BHO quietly ends pistols on the flight deck
Results 1 to 8 of 8

BHO quietly ends pistols on the flight deck

This is a discussion on BHO quietly ends pistols on the flight deck within the Politics forums, part of the Main Category category; EDITORIAL: Guns on a plane After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they ...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Mi
    Posts
    1,856

    Default BHO quietly ends pistols on the flight deck

    EDITORIAL: Guns on a plane
    After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

    Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

    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.

    This looks like completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots. The 12,000 Federal Flight Deck Officers, the pilots who have been approved to carry guns, are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency. There are no cases where any of them has improperly brandished or used a gun. There are just a few cases where officers have improperly used their IDs.

    Fewer than one percent of the officers have any administrative actions brought against them and, we are told, virtually all of those cases “are trumped up.”

    Take a case against one flight officer who had visited the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles within the last few weeks. While there, the pilot noticed that federal law enforcement officers can, with the approval of a superior, obtain a license plate that cannot be traced, a key safety feature for law enforcement personnel. So the pilot asked if, as a member of the federal program, he was eligible. The DMV staffer checked and said “no.” The next day administrative actions were brought against the pilot for “misrepresenting himself.” These are the kinds of cases that President Obama wants to investigate.

    Since Mr. Obama's election, pilots have told us that the approval process for letting pilots carry guns on planes slowed significantly. Last week the problem went from bad to worse. Federal Flight Deck Officers - the pilots who have been approved to carry guns - indicate that the approval process has stalled out.

    Pilots cannot openly speak about the changing policies for fear of retaliation from the Transportation Security Administration. Pilots who act in any way that causes a “loss of confidence” in the armed pilot program risk criminal prosecution as well as their removal from the program. Despite these threats, pilots in the Federal Flight Deck Officers program have raised real concerns in multiple interviews.

    Arming pilots after Sept. 11 was nothing new. Until the early 1960s, American commercial passenger pilots on any flight carrying U.S. mail were required to carry handguns. Indeed, U.S. pilots were still allowed to carry guns until as recently as 1987. There are no records that any of these pilots (either military or commercial) ever causing any significant problems.

    Screening of airplane passengers is hardly perfect. While armed marshals are helpful, the program covers less than 3 percent of the flights out of Washington D.C.'s three airports and even fewer across the country. Sky marshals are costly and quit more often than other law-enforcement officers.

    Armed pilots are a cost-effective backup layer of security. Terrorists can only enter the cockpit through one narrow entrance, and armed pilots have some time to prepare themselves as hijackers penetrate the strengthened cockpit doors. With pilots, we have people who are willing to take on the burden of protecting the planes for free. About 70 percent of the pilots at major American carriers have military backgrounds.

    Frankly, as a matter of pure politics, we cannot understand what the administration is thinking. Nearly 40 House Democrats are in districts were the NRA is more popular than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. We can't find any independent poll in which the public is demanding that pilots disarm. Why does this move make sense?

    Only anti-gun extremists and terrorist recruits are worried about armed pilots. So why is the Obama administration catering to this tiny lobby at the expense of public safety?

    Washington Times - EDITORIAL: Guns on a plane

    *************************

    News from NRA_ILA..
    Glad I quit flying... Good luck all of you road warriors out there
    Semper Fi

  2. #2
    Glockster20's Avatar
    Glockster20 is offline Clinging to God and guns
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    1,225

    Default

    To answer the author's question, he is catering to terrorists. He has already extended the "olive branch" to the tali-tubbies. He doesn't give a rats a$$ about us. BHO is an egotistical and narcissistic jerk that only cares about BHO!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    southeastern va
    Posts
    235

    Default

    he is paving the way for terrorists to attack the us once again. Far as i am concerned he himself is nothing more than a terrorist. next thing you know he will enact a law that we have to worship ALLAH

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    17

    Default

    I know I am probably the minority here, but I don't have a problem with ending the program as it currently is structured. First, the pilots are there to fly the plane, not act as an air marshall. As long as they keep the ruggedized cockpit door closed, another 9/11-style attack is not possible. Second, the restrictions they put on the pilots as part of the training program were ridiculous, such as defining the exact holster that must be used (which by the way, is unsafe, and has actually caused unintentional firings.) Third, $2m saved is a good thing - I just wish Congress and this administration would continue to cut their spending.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    7,857

    Default

    Is anyone surprised that this anti 2nd amendment Marxist did this?
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Filbert View Post
    I know I am probably the minority here, but I don't have a problem with ending the program as it currently is structured. First, the pilots are there to fly the plane, not act as an air marshall. As long as they keep the ruggedized cockpit door closed, another 9/11-style attack is not possible. Second, the restrictions they put on the pilots as part of the training program were ridiculous, such as defining the exact holster that must be used (which by the way, is unsafe, and has actually caused unintentional firings.) Third, $2m saved is a good thing - I just wish Congress and this administration would continue to cut their spending.

    I would NEVER under estimate the capabilities of a determined terrorist. Contrary to what you believe, those "ruggedized doors" aren't as tough to break as you may think. I travel a lot on various aircraft, so I see a lot of different variations of the doors to the cockpit. Most of them are secured by keyed locks. Most times there are 2 locks, one towards the top, and one towards the bottom. I've seen cases where the door was secured by a single lock. Keep in mind that ANY lock can be defeated. Most common method would probably by picking. Another option to defeat the door would be by prying. Many devices could be used to pry the door open.

    Armed pilots would be the last line of defense in keeping terrorists out of the cockpits. The terrorists will never know if the plane they intend to attack will be piloted by armed pilots.



    gf
    "A few well placed shots with a .22LR is a lot better than a bunch of solid misses with a .44 mag!" Glock Armorer, NRA Chief RSO, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Muzzleloading Rifle, Muzzleloading Shotgun, and Home Firearm Safety Training Counselor

  7. #7
    wolfhunter Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Filbert View Post
    I know I am probably the minority here, but I don't have a problem with ending the program as it currently is structured. First, the pilots are there to fly the plane, not act as an air marshall. As long as they keep the ruggedized cockpit door closed, another 9/11-style attack is not possible. Second, the restrictions they put on the pilots as part of the training program were ridiculous, such as defining the exact holster that must be used (which by the way, is unsafe, and has actually caused unintentional firings.) Third, $2m saved is a good thing - I just wish Congress and this administration would continue to cut their spending.
    Two million SAVED might be a good thing, but BHO isn't going to save it, he's spending it on more Supervisor/auditors. The ridiculous training program and restrictions were DESIGNED to discourage pilots from applying for the program, this is just another anti-gun plot.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Central Nevada
    Posts
    712

    Default

    First, the pilots are there to fly the plane, not act as an air marshal.
    It is currently estimated that 1% of flights are being covered by an air marshal. I feel safer knowing that the pilots might be armed. I'm sure it is a deterrent to "wanna-be" terrorists. There is no justification for ending this program. I have sent an email to the White House expressing my outrage at another attempt by President Hussein to undermine our national security.
    "When the outflow exceeds the inflow, the upkeep becomes the downfall"

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •