Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns

This is a discussion on Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns within the Politics forums, part of the Main Category category; On November 19, 2002, the Federal Flight Deck Officers program was approved in the Senate, by a vote of 90 ...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NewHampshire
    Posts
    1,971

    Default Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns

    On November 19, 2002, the Federal Flight Deck Officers program was approved in the Senate, by a vote of 90 to 9, as part of H.R. 5005, “A bill to establish the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.” While Senators Akaka, Byrd, Feingold, Hollings, Inouye, Jeffords, Kennedy, Levin, and Sarbanes all vote against the DHS bill, the Federal Flight Deck Officers portion of the measure had overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle. Three days later, the House passed the final bill without objection and it became Public Law No: 107-296.

    The vast majority of those who voted to arm commercial pilots are still Members of Congress so where is the outrage now from them over this?

    Washington Times
    Tuesday, March 17, 2009
    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.”

    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.

    The editorial continues after the image below.



    Click on image to view the online 9/11 Flight Crew Memorial.

    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?

    Hat tip to Michelle Malkin.

    ——

    Update, 1:40 PM: You need to know a little bit more about what is going on at the Transportation Security Administration:

    This site’s post, April 25, 2008
    TSA: Airline pilots sane to fly; too crazy to be armed

    At Pajamas Media, Annie Jacobsen writes that an Oklahoma doctor contracted by the Transportation Security Administration is disqualifying airline pilots from flying armed under the Federal Flight Deck Officer’s program.

    I asked Dr. Hogan to speak about subjecting pilots — who are routinely drug-tested, by the way — to the Hogan Test. “There is a distinction between technical talent and emotional maturity. You can fly a plane and be crazy — or at least be a complete hot-head — which is what we find all the time,” Hogan said.

    Captain Mackett cited an example from the written part of the psyche test — since changed — that asked: “Would you like to be a fighter pilot?” Considering that many commercial pilots are and have been fighter pilots it’s natural that many would answer that question with a “Yes.” According to Mackett, the TSA concluded that these pilots “had overly aggressive personalities and disqualified them from the program.”

    Thanks to this doctor and the loony leadership at the TSA, otherwise qualified pilots — who are licensed, trained, and willing to carry firearms — are allowed to fly yet denied the means to aggressively defend their passengers and planes.

    Plus this post:

    This site’s post, April 22, 2008
    Inexperienced airport screeners becoming air marshals

    Not long ago, The Aviation Nation’s Annie Jacobsen reported the Transportation Security Administration had experienced an 120% turnover in personnel in a mere five years of existence. Not all was lost, however; some of those disgruntled employees are now protecting passengers in-flight:

    CNN’s Drew Griffen interviewed air marshals who said screeners with “no college, no law-enforcement no military background” are becoming air marshals. “It’s an embarrassment. I know I wouldn’t want them on my flight, I wouldn’t want them as my partner,” one air marshal said.

    further …

    “Trust me, you do not want to mess with those guys,” [TSA chief Kip] Hawley said. “Anybody who messes with a flight having a TSO on it who is now an air marshal will be dead.”

    Trust him? He has to be kidding.

    THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY'LL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!!!!!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    380

    Default

    This was proven as bogus last month, the facts are that money has been taken from the overseeing authority but the program is still going strong. This surfaced in February the first time I will track down the info today

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bothell WA
    Posts
    34

    Default

    The Washington Times started this with an editorial. Here is their latetest on this:

    Gun program for pilots set for expansion, officials insist

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TR4A View Post
    The Washington Times started this with an editorial. Here is their latetest on this:

    Gun program for pilots set for expansion, officials insist
    Good find, thats what I was going to look for when I got the chance.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Central Nevada
    Posts
    714

    Default

    Well, I'm glad it turned out to be false. I did email the White House about it though. Oh well, didn't expect a reply anyhow.
    "When the outflow exceeds the inflow, the upkeep becomes the downfall"

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarrellM5 View Post
    Well, I'm glad it turned out to be false. I did email the White House about it though. Oh well, didn't expect a reply anyhow.
    Thats a good call, when in doubt write a letter or 2.

    It is much more effective at helping things than some who post 1,000,000 old videos on here and junk up the threads so no one wants to read them.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    3,088

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rockwerks View Post
    Thats a good call, when in doubt write a letter or 2.

    It is much more effective at helping things than some who post 1,000,000 old videos on here and junk up the threads so no one wants to read them.
    Ahem! not proven false, story changed by the Obama USURPER Administration again!

    Yes gun bans in England, Australia and Canada, and similar measures, being actively discussed by by all the major media & former Clinton Gun Ban Supporters that are now members of the Obama USURPER Administration and influential members of the House & Senate are so passe'

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohemian View Post
    Ahem! not proven false, story changed by the Obama USURPER Administration again!

    '
    can you link to the previous story to confirm the change?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Cape Cod
    Posts
    587

    Default

    That is so messed up! Just another back door gun ban!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mid Michigan
    Posts
    2,590

    Default

    I really wouldn't put it past this administration to do such a thing.. that's all they need is another 911 then they can pretty much take as much control as they want. martial law anyone?
    You can have my freedom as soon as I'm done with it!!!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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
  •