great post! I, for one, think pilots SHOULD be armed, and should have been armed long before 9/11. The points made by the writer are quite valid, not only in theory, but in practical application. Frangible bullets, subsonic rounds, and other such types of projectiles have been readily available for years, and our pilots should not only be allowed, but trained, in firearms use.
The sad part of the whole thing is this, though- and I realize this has been said before, so many times- "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". Well, guess what. Apply an "old west" scenario to a 767 Widebody aircraft: the passengers are the townspeople, the flight crew are the cavalry, and the terrorists, are, well, the Indians. The cockpit is the "fort", which must be defended, and what if the fort has no weapons with which to defend no only itself, but the townspeople? The Indians win.
Well, back to modern day- let's let the cavalry defend the fort.
I don't see this as an issue that ought to be particularly difficult. The Professional Pilots control their own organizations pretty well and can coordinate a very muscular effort to make this happen. The message is "on Monday April 15, 2002, every professional pilot is going to call in sick and stay sick until the FAA approves a rule that says any person who holds any kind of current Pilot Certificate can carry any kind of heat anywhere including on airplanes". The Pilots ought to get national support from private citizens and from each other--substantial majorities of both groups support the proposition.
Enough time has passed since September 11 that we have become lax in our defense again. We have hard intelligence that continuing plans exist to use the hijacked airliner as a terrorist weapon. Armed pilots including the possibility of private pilots in the cabin are the only certain remedy.