Why is President Bush against arming Pilots?

Question | September 28, 2001 | Search4Truth

[Search4Truth]

The cockpit is what these terrorist need to take to accomplish theri mission of terror. We need to put in a bulkhead to protect the cockpit and armed pilots behind it. The plane is then secured, It ia a simple as that. Or we can have armed marshall in the cabin ready to engage in a fire-fight with the terrorist.

We trust these pilots with our lives already. Why not give him the tools he needs to do that job better? Maybe when 70,000 people are killed we will awaken to this simple fact. We must be able to protect ourselves. The Federal government has already proven that they can not protect us. We seem to be forgetting too quickly that 7,000 Americans were just massacred because the pilots could not defend the cockpit.

[Search4Truth]

"I have two concerns about guns on planes. 1) the terrorists could wrestle the guns away from the pilots and then the plane has terrorists with guns and then the whole plane is really screwed and 2) from what I have read, the verdict is out on those bullets that don't go through airplane walls--methinks that depressurization would be a really crappy way to die.

An armed pilot behind a bulkhead protected cockpit would be the last line of the defense. A ex-military pilot properly trained in the use of firearms in a close combat siutation, a 2 day course, would not be so easily overtaken by men with box cutters.

"What about stun guns and pepper spray? I'll bet every flight attendant has pepper spray or mace on them now! LOL!

This is probably a good idea. I would trust attendants to carry pepper spray. Althoug, in a close space such a an airplane, it could annoy a lot of peolpe

[super175]

I understand where you are coming from...We already trust the captains. However, what about Egypt Air? Everyone says that particular captain went on a sucide mission...

How are we going to screen our pilots? Or the pilots from other countries who are flying around on international flights?

If they have good screening of pilots, background checks, etc thats fine.

As far as cowboys go, I think having a few in the back seat is just as effective as having a few in the front...

[super175]

Lock the pilots in the drivers seat, then let the cowboys in the back deal with any ruckus.

[Republic]

I don't think we have to break ALL trust with our President because we disagree on this one issue. Gish. It must be hard to be your friend if you are so black and white on everysingle topic.....has there ever been politician or friend of yours you have agreed with on every single isuue? I've never had that experience. I even disagree with myself on occasion! ;^)

I think it is of upmost importance that EVERYONE who sits in the cockpit of a plane have access to weapons. Period. No steel door is going to keep the captain from helping passengers or attendents in distress. It may not be the cowardly terrorists wanting IN but the Captain needing to get OUT into the cabin. IN such a case-he needs to be able to come out ARMED.I want my pilots armed....if my pilots WANT to be armed.

But I trust our President, 100%. I just disagree with him on this issue.

[PA_hayseed]

I really need an answer to this question. I don't understand why President Bush is opposing arming pilots. This simple measure could have averted this whole tragedy.

What if the President wants to "maintain control of the chain of accountability" ???

[Search4Truth]

"As far as cowboys go, I think having a few in the back seat is just as effective as having a few in the front... "

I think that idea of plain clothes marshals is a good one. Terrorist would never know, who they were or how many there were. The terrorist could be certain of one thing. There are trained and armed pilots in the cockpit.

[InfraRed]

To my mind, that makes everyone who has worked so hard to create these kill zones of disarmed Americans, complicit in the deaths of 7,000 Americans.

There is no doubt. You are correct.

Are we to add President Bush to that list?

I have never considered President Bush the staunchest pro-defense candidate. However, he has his hands full at the moment, and I'm not ready to give him a hard time. He is maintaining the status-quo, not furthering the disarmament of Americans. I do wish he would stand up for our right to self-defense though.

[super175]

Either way its fine with me. Some experts can say all they want, however the end result should be that terrorists get buckshot to the brain.

More than one way to skin a cat.

I even think access to the cabin should be only through a seperate door from the outside of the plane. In other words, no walking from the cabin to the cockpit... It would be sealed off completely.

In order to get in the cockpit you have to be parked on the ground...

[Pure Country]

Why don't the pilots just have a button to push in the cockpit that will seal them off and put a spray of some sort back in the passenger area that would knock everyone out until they land? There is surely something safe out there that wouldn't harm anyone, just put them to sleep for a while. In this day and age, there has to be a product that would do the job. Sure there might be some who would get sick from it, but better sick than dead.

[Deep_6]

re: "..Bush is also NWO.... this terror incident is just the right catalyst to speed up the New World Order by 100 years... Bilderbergers all..." (watta moron)

[Search4Truth]

"I don't think we have to break ALL trust with our President because we disagree on this one issue. Gish. It must be hard to be your friend if you are so black and white on everysingle topic.....has there ever been politician or friend of yours you have agreed with on every single isuue? I've never had that experience. I even disagree with myself on occasion! ;^)"

I treat people according to theiir nature, and start by giving them the benefit of the doubt. I believe that President Bush is an honorable man, until he proves himslef otherwise.

To the point at hand, I hardly think this is a small matter - the arming of pilots, the simplest thing that can be done to avoid or avert this kind of tragedy in the future. I hardly think that I am unfairly criticizing President Bush by pointing out that his stance on this is consistent with the the anti-gun lobby and is anti-2nd Amendendment. I truly hope that I am wrong. If I am correct, than I will be treating President Bush as I do all anit-2ND Amendment types, according to their nature.

Given your screen name, I would think that you would have simlar objections with what President Bush is doing.

[Havisham]

It's suicidal NOT to arm the pilots. The president shouldn't have rejected the request out of hand. Seriously considering the proposal would have boosted public confidence and discouraged terrorism. I don't know why the president makes half the compromises he makes with the dims and congressional Republicans can't wait to cave on any democrat whine.

[ctdonath2]

The legal complexities are far more intricate than most people realize. Every state has a different patchwork of gun control laws, which the feds cannot preempt for non-federal employees. The pilot would, practically, have to get a non-resident permit for every state - and many states make it very hard or impossible to get non-resident permits. The obtuseness and obfuscation of laws of each state, multiplied by the number of states the pilot operates in, make it practically impossible for pilots to not commit misdemeanors & felonies on an almost daily basis.

Example: a simple cross-country flight from NYC to LA with a stopover in Chicago.
- NY does not grant CCW permits to non-residents.
- Should an exemption be made or the pilot live in NYC, CCW permits in NYC are terribly difficult (nearly impossible) to obtain.
- Illinois prohibits carry of firearms, period.
- Chicago requires registration of all firearms possessed, and is refusing to register any more.
- California, practically speaking, does not grant non-resident CCW permits.
- None of these states recognize CCW permits from other states.
And that's just the beginning.

Should Bush push for arming pilots, he would have to push for major overhaul of gun laws in nearly every state, plus force the Supreme Court to rule on applying the 14th Amendment to state gun permits. While it is a huge battle that must be fought and won, even if he is adamantly totally unquestionably passionately for arming pilots, he simply doesn't have the time to deal with it now as he's got a war to run.

[MWS]

EXCELLENT cartoon. When will the gun-grabbers learn that armed citizens are our friends? The argument for allowing citizens to carry guns onto planes is strengthened by recent admissions that a hole through a plane is NOT going to cause a catastrophic event inside the cabin... where's the problem?

[InfraRed]

However, for the fact that the government is taking away even the nail clippers of pilots, the idea that they will ever allow them to carry guns is unlikely to a high degree.

If you don't feel safe, don't fly. That's my plan.

The government and the airlines have proven beyond the shadow of any doubt that they are incapable of protecting American citizens. I'm not prepared to risk my life while giving them a second, third, or fourth chance to get it right. They have both failed miserably.

[Havisham]

I'm not willing to pay for 5,000 air marshall flights/day. It's just preposterous on it's face. And we'd be leaving ourselves open to a much bigger threat: terrorist infilitration of air marshall ranks. Pilots are by far the smaller security risk. Let it be known they may be armed. Besides, the coming attacks won't be on planes. Easier targets of vulnerability exist and we all know what they are.

[Search4Truth]

With all do respect and appreciation for your post, go tell that to families' of 7,000 dead Americans. This is just legalese bull.

If the Federal government can not protect us, only give us legalese as an excuse, then why in the hell do I pay more Fed taxes than most people make.

The one thing that the Federal government is legitimately responsible for, they have failed in. And like so many other things they have failed in, they are not willing to allow us to handle ourselves. It is apparently business as usual.

[zeugma]

I like Pres. Bush as a man. As a President, he was better than the other major alternative. I think he's handling this situation well for the most part, though I have grave misgivings about some of his proposals most significantly the 'homeland defence' department. The very name brings to mind images of Germans singing songs about the Fatherland or Russians waxing poetic about Rodina(sp?).

Why doesn't he apparently trust pilots to be armed? Probably because he feels at this juncture that it is not politically expedient to do so. He's trying to maintain coalitions both domestically and internationally. On the domestic front, there are plenty of true believers in Victim Disarmament that would go ape-sh__ if he were to suggest that anyone other than the police/military carry arms on a routine basis.

For many, Victim Disarmament is a major part of their religion of state-worship. Attack this fundamental premise of their religion, that the state should not have a monopoly of lethal force and you'll see serious opposition begin to mount on many more fronts than we see now. I think that overall, he's being pragmatic in that he doesn't want to expend political capital (and being foolishly cautious IMO) by making such a suggestion. I'd like to see the pilots, cabin crew and passenger armed as well, but that is not going to happen in this country any time soon. Much more will be necessary to transpire before we regain our lost liberties.

[Search4Truth]

"Easier targets of vulnerability exist and we all know what they are. "

The airlines would be a perfect target to hit again. It work so well the first time, and they are still vulnerable. We know the terrorsist are willing to die in the attempt. And the terrorist goals to detroy confidence would make hitting the airlines again an effective move. We would be under estimating these terrorist again, if we did not think that they would strike again in the same way.