U.S. Won't Allow Guns in Cockpits

AP ^ | 2-21-2002 | JONATHAN D. SALANT

[Cagey]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The federal government said Tuesday that pilots will not be allowed to have guns in the cockpits of commercial airplanes.

The announcement was made at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing by John Magaw, undersecretary for transportation security. It followed months of debate over whether arming pilots would be a deterrent to hijackers.

Both Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta and Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge previously indicated their opposition to arming pilots.

Magaw gave no reason for his decision, which was announced in response to a question from Arizona Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the committee.

Magaw said a formal announcement will be made later in the week.

Airline pilots have been pushing for guns, saying it would allow them to confront a hijacker who breaks into the cockpit. Hijackers took over four commercial airlines on Sept. 11, crashing two of them into the World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon. The fourth crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.

Flight attendants, meanwhile, have advocated nonlethal weapons, such as stun guns, that they could use in emergencies.

Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., who chairs the Commerce Committee, said guns would not be needed as long as pilots kept cockpit doors locked while in flight.

"You can put the rule in right now and cut out all the argument about pistols and stun guns," Hollings said.

Opponents of arming pilots have said reinforced cockpit doors now required on all planes mean that pistols are unnecessary. They have also expressed concern that an errant shot might hit a passenger or damage a key electrical system on the plane.

Two House Republicans have introduced legislation to arm pilots and the House Transportation Committee is scheduled to take up the bill this week.

[xdem]

If this policy is to change, we need to do three things:

1 - Don't fly on a commercial airliner, no matter what.

2 - Write letters to the RNC, "W", and Republican members
of Congress. Let them know they will not get ANY SUPPORT
from you if they don't change this.

3 - Follow though at the next election based on their actions.

[bvw]

Yo dude, it was me who said,

"HUGE future tax burden to my children and grandchildren to be an attack as much as any terrorist might mount, though not *directly* as bloody"

I definitely reserve the right and duty to be "greedy", if that is what you call keeping my OWN money. The federale pensionaire screeners and marshals are NOT making a spit-fuls worth of difference to aiplane security and safety -- in fact just by being (not to mention being in a very large size) they pull executive focus and resources away from real lines of endeavor that would make things safer. It is worse than a waste - it is a reckless expense!

[snopercod]

Time for a pilot strike. My thoughts exactly. If only they had the gumption.

[PsyOp]

They can do a snap roll

Not unless you want to see the wings come off. A barrel roll can be executed by some airliners like the 707, which has performed one at the hands of a test pilot. A good hard bank or zero-G maneuver will take them off their feet quick enough though.

[Elsie]

Time for a pilot strike........

And if that doesn't work, a passenger strike. NO! No. no..........

A simple, VERY thorough airport screening for each and every person that has the power to vote on this subject.

---

We CAN'T be TOO careful, you know:
There IS no backup if someone gets through the gate; somehow....

[dixierat22]

This thread is funny. Mainly b/c a thought out decision is made, and people on here are already calling for the head of our President. I am more concerned with keeping the pilots secured in the cockpit rather than them coming out of the cockpit, making the entire plane vulnerable, and giving a well trained terrorist who has probably taken a lot of time to practice shooting or cutting the chance of getting in that cockpit.

I haven't read anybody calling for the Presidents head, nor has any one suggested that the pilot should leave the cockpit to assault a gang of terrorists in the aircarft passenger cabin. THINKING people, who have some experience in the world, realize that any door may be broken into. If the terrorist does get through the door, which he probably can, eventually, if the pilots are unarmed, you have given the terrorist a potent weapon such as the 9/11 aircraft. The terrorist will be armed. That is a certainty. Should not the pilots at least have a chance to defend the cockpit?

[sixmil]

U.S. Won't Allow Guns in Cockpits

Potential terrorists, however, will continue to be allowed on board because otherwise, how are we going to catch them doing something bad? < / s a r c a s m >

[HiTech RedNeck]

THINKING people, who have some experience in the world, realize that any door may be broken into.

Or sneaked through, unless the airlines install dedicated pilot lavatories.

[Geezerette]

Magaw = Clinton holdover, BATF?

Norman (Minnow) Mineta = Clinton holdover.

Why, Mr. President?

g

[Musket]

Email Mineta's office here:"dot.comments@ost.dot.gov"

[Myrddin]

The current hour news report says "The Bush administration believes pilots should focus on flying the airplanes and leave security to the federal air marshal". Ok, fine. The pilots (and airlines) should immediately ground any flight that does not have an air marshal on board. The pilots can't focus on flying the airplane if they have no means of defending against air piracy and nobody aboard to do it on their behalf. Send Norm Mineta a bill for the lost revenue.

[dbwz]

THAT gives the hijacker IMMEDIATE and UNPREVENTABLE access to the MARSHALL's gun ... WHILE LEAVING THE PILOT (the ONLY person who needs a weapon!) STILL disarmed. Against the NOW ARMED attackers.

When the now-armed terrorists break through the cockpit door without warning, what position are the pilots in?

[Myrddin]

I would prefer to have citizens and pilots carrying. The point of refusing to fly an airplane without an air marshal aboard is to illustrate by absurdity the policy of Mineta et al. They don't have enough trained air marshals to cover every flight. If they did, they still don't have enough money to pay them. It would only take a day or two of this policy to throw air travel into absolute chaos and call the bluff of these anti-gun political hacks.

[Myrddin]

I did overlook one item. I'd be happy to carry my CCW weapon. The seats are a bit narrow. My Palm Pilot just fits in that space today. A 5 shot .38SPL would be adequate and not terribly inconvenient to carry.