Obama slips another one by us: No more guns in plane cockpits ?

[Tech_Esq]

Why is the government so stupid? What did the pilots do to provoke this dumb law? Did they shoot a passenger, the copilot, anyone? Did they threaten anyone? No. This is another attempt to "bring down taxes" by not having protection for pilots if something ever, God forbid, happened on another airplane. Does he not care if there is another 9/11? Does he not want our pilots to be able to protect themselves? And yet another wonderful idea from our government. Way to go.

No, of course they didn't. The pilots have been well trained and have acted completely appropriately with the firearms they carry. But, let's see if they can keep up that record without training. Once there's an incident, then they have an excuse to end the program.

And contrary to what some fool said on here, the Pilots don't have guns to act like the "po-lice" that have guns to act as the last vestige of hope in a dire situation.

If this sort of terrorism was commonplace then an armed federal agent should be aboard each plane. And no, private employees should not be enforcing federal terrorism laws.

First, when the potential for harm is as great as it is, "commonplace" is not the standard. When you can kill thousands with a single incident, catching bad guys "sometimes" doesn't cut it.

I didn't see anyone advocating having pilot enforce any law whatsoever. What are you talking about?

 

[Vel]

How many people do you know can always "properly aim" a bullet?

A lot less now that we've taken money from their training.

Why can't the airlines pay for their training? Or the pilots themselves?

OMG, OBAMA CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!

Please check your reading comprehension. Obama did NOT "cut government spending". He diverted spending from training to supervisory spending. NO savings, just more paperwork.

 

[pete]

Washington Times - EDITORIAL: Guns on a plane

The Obama administration this past week diverted some $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots.

Much more at link.

So, what the hell is this? Disarm the pilots, none of which have ever abused their authority, not even so much as brandished their weapons?

What say you?

Obama is afraid of guns. He's probably going to die by one. I've said for awhile now that my bet is he'll be assassinated.

He is going to do that one thing and someone is going to pull the trigger. Another record he can add ... first AAA

 

[pete]

Why is the government so stupid? What did the pilots do to provoke this dumb law? Did they shoot a passenger, the copilot, anyone? Did they threaten anyone? No. This is another attempt to "bring down taxes" by not having protection for pilots if something ever, God forbid, happened on another airplane. Does he not care if there is another 9/11? Does he not want our pilots to be able to protect themselves? And yet another wonderful idea from our government. Way to go.

No, of course they didn't. The pilots have been well trained and have acted completely appropriately with the firearms they carry. But, let's see if they can keep up that record without training. Once there's an incident, then they have an excuse to end the program.

And contrary to what some fool said on here, the Pilots don't have guns to act like the "po-lice" that have guns to act as the last vestige of hope in a dire situation.

If this sort of terrorism was commonplace then an armed federal agent should be aboard each plane. And no, private employees should not be enforcing federal terrorism laws.

That is just a ... forget it ... WHATS THE DIFFERENCE???

If they are trained and take a course they then are certified!! They take a couse and years or months of training to get us where we want to go safely and if it can be used by a terrorist as a weapon I guess they shouldnt be allowed to fly the planes either.

This ass hole lives in a dream world!!!

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, of course they didn't. The pilots have been well trained and have acted completely appropriately with the firearms they carry. But, let's see if they can keep up that record without training. Once there's an incident, then they have an excuse to end the program.

And contrary to what some fool said on here, the Pilots don't have guns to act like the "po-lice" that have guns to act as the last vestige of hope in a dire situation.

If this sort of terrorism was commonplace then an armed federal agent should be aboard each plane. And no, private employees should not be enforcing federal terrorism laws.

Since when is self defense enforcing federal terrorism laws? Oh wait.. my bad.. I meant to say enforcing federal man made disaster laws.

Our nation has always respected the concept of citizens defending themselves and others in lieu of the possibility of assigning every citizen their own personal police bodyguard. It also makes a hell of a lot more sense to train airline personnel to foil a hijacking for free, rather than paying out a lot more money to hire air marshals for every single flight. They are already going to be there anyway, they are already taking on responsibility for the lives and safety of their passengers by flying the plane in the first place, and their own lives are already on the line in the event of a hijacking.

 

[Ravi]

No, of course they didn't. The pilots have been well trained and have acted completely appropriately with the firearms they carry. But, let's see if they can keep up that record without training. Once there's an incident, then they have an excuse to end the program.

And contrary to what some fool said on here, the Pilots don't have guns to act like the "po-lice" that have guns to act as the last vestige of hope in a dire situation.

If this sort of terrorism was commonplace then an armed federal agent should be aboard each plane. And no, private employees should not be enforcing federal terrorism laws.

Since when is self defense enforcing federal terrorism laws? Oh wait.. my bad.. I meant to say enforcing federal man made disaster laws.

It stops being simply self-defense when it is defending a plane full of people.

 

[glockmail]

Meh ... it's all moot really. Once someone draws a gun, a properly trained pilot could still avoid disaster without a gun. First ... restricting access to the cockpit and actually enforcing it would help a lot (instead of what happened the last few hijackings) and just stop being such chicken shits when faced with a criminal. They are brave because everyone else just cowers.

You're such an asshole and an idiot. Its obvious from this post that you think that the US pilots who were on 9-11 were cowards.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

There's nothing in the linked article that proves the thread title.

Was just gonna say this.

Dont confuse them with facts.

My mea culpa folks, a question mark was meant to appear after the sentence. I didn't notice until just now it didn't get picked up. Of course, that's because I haven't been back since I posted this, until now.

The editorial cites anecdotal sources, and draws a conclusion without any sourced quotes to back it up. It is therefore apparently informed speculation by the Washington Times. It's a better source then a blog or a partisan dot-org, but it still appears to be speculation nonetheless.

My apologies for any apparent misrepresentation, and I will ask a Mod to install a question mark at the end of the thread title.

As it is, it's at least sparked some excellent debate, which was the main idea.

Carry on.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Well, MM...are you going to correct your thread title or not?

It's been done. However you'll notice I drew no conclusions in my comments in the OP, merely asked what say you.

 

[oreo]

The only business in the United States that is doing well--is the gun shop. All shops are out of ammunition--no where to be found. This is what happens when you get an anti-gun President along with an anti-gun attorney general.

 

[Ravi]

Well, MM...are you going to correct your thread title or not?

It's been done. However you'll notice I drew no conclusions in my comments in the OP, merely asked what say you.

okie dokie...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Meh ... it's all moot really. Once someone draws a gun, a properly trained pilot could still avoid disaster without a gun. First ... restricting access to the cockpit and actually enforcing it would help a lot (instead of what happened the last few hijackings) and just stop being such chicken shits when faced with a criminal. They are brave because everyone else just cowers.

You're such an asshole and an idiot. Its obvious from this post that you think that the US pilots who were on 9-11 were cowards.

The official policy of the airlines prior to 9-11 was for their flight personnel NOT to oppose hijackers and to give them whatever they asked for, without even getting proof that they really were armed. If someone held up a teddy bear and said, "There's a grenade in here; fly us to Havana", they were instructed to just take their word for it and do it. This is because prior to 9-11, it wasn't expected that hijackers actually WANTED to kill everyone on the plane as their primary objective, so the airlines were willing to eat whatever costs in order to get as many people out safely as possible. A pilot violating this policy would have found himself summarily fired.

And you're right. Kitten IS an asshole and an idiot.

 

[DiveCon]

Meh ... it's all moot really. Once someone draws a gun, a properly trained pilot could still avoid disaster without a gun. First ... restricting access to the cockpit and actually enforcing it would help a lot (instead of what happened the last few hijackings) and just stop being such chicken shits when faced with a criminal. They are brave because everyone else just cowers.

You're such an asshole and an idiot. Its obvious from this post that you think that the US pilots who were on 9-11 were cowards.

The official policy of the airlines prior to 9-11 was for their flight personnel NOT to oppose hijackers and to give them whatever they asked for, without even getting proof that they really were armed. If someone held up a teddy bear and said, "There's a grenade in here; fly us to Havana", they were instructed to just take their word for it and do it. This is because prior to 9-11, it wasn't expected that hijackers actually WANTED to kill everyone on the plane as their primary objective, so the airlines were willing to eat whatever costs in order to get as many people out safely as possible. A pilot violating this policy would have found himself summarily fired.

And you're right. Kitten IS an asshole and an idiot.

while i agree with most of your post, i disagree with the last line

 

[007]

Why can't the airlines pay for their training? Or the pilots themselves?

OMG, OBAMA CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!

Became a national defense issue. Government needs to make sure pilots are capable of defending American lives while aboard the planes. Same way pay to train the cops who keep us safe on the ground.

OMG OBAMA CUT THE WRONG GOVERNMENT SPENDING

That's your opinion. I'm good with federal marshalls...pilots aren't the po-lice and they shouldn't be used as such.

You do realize a large portion of pilots are ex military, and have already been trained in the use of a hand gun on an air craft. And Federal Marshals, well, there's just a small handful of them, so that pilot is really the people's last line of defense against having their plane flown into a damn building and dying. So yes, it makes perfect sense to arm the pilot. Course doing things that DON'T make any sense is the liberals M.O..

Each year, the Transportation Security Administration spends several billion tax dollars, the vast majority on our “multi-layered” airline security system. But, breaches of the system have been rampant in nearly every area, often by innocent people who weren’t even trying. Data confirming the abysmal weapons detection rates in penetration tests at airport checkpoints have been restricted because the results are so poor. The number of federal air marshals is also not publicized because there are so few.

Airline Pilots Security Alliance - Mission Statement

 

[007]

Why is the government so stupid? What did the pilots do to provoke this dumb law? Did they shoot a passenger, the copilot, anyone? Did they threaten anyone? No. This is another attempt to "bring down taxes" by not having protection for pilots if something ever, God forbid, happened on another airplane. Does he not care if there is another 9/11? Does he not want our pilots to be able to protect themselves? And yet another wonderful idea from our government. Way to go.

You KNOW terrorists look at things we do here in this country with disbelief. So we made it harder for them to hijack a plane. Now we turn around and make it easier again. They have to look at each other when shit like this happens and LAUGH! "Those STUPID Americans!" That's why the terrorists are always pulling for the liberals to be in charge here in America, because it's ALWAYS the LIBERALS that pull stupid shit like this.

 

[007]

Washington Times - EDITORIAL: Guns on a plane

Much more at link.

So, what the hell is this? Disarm the pilots, none of which have ever abused their authority, not even so much as brandished their weapons?

What say you?

Obama is afraid of guns. He's probably going to die by one. I've said for awhile now that my bet is he'll be assassinated.

I sure hope you lose your bet.

Considering who's in line to take his place, it really wouldn't do any good to take him out.

I'm just betting some dumb ass will.

 

[glockmail]

...
Considering who's in line to take his place, it really wouldn't do any good to take him out.

I'm just betting some dumb ass will.

Take out Biden then we'll have Peolsi. Holy shit are we screwed.

 

[Tech_Esq]

...
Considering who's in line to take his place, it really wouldn't do any good to take him out.

I'm just betting some dumb ass will.

Take out Biden then we'll have Peolsi. Holy shit are we screwed.

And if she were gone too, it would be Byrd

Then Hillary. Hmmm....If Obama and Biden go, Pelosi and Byrd better invest in kevlar sheets. Hillary would probably cap them herself.

 

[007]

...
Considering who's in line to take his place, it really wouldn't do any good to take him out.

I'm just betting some dumb ass will.

Take out Biden then we'll have Peolsi. Holy shit are we screwed.

Yeah we're screwed for the next four years no matter HOW you look at it. All we can hope for is for the conservatives to retake the majority next year, and I fully expect that to happen. The latest polls show it.

 

[glockmail]

...
Considering who's in line to take his place, it really wouldn't do any good to take him out.

I'm just betting some dumb ass will.

Take out Biden then we'll have Peolsi. Holy shit are we screwed.

Yeah we're screwed for the next four years no matter HOW you look at it. All we can hope for is for the conservatives to retake the majority next year, and I full expect that to happen. The latest polls show it.

We, as the collective voters, need to get screwed.