New Bill to Force TSA to Arm Pilots

WASHINGTON -- Members of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance and other pilot organizations will join U.S. Senators Jim Bunning (R-KY) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) at a press conference Thursday, April 1, 2004, at 11:30 a.m. (EST) where they will introduce new legislation that will force the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) to implement the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program as originally intended by Congress.

Since the armed pilots program was first created by Congress nearly two years ago the TSA has been dragging its feet in arming a fraction of the 100,000 pilots eligible to be armed. The Cockpit Security Technical Corrections and Improvement Act will remove some of the barriers put in place by the TSA, and allow pilots to be armed faster in order to protect our skies from the threat of a terrorist attack.

The current weapons carriage requirements are one of several key deficiencies in the present FFDO program that are responsible for a refusal by thousands of pilots to volunteer for this important program. The Airline Pilots Security Alliance (APSA) has worked closely with members of Congress in the drafting of this legislation including adding corrections and improvements suggested by pilots with Law Enforcement experience, current Federal Flight Deck Officers (FFDOs), and security industry experts.

"We regret that Congress has to revisit this issue," said APSA President David Mackett. "However, we are encouraged that the passage of this legislation will result in the tens of thousands of professional airline pilots who are currently avoiding TSA's onerous program, volunteering to provide the effective deterrent layer of security that Congress originally intended."

I would not normally want to align myself with Boxer. This is amusing. I, and most I work with, will not arm ourselves until the ridiculous and onerous regulations are rectified. They discourage carry, and in some instances make transporting more hazardous than simply maintaining the weapon on person. I know two ex mil attack pilots that flunked the psych test. What a hoot--ok to dispense 1000#ers, but dont touch that little glock.

Most of us want the most secure environment possible for the customer, and are willing to carry, but lets fix the system that was deliberately rigged to discourage volunteers.

Clintonesque bureaucrats arent interested in doing their jobs or accomplishing the mission
They are interested in power...aquiring it...garnering even more...and jeolously holding on to any gains they make....and....they dont share or work well and play with others...

Homeland Security has left a hole in our borders big enough to drive several train & cargo ship loads worth of illegal aliens, wmds, & multitudes of unclassified terrorists and assorted invaders...and their paraphanelia

General Tommy Franks says we are ONE terror event away from the suspension of the Constiturion and Bill of Rights...

So why are the PTB inviting such events?.....by keeping our borders wide open...
imo

It’s been discussed to death but I have a relative that spent the better part of a year after 9-11 conducting takeover scenarios involving pilots armed and trained (for testing purposes) by another arm of their company.

I haven’t seen or heard from him in months but the last time we discussed this particular topic he claimed that during their hundreds of scenarios that took place all around the U.S. – not a single armed pilot was ever able to *draw* a weapon, much less use it to prevent the takeover.

He said it was pathetic. That they could take it over at will, repeatedly, and that due to their ability to do it they ended up changing the “rules” of the trials so that the pilots involved in the test scenarios literally knew which “flights” would or would not be one during which an attempt to take over the cockpit would occur. Even so, they could still take control of the cockpit.

He claimed it was a waste of time and money. Not just the arming/training, but designing a training program that can’t work due to fundamental limitations as well as testing it. He knows people working for competitors that were doing the same type of thing and implied that they had similar results.

In his opinion a successful plan to prevent unauthorized entry would have one or more armed marshals in the passenger compartment where (for their purposes) a takeover attempt would originate – vastly more effective, according to him.

He also claimed that in one report they recommended a few things (not involving arming pilots) that would all but guarantee never having an unauthorized entry, but that the pilot unions were dead-set against them. (Whatever they were – he didn’t say). His view towards the end was that the entire issue was a politicking power grab by APSA-types. I’d ping him over to address it himself, but he got banned at some point (probably over this very issue) and lost interest…

But whatever. If it is a big waste of money I’m surprised they’ve waited this long to ramp up their arming drive. Or maybe someone’s figured out how to make things “work.” I suppose that’s possible. But then I’m also familiar with some of the limitations they face and they’re pretty much insurmountable, IMO.

LurkedLongEnough said: The big sticking point about this topic is "What if a terrorist disguised as a pilot and who has a gun gets into the cockpit?"

You are kidding, right?

If a terrorist disguised as a pilot gets into the cockpit, just what is it that he would do with the gun? Shoot the co-pilot? Force the stewardess to bring him coffee?

What mechanism can be used to prevent bringing a firearm into the cockpit of a plane but which could somehow fail to prevent a terrorist disguised as a pilot from getting to the cockpit?

What would happen if a terrorist disguised as a sky-marshal brought a gun onto an aircraft? Is this a reason to disarm sky-marshals?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.