick a pitbull guard dog just outside the cabin, they're cheaper than Sky Marshalls and work for only dog biscuits. Of course they might poop on the floor with those long 10 hour+ flights.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dr.dirtdr.dirt Member Posts: 35 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    these people feed on our weakness, that is, the inability to defend ourself. it dont matter if you never use it, if it is known that air crews are armed, these people wont try to take over a flight with a knife. they even know its stupid to take a knife to a gunfight. that is the point, to be armed to discurage attemts, not to shoot holes in planes. if you are on that plane, does it matter if you hit a building, or die from a plane blowing apart? if you are going to fight, think like your enemy, know them, find there weakness. if you namby-pamby limp-wristed girly boys cant take it, stand aside, this country still has a few men in it, and they will fight! IF YOUR NOT AN AMERICAN, IT MIGHT BE BEST IF YOU LEAVE THE COUNTRY...NOW!!!!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • whiteclouderwhiteclouder Member Posts: 10,574 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Let's just lock the cockpit.Clouder..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mudgemudge Member Posts: 4,225 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Whiteclouder.....The cockpits are locked! The armed cockpit crew would be the "last ditch" response. There are others. I've been on some commercial airplanes that done some pretty violent manuevers. I've done both the negative "G" and the positive "G" manuevers. (Not voluntarily, I assure you.) Both can cause nausea of varying degrees. Violent banking can also create a chaotic situation. Some passengers could take advantage of either of these situations to aid them in overpowering the perps. Sure these are extreme solutions but extreme circumstances sometimes call for them.These are all "what ifs" so little will be accomplished by "nit picking" them. Not to name names but I fully expect it.Mudge
    Anyone who CAN carry, SHOULD carry!Let me update that.Anyone who CAN carry, BETTER carry.[This message has been edited by mudge (edited 09-17-2001).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.