I dont know not many do, evidently.
So far fighters have escorted jets with unruly or drunk or mental passengers oh there was that one with the shoe-bomber. But none of those flights were hijacked and being piloted toward a building. Still, I suppose you have to treat each incident as if it was a hijacking.
To me its just a tool to manipulate give me what I want or you risk being shot down by the USAF. Its rings hollow considering that on 9/11, when three of four planes were indeed being flown into buildings, approximately zero of them were shot down.
I dont like the idea of a non-federal employee being given the legal authority and status of a federal law enforcement officer. I dont like the idea that this great Arm The Pilots proposal is voluntary in nature. I dont like the idea that pilots MUST be armed (voluntarily) yet they are still flying (unarmed) because _____ (fill in the blank for me because I cant.)
From the proposal (the APSA site) that I read, they want to be deputized FLEOs. Their legal authority is not limited to when they are on an airplane, while they are on airport property or anything else. And yet they are not LEOs. they will not be conducting interviews or compiling information on any terrorist suspects, or doing any other LEO-type work during their non-flying hours. They are LEOs in name only, and only for the reason of circumventing existing gun laws and to limit their liability. They are not even federal employees usually that is nice because the federal government is at least somewhat (supposedly) responsible for, and can control, their actions to some degree that would not be the case here as they would not be federal employees. Theyd essentially be licensees. Or something.
I dont like it. I didnt like the idea of making the guy that holds the plastic tray with your car keys while you walk through the metal detector a federal employee either, and you see what that got me.
It was a pretty picture though (your link). Even though that fighter is not in a position to fire a missile at or shoot down anything
I really don't like their proposal (seriously). If they want to be armed while in flight or while on airline/airport property, that is fine. Otherwise they are just Joe Citizen... And even while on the job, they are Joe Citizen with a carry permit... all fine with me. The way it is currently proposed is not. Not that it matters...
fighters have escorted
I disagree. Fighters have intercepted commercial flights. This difference is crucial. The fighter is not there to protect the airliner, the fighter is there to protect the world against the airliner.
To me its just a tool to manipulate give me what I want or you risk being shot down by the USAF. Its rings hollow considering that on 9/11,
I have to agree with you here, and it does ring hollow. Hijackers must now be assumed to place no value on their lives, and the intimidation of offering them one death serving Jihad versus a different death serving Jihad would likely have no effect.
I dont like the idea of a non-federal employee being given the legal authority and status of a federal law enforcement officer.
I'm not sure I understand your objection. Do you dislike full-time FLEO's losing the monopoly on nationwide right to apply force? Do you dislike the fact that such bizarre legal constructs are being fashioned in order to avoid the sense and appearance that citizens can effectively provide for their own defense? Maybe you, like me, just can't believe that President Bush keeps throwing clueless freedom-hating bimbos into these position, or is something else entirely?
It was a pretty picture though (your link). Even though that fighter is not in a position to fire a missile at or shoot down anything
This is a red herring. If needed, that F15 could offensively engage the plane the picture was taken from in under 5 seconds.
all fine with me. The way it is currently proposed is not. Not that it matters...
I still don't understand your objection.