The White House Warms to Idea, Once Opposed, of Arming Pilots [Gains Traction With Gun Foes]

The Wall Street Journal ^ | Thursday, August 15, 2002 | STEPHEN POWER

[TroutStalker]

WASHINGTON -- When the White House three months ago held its first hearing on whether to let airline pilots carry guns, the Bush administration didn't bother sending anyone to register its opposition. The idea seemed unlikely to go far.

Not anymore. The Republican-controlled House has since approved such a move. Despite objections from airline executives, gun-control groups and some aviation-safety experts, the Democrat-led Senate appears ready to follow suit. Now the administration, which announced its opposition to arming pilots less than three months ago, says it is reconsidering that stance.

[spodefly]

Maybe, just maybe, the DC crowd is listening to us on this one. Or maybe not a single one of them wants to have fingers pointed their way when an F16 shoots down an airliner that a pilot could have saved. Even if politicians are not principled, they are pragmatic.

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

BUMP!

[JohnHuang2]

Thanks for the ping, amigo!

[JohnHuang2]

Heads up

[TroutStalker]

Thanks for bumping to your lists.

[lawdude]

The "Air Marshall" plan is failing terribly. The whole concept is unworkable and very expensive.

1- Pilots are reliable to a fault.
2- No American pilot has ever downed his own plane.
3- They are on the plane anyway.
4- Most have been trained in the use of handguns and training the rest would take a very short time.
5- Those that don't want to participate would not have to.
6- The very fact that a plane would most likely have an armed person in the cockpit would be the best deterent.

What would it cost to try. In the event a pilot decided to go wild, we would lose no more than we would should a hijacker get on board. Now just which scenario is the more likely? Hmmmmm?

When ever libs say something will not work, and refuse to give it a try, you know it will work if it is tried! Just look at welfare reform, tax reductions, etc.

[JohnHuang2]

Welcome, friend.

[CWRWinger]

Until pilots start packing, all this is just talk. And I don't use the airlines and rental car companies until both passengers and pilots are armed.

[Quilla]

I had a conversation about arming pilots this week with a customer who is a pilot for American Airlines. He often flies out of Miami into South America and the Bahamas. He is against the proposal as it stands and explained that he walks through the airport and goes through security just like everyone else. If he were armed, he said it would be like walking through the airport with a bullseye painted on his forehead. He questioned what he would do with his gun when he arrived in Columbia as officials there certainly wouldn't allow it into the country. He did have a solution though - guns should be part of the plane's equipment, locked in the cockpit via satellite. When weight was removed from the landing gear, the box would unlock. Conversely, it would relock upon landing, again, all by way of satellite or similar untamperable system. Sounded pretty good.

[Shooter 2.5]

We trust one pilot with Missiles and Vulcan cannons. Why can't we trust another pilot with a .38?

[Mr. Lucky]

There's a reason even more fundamental than the practical reasons you list:

Free people defend themselves; slaves rely upon their masters for protection. Airline pilots (aside from being infinitely more competent than air marshalls) are private citizens and have the right, as free men, to protect those other free men within their charge.

Or something like that.

[Former Proud Canadian]

Is common sense finally winning out over PC thought?

[freedomcrusader]

What about FBI who routinely go through security with their weapons? I know an FBI agent who says he just flashes his badge, and the screener ignores the firearm on the X-ray view screen.

[Travis McGee]

bttt

[Quilla]

I'm not sure, but I doubt FBI agents (unless they are wearing those windbreakers with huge letters on the back) are that easy to spot. The pilot's point was that his uniform would be a red flag that he was carrying a gun.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

Good.

The number one improvement President Bush could make right now is to remove Minetta, stop the idiotic profiling of grandmothers, and allow Pilots to be armed. That would add security to the flying public and end the harrassment of normal Americans taking flights. (Maybe the sinking of Airline companies is prompting this reexamination of the arming pilots issue and we can only hope that the President's team will also see the ridiculousness of searching a grandmother while ignoring a Middle Eastern looking young man!!! is keeping people from flying. I will not fly unless absolutely necessary.

[AlaskaErik]

He did have a solution though - guns should be part of the plane's equipment, locked in the cockpit via satellite. When weight was removed from the landing gear, the box would unlock. Conversely, it would relock upon landing, again, all by way of satellite or similar untamperable system.

What if someone attempts a takeover on the ground? Say right before the take-off roll. Pilots should be issued a holster and should arm themselves once the cockpit door is secured. Forget the fancy technology.

[freedomcrusader]

But not all fo them would be carrying a gun under a voluntary program.