Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush to OK Guns for Airline Pilots
AP via The NY Times ^ | 5 September 2002 | AP

Posted on 09/05/2002 4:06:17 PM PDT by SBeck

Bush to OK Guns for Airline Pilots
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 6:37 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate voted overwhelmingly Thursday to allow commercial pilots to carry weapons in the cockpit after the Bush administration dropped its opposition to the idea.

The administration, though, said a number of safety and logistical issues needed to be resolved.

In a letter to two senators, the White House recommended giving pilots lockboxes for the weapons so they won't be left in the cockpit. It also said only pilots who volunteer to carry weapons and receive extensive training should be armed.

Al Aitken, a pilot speaking for the 14,500-member union representing American Airlines pilots, which supports arming pilots, said the 87-6 vote meant the Senate recognized that all the security layers the administration is putting into place are still inadequate.

``The people who need the weapons as a last line of defense are the pilots,'' he said. ``They're the only ones they're trying to keep the gun from,'' he said, adding that thousands of state and federal law enforcement officers travel on planes while armed.

The heads of 21 airlines, which oppose the measure, sent a letter to each senator Thursday saying they wanted to discuss the idea of arming pilots with Congress and the administration.

``It must be noted, however, that while we are spending literally billions of dollars to keep dangerous weapons off of aircraft, the idea of intentionally introducing thousands of deadly weapons in to the system appears to be dangerously counterproductive,'' the letter said.

To address some of the airlines' concerns, the administration suggested a ``detailed, effective'' training program be designed from scratch and tested before an estimated 85,000 pilots are allowed to carry weapons.

The administration also warned the cost would be significant -- $900 million to start and $250 million annually thereafter -- and said there is no money now in the Transportation Security Administration budget to cover the expenses.

The letter from Transportation Security Administration chief James Loy was delivered to Sens. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., and John McCain, R-Ariz., as the Senate debated the measure that would allow all pilots to carry guns into the cockpit. Hollings is chairman of the Senate Commerce and Transportation Committee; McCain is the committee's ranking Republican.

``If there is to be responsible legislation establishing a program to allow guns in the cockpit, it must address the numerous safety, security, cost and operational issues,'' Loy wrote.

Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., offered the amendment to the homeland security bill that would prohibit airlines and the federal government from barring armed pilots.

``We prefer a more comprehensive approach in our amendment, but are grateful for any efforts by the administration to roll the ball down the field,'' said Smith's spokeswoman, Lisa Harrison.

The chairman of the House Transportation Committee's aviation subcommittee, Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., said pilots should be armed at least until bulletproof cockpit doors are installed in all planes.

The Federal Aviation Administration said Thursday that manufacturers and airlines agree an April 9 deadline to install the new doors can be met.

Mica said the administration realized that the momentum in Congress favoring arming pilots is strong. A bill to create a program that would train and arm some pilots passed the House 310-113 in July.

Transportation Undersecretary John Magaw, who headed the TSA until July, said in May he would not allow pilots to carry guns. Reinforced cockpits and armed air marshals provide enough protection against terrorists who try to take over an airplane, Magaw said.

After Magaw's departure, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said he would re-examine the issue.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: airseclist; banglist; cockpit; guns; pilots
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 last
To: tall_tex
Shoulder holster best way to go, worn on the left side fore righties, right side for lefties.. Not sure the left for right or right for left is PC

I think it isn't because it "reinforces a heterosexual orthodoxy" ... :-O)

101 posted on 09/06/2002 11:18:28 AM PDT by Smile-n-Win
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: night reader
No! No! No! We want to arm them with handguns, not with Congress and the administration!

LOL Though things like Congress and the administration can be MUCH scarier than handguns at times!

102 posted on 09/06/2002 11:21:25 AM PDT by Smile-n-Win
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
It is so easy. First you take a stance-any stance-that is opposite the one you really want to come to fruition. Immedicately your opponents begin making noises opposite your proclamations. Soon, when the level of noise is just about right, you cave in, accomplishing what needs to be done for the good of the nation and end up looking like a person willing to listen to reason. That is how the WH played this card, imho.
103 posted on 09/06/2002 5:27:13 PM PDT by Republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: SBeck

Here me out. A lockbox makes sense from a couple of standpoints:

1. An airline pilot is easily identified and even if he picks up his firearm in the sterile area - beyond the checkpoint - he or she will become a target of opportunity for a directed attack by terrorists to obtain firearms.

This whole issue would be moot, if we allowed any law enforcement officer, from any federal, state or local agency, who wanted to take specialized training, to carry a weapon on the plane.  On any given flight, there is a fairly good chance that one of the roughly 700,000 combined full time law enforcement officers in the U.S. will be on that flight, either on official business or for pleasure.  Add pilots and air marshals to that mix and the odds of one or more guns being on any given aircraft, in the hands of trained professionals, becomes quite high.

In that case, even if a terrorist were to manage to get a gun from a single pilot, his chances of successfully using it in a hijacking attempt becomes very small.  He and some others try to use the stolen gun in a hijacking and are suddenly faced by two armed, off-duty policemen and an air marshal.

The problem is that our laws no longer respect the Second Amendment.  In fact, if we did respect the Second Amendment, any citizen who could pass a comprehensive background check (at his own expense), was willing to take the necessary training to use a gun on an aircraft (at his own expense) and pay for the special ammo required, would be allowed to carry a gun on any aircraft.  Then the terrorists wouldn't stand a chance of seizing control of one of our aircraft.

 

104 posted on 09/06/2002 9:49:07 PM PDT by Action-America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The White House doesn't care for this idea, as they are promting an expensive, exhaustive, unfundable program to train the pilots. This way, they can say that they support arming pilots, while later claiming that it couldn't be done due to funding problems. Opinions haven't really changed. Bush is one of the politically correct ones.
105 posted on 09/06/2002 11:13:46 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Republic
First you take a stance-any stance-that is opposite the one you really want to come to fruition. ...

I suppose it's possible, but all of the evidence points to the simpler explanation. Ie, Bush is an anti-gunner, and caved in only when presented with a veto-proof majority.

106 posted on 09/07/2002 3:57:03 AM PDT by from occupied ga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson