Should commercial pilots be able to carry guns? (1 Viewer)

[Goobieman]

Its been a while, so...

Should arline flight crews have the option of being armed while on the flight deck?

IMHO:
Giving the people who can safely land the aircraft the ability to defend the flight deck with deadly force is a GREAT idea.

 

[Deegan]

Its been a while, so...

Should arline flight crews have the option of being armed while on the flight deck?

IMHO:
Giving the people who can safely land the aircraft the ability to defend the flight deck with deadly force is a GREAT idea.

Sure, but only with those rubber bullets, I don't want some pilot shooting a hole in the plane. I also think that the best defense is a strong cockpit door, that pretty much settles the issue IMO.

 

[Navy Pride]

Definitely

 

[Goobieman]

Sure, but only with those rubber bullets, I don't want some pilot shooting a hole in the plane. I also think that the best defense is a strong cockpit door, that pretty much settles the issue IMO.

A .50" hole in a commecrial jet liner isnt going to do a thing to it.
Several .50" holes arenlt going to do a thing to it.
Even a hit to a window, which will likely not blow the window out, isnt going to do a thing to it.

And while a strong door is a good idea and should certainly be there, its a passive defense -- and like all passive defensees, it can be defeated.

 

[Iriemon]

Seems to me that would be giving a would be hijacker the opportunity to obtain a weapon. Adequately trainging pilots and crew in the proper care and use of firearms would be a major undertakeing and I wouldhn't what them to have guns without it. Wouldn't it be cheaper to put law enforcement agents on selected flights?

 

[Kandahar]

Meh, I'm hesitant to allow this. Like Iriemon pointed out, it means that there are weapons on the plane and therefore the possibility of terrorists getting guns.

Also, is it really practical to expect someone to be able to fly a plane and shoot terrorists at the same time?

 

[Goobieman]

Meh, I'm hesitant to allow this. Like Iriemon pointed out, it means that there are weapons on the plane and therefore the possibility of terrorists getting guns.

If the pilots have the guns and they are behind a locked security door, the only way to get the guns is to get them from the pilots -- after defeating the security door and taking defensive fire from said pilots.
At that point, the plane is lost, guns or not.

Note that no one objects to lawmen having guns on the aircraft; its FAR more likely the the terrorist can get his/their gun than those of the pilots, as the lawman is in the cabin with the passengers.

Also, is it really practical to expect someone to be able to fly a plane and shoot terrorists at the same time?

Autopilot. Airliners fly on autopilot most of the time.
And in any event, there's usually a three-man crew, so if one flies the plane, 2 can defend the flight deck.

Why isnt it a good idea for the pilots to be able to defend the flight deck w/ deadly force?

 

[Voidwar]

Anyone trying anything on a plane is going to be ripped into several bloody gobs of leather by the 200 Furious Apes in Coach. Defending planes isn't that important anymore, the passengers will do it, , , hide behind the first class curtain and watch.

Even the recent plot was just to blow them up, not gain control of the cabin.

 

[Navy Pride]

Seems to me that would be giving a would be hijacker the opportunity to obtain a weapon. Adequately trainging pilots and crew in the proper care and use of firearms would be a major undertakeing and I wouldhn't what them to have guns without it. Wouldn't it be cheaper to put law enforcement agents on selected flights?

How is that giving a would be hi jacker that opportunity?

They are already putting Marshall on selected flights..........

 

[Hobbes]

I agree with the idea of pilots defending themselves. But to clarify, we are talking about American pilots I'm assuming. I trust our government and airlines and the FAA to make this a very secure feature, however if some other countries implemented this it would make me worry.

I honestly wouldn't expect the cockpit to be the target again , with the reinforced doors and passengers who will fight back, but as a last line of defense it couldn't hurt.

 

[Deegan]

Anyone trying anything on a plane is going to be ripped into several bloody gobs of leather by the 200 Furious Apes in Coach. Defending planes isn't that important anymore, the passengers will do it, , , hide behind the first class curtain and watch.

Even the recent plot was just to blow them up, not gain control of the cabin.

Exactly, they had better hope I am not on that flight, I will not hesitate to break some necks.

I have to vote no, now that I have heard from a few others on this, and as Kandahar said, shouldn't the pilot be a little preoccupied with flying the plane?

Still, a strong door is all that is needed, and it does not open until the plane is safely on the ground.

 

[Goobieman]

How is that giving a would be hi jacker that opportunity?
They are already putting Marshall on selected flights..........

Right. The Air Marshal is in the cabin with the terrorists.
If anyone is going to have his gun taken by the terrorists, its him.

 

[faithful_servant]

Seems to me that would be giving a would be hijacker the opportunity to obtain a weapon. Adequately trainging pilots and crew in the proper care and use of firearms would be a major undertakeing and I wouldhn't what them to have guns without it. Wouldn't it be cheaper to put law enforcement agents on selected flights?

Simple solution to the terrorists getting control of a weapon is to make them smart guns that recognize the user. This is existing tech and this is a perfect situation for their use.

 

[faithful_servant]

Anyone trying anything on a plane is going to be ripped into several bloody gobs of leather by the 200 Furious Apes in Coach. Defending planes isn't that important anymore, the passengers will do it, , , hide behind the first class curtain and watch.

Even the recent plot was just to blow them up, not gain control of the cabin.

V-dub's got a good point. It didn't take long for us to figure out that terrorists attempting to hijack a plane needed to be stopped and the passengers are the best ones to do that. IMO, the era of hijacking planes ala 9/11 is pretty much done for, someone may try it again, but it's doubtful. What we need to be on the lookout for is precisely timed bombs, set to detonate in a place where the debris from the explosion would cause as much damage as the explosion itself.

 

[Navy Pride]

As Archie Bunker once said in and old Episode of All in the Family when asked what to do by a news reporter about Airplane Hijacking: Issue each passenger a gun and let the passengers and hijackers shoot it out.....:rofl .......Seriously though I think the pilot should have a weapon to protect himself.............You always have a co pilot or as someone said auto pilot to run the plane..........

 

[Goobieman]

V-dub's got a good point. It didn't take long for us to figure out that terrorists attempting to hijack a plane needed to be stopped and the passengers are the best ones to do that. IMO, the era of hijacking planes ala 9/11 is pretty much done for, someone may try it again, but it's doubtful. What we need to be on the lookout for is precisely timed bombs, set to detonate in a place where the debris from the explosion would cause as much damage as the explosion itself.

All this may be true -- but it doesnt negate the need to have a final line of deadly force protecting the flight deck.

 

[Gibberish]

The cockpit doors should be created in such a way that they cannot be opened from the outside short of blowing them open with a bomb (which would destroy the plane anyway).

Pilots should be made not to open the doors even if the terrorists start executing people. They should report the situation and land at the nearest airport possible.

Yes 30-200 people might die but thousands will not and terrorists will learn they cannot make a statement more then executing civilians inside a plane.

However, the problem with this situation lies in the humanity of the pilots. Most people cannot sit back and watch a handful of people die. They would give the plane over to the terrorists to save the lives of the passengers for that brief moment before the plane blows up into a national site and kills all the passengers anyway along with a few thousand other civilians.

 

[americanwoman]

I have no problem with a pilot carrying a gun- as long as he/she isn't drunk...:shock:

 

[cherokee]

Seems to me that would be giving a would be hijacker the opportunity to obtain a weapon. Adequately trainging pilots and crew in the proper care and use of firearms would be a major undertakeing and I wouldhn't what them to have guns without it. Wouldn't it be cheaper to put law enforcement agents on selected flights?

My cuz is a pilot.
Its locked up and only he and his co-pilot know the combo.
and yes they were trained when and how to use them...

Our pilots are safe.........

 

[Goobieman]

My cuz is a pilot.
Its locked up and only he and his co-pilot know the combo.
and yes they were trained when and how to use them...
Our pilots are safe.........

Many, maybe even most, commercial pikots are ex-military or reservists.
They already know how to use a gun.

 

[AcePylut]

Cockpit doors ain't gonna do squat. All a hijacker is gonna do is a grab a baby, and threaten to kill him/her. If the pilots refuse to open the door, there's one dead baby, and another being grabbed. No one's going to let that massacre continue.

Pilots with guns aren't going to be effective either. They're not going to risk missing their target and causing an explosive decompression, which will happen be that a rubber bullet or a full metal jacket - because all it takes is a hairline fracture in the aircrafts pressure vessel to cause a catastrophic failure.

That's all just crap to allow some politican stand up and babble that he's tough on terrorism, when in r eality, it's just a knee-jerk reaction meant to satisfy the brainless masses.

All that's crap is a joke. The defense of the aircraft comes from the sheep sitting in the passenger chairs. It's THEIR duty to beat the would-be hijackers to a bloody pulp.... not the governments, not the pilots, not the air traffic controllers, not some nameless faceless politician that signed a law X years ago that said you can't bring Exhibit A onto an aircraft.

It's the passengers that are going to prevent a hijacking from occuring occur... at least for the foreseeable future anyway, until we all go back into hibernation.

 

[SixStringHero]

What percentage of US flights have air marshalls to be begin with?

My guess is that statistic isn't public knowledge, but it would make me feel better knowing one was on board, or at the very least the pilots were armed.

 

[Goobieman]

Cockpit doors ain't gonna do squat. All a hijacker is gonna do is a grab a baby, and threaten to kill him/her. If the pilots refuse to open the door, there's one dead baby, and another being grabbed. No one's going to let that massacre continue.

Given your scenario, the babies are dead no matter what. Might as well save as many people as posisble by not opening the door.

Pilots with guns aren't going to be effective either. They're not going to risk missing their target and causing an explosive decompression, which will happen be that a rubber bullet or a full metal jacket - because all it takes is a hairline fracture in the aircrafts pressure vessel to cause a catastrophic failure.

This is popular myth. Stray bullets will not cause catastrophic failure of the pressure hull of a modern airliner.

That's all just crap to allow some politican stand up and babble that he's tough on terrorism, when in r eality, it's just a knee-jerk reaction meant to satisfy the brainless masses.

And keep airliners from crashing into our skyscrapers.

All that's crap is a joke. The defense of the aircraft comes from the sheep sitting in the passenger chairs. It's THEIR duty to beat the would-be hijackers to a bloody pulp.... not the governments, not the pilots, not the air traffic controllers, not some nameless faceless politician that signed a law X years ago that said you can't bring Exhibit A onto an aircraft.

None of this negates the need for a final layer of deadly force protecting the flight deck.

 

[Voidwar]

None of this negates the need for a final layer of deadly force protecting the flight deck.

The fact that the passengers will tear them to pieces makes the gun an irrelevant afterthought. Its makework at this point, and thus wasted effort / weight / thought.

A cockpit will never be threatened again, because the guys who were gonna try it, will already be dead before they get even with the first class galley.

 

[Paladin]

Make sure the pilots are trained in some sort of martial arts. Not traditional TKD, but maybe hapkido, or the style taught to US service personnel.

I teach self-defense to young ladies, and the hardest part is getting past the mind-set of "I don't want to hurt" the assailant. The pilots have to get past that mind-set also.

ted