• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should airline pilots be allowed to have a loaded pistol on the plane?

Should pilots be allowed to keep a pistol on the plane?

  • Yes, I think this is a great idea.

    Votes: 39 73.6%

  • No, I disagree to this idea.

    Votes: 8 15.1%

  • Undecided. I think it should be open to more debate.

    Votes: 6 11.3%
  • Total voters
    53
bicycleman said:
Most of the airline pilots are ex-military and would already have been trained in tactical firearms handling, so yes firearms should be kept in the cockpit. In fact, stewardesses should be armed with blackjacks.
Click to expand...

That is not true.
 
stalin_was_a_nice_being said:
That is not true.
Click to expand...

I knew a lot of ex fighter pilots who after getting out went into the airline industry. I knew one who flew crop duster planes until a major air liner called him. They have that much love for flying that they don't want to leave it after getting out.
 
bicycleman said:
I knew a lot of ex fighter pilots who after getting out went into the airline industry. I knew one who flew crop duster planes until a major air liner called him. They have that much love for flying that they don't want to leave it after getting out.
Click to expand...

I know some pilots that were for the Air Force and the majority of them fly corporate jets. So I don't know the quality of your friends who fly for commercial airlines. They don't get paid as good as a pilot for a corporation and most air force pilots are wanted to fly corporate jets. Not average jet lines.
 
stalin_was_a_nice_being said:
I know some pilots that were for the Air Force and the majority of them fly corporate jets. So I don't know the quality of your friends who fly for commercial airlines. They don't get paid as good as a pilot for a corporation and most air force pilots are wanted to fly corporate jets. Not average jet lines.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for it now, but at one time, airline pilots made some high salaries in the past. No matter, their salaries or where they go for employment, most have had military experience, and won't have to go through any extensive training in handling a firearm. If that cockpit is barricaded, it will save a lot of lives as well.
 
bicycleman said:
I can't speak for it now, but at one time, airline pilots made some high salaries in the past. No matter, their salaries or where they go for employment, most have had military experience, and won't have to go through any extensive training in handling a firearm. If that cockpit is barricaded, it will save a lot of lives as well.
Click to expand...

They might have basic training in handling a firearm, but don't have training in handling firearms on an Airliner 40,000 feet up with 400 passengers on board. Special training should be required.

Implementing full body scans might be the best solution. The new systems would have stopped the underwear bomber in his tracks. Keeping weapons and explosives off the planes in the first place is the key and we have the technology to do just that.
 
Dirty Harry said:
They might have basic training in handling a firearm, but don't have training in handling firearms on an Airliner 40,000 feet up with 400 passengers on board. Special training should be required.
Click to expand...

No more than an armed security guard doing crowed control.

They would carry the special ammo the air marshalls carry. Problem solved.

Dirty Harry said:
Implementing full body scans might be the best solution. The new systems would have stopped the underwear bomber in his tracks. Keeping weapons and explosives off the planes in the first place is the key and we have the technology to do just that.
Click to expand...

This is just another added security feature which at some point they will figure a way around. Not saying don't do it, saying don't depend on any one thing.

In the end, it is still up to the flight crew to protect themselves and the passengers.
 
Blackdog said:
In the end, it is still up to the flight crew to protect themselves and the passengers.
Click to expand...

If a passenger manages to smuggle a bomb on board, the flight crew is completely useless in protecting the plane.
 
Last edited:
bicycleman said:
I can't speak for it now, but at one time, airline pilots made some high salaries in the past. No matter, their salaries or where they go for employment, most have had military experience, and won't have to go through any extensive training in handling a firearm. If that cockpit is barricaded, it will save a lot of lives as well.
Click to expand...

Federal Flight Deck Officer

Selection for FFDO Training

To be selected for Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) training by TSA you must:

Successfully complete all selection assessments including any specified psychological, medical or physical ability requirements.
Be determined to meet all established standards by the Federal Air Marshal Service.
Be available to attend the FFDO training program in its entirety on your own time and at your own expense within one year from your acceptance in the program (the cost of the training and equipment are covered by TSA and the Federal Air Marshal Service; volunteers are responsible for their own travel, lodging, and daily expenses).

Training

Initial training will be conducted in a one-week session that will typically require volunteers to arrive mid-afternoon on a Sunday and remain through the conclusion of training the following Saturday afternoon.

All trainees must remain and be present for the entire training session.
All trainees must attend the training on their own time and at their own expense (out-of-pocket expenses are estimated to be $200, plus travel).
The training is physically demanding. It is recommended that volunteers for the FFDO program be of average to above average physical fitness to avoid any potential for injury. A recommended pre-training fitness program will be made available upon request after acceptance in the program.
All trainees must participate and successfully pass required bi-annual firearms re-qualification activities on their own time and at their own expense.

Successful completion of all training curriculum is required for deputation.
Click to expand...
 
Dirty Harry said:
It is totally different than doing crowd control.
Click to expand...

No it's not. I was a police officer and I know that a crowed of people is a crowed of people. The only thing that will make a difference is not puncturing the aircraft. The dynamics and possible hostage situation is exactly the same.

That is why I mentioned the special ammo which you ignored.
 
Dirty Harry said:
If a passenger manages to smuggle a bomb on board, the flight crew is completely useless in protecting the plane.
Click to expand...

If they can get a bomb on board the security failed. And as we have seen, they were more effective without a bomb. :roll:

9/11 mite have been averted had the pilots been armed.
 
Manc Skipper said:
A gun will be such a comfort to a pilot as he plummets to earth, ready for any emergency, after the bomb explodes unannounced.
Click to expand...
Given that the issue here is the pilots' ability to defend the flight deck during a terrorist takeover attempt, your respose, above, is nothing but a rather stinky red herring.
 
Blackdog said:
9/11 mite have been averted had the pilots been armed.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I doubt it. A locked cabin door like the Israelis used would have been more effective and it would have been averted completely had the weapons been discovered prior to departure.
 
Goobieman said:
Given that the issue here is the pilots' ability to defend the flight deck during a terrorist takeover attempt, your respose, above, is nothing but a rather stinky red herring.
Click to expand...

I do believe the proper measures have been taken to prevent a cockpit takeover. That will probably never happen again. Now the terrorists tactic of choice seems to be bringing the plane down with explosives. A gun ain't going to stop the bomb from going off.
 
Dirty Harry said:
I do believe the proper measures have been taken to prevent a cockpit takeover. That will probably never happen again. Now the terrorists tactic of choice seems to be bringing the plane down with explosives. A gun ain't going to stop the bomb from going off.
Click to expand...
Which is, again, irrelevant to the point, as it is not supposed to.

It IS supposed to assist in defending the flight deck with deadly force, a purpose for which it is very well suited.

That a gun on the flight deck will not stop a terrorist with a bomb is not an argument against a gun on the flight deck.
 
I'm sorry, but if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bust his butt so often---things is what they is.
 
Goobieman said:
Which is, again, irrelevant to the point, as it is not supposed to.

It IS supposed to assist in defending the flight deck with deadly force, a purpose for which it is very well suited.

That a gun on the flight deck will not stop a terrorist with a bomb is not an argument against a gun on the flight deck.
Click to expand...

After the measures taken since 9/11 the flight decks are already secure. I am for pilots having guns, but I doubt if it will stop the next attack. The next terror attack will not be a flight deck takeover. That's the point.
 
Dirty Harry said:
After the measures taken since 9/11 the flight decks are already secure.
Click to expand...
Disagree. Passive defenses, being passive, are always defeatable. To actually secure the flight deck, you need some sort of effective active defense as well, such as arming the pilots.
I am for pilots having guns, but I doubt if it will stop the next attack.
Click to expand...
It is more likely to do so than the passive measures in place now.
The next terror attack will not be a flight deck takeover.
Click to expand...
Maybe not -- but that doesnt mean there will never be another takeover attempt.
That's the point.
Click to expand...
Which does nothing to counter the argument that pilots shoud be armed.
 
By the time they are on the plane, may be a little to late.
 
Goobieman said:
Disagree. Passive defenses, being passive, are always defeatable. To actually secure the flight deck, you need some sort of effective active defense as well, such as arming the pilots.

.
Click to expand...

If terrorists can not get into the cabin then it is secure. If they don't have explosives or weapons then the plane is secure. Keeping weapons and explosives off airplanes is the solution. Arming the pilots will not stop the next terror attack.
I am not trying to counter the argument that pilots should be armed. I just don't see it stopping terror attacks on planes.
 
Last edited:
Dirty Harry said:
If terrorists can not get into the cabin then it is secure.
Click to expand...
The flaw here is your assumption that they cannot currently defeat the passive defenses in place.
 
Goobieman said:
The flaw here is your assumption that they cannot currently defeat the passive defenses in place.
Click to expand...

And you assume that they can. I hope they have made the corrections needed to make it so they can't. A re-enforced door with proper locking mechanism can not be penetrated without explosives and if they have explosives, guns ain't gonna help.
 
Tsunami said:
I don't think it is a good idea to keep a firearm on an airplane, at least not with normal ammunition, because of the decompression risk. No matter how well trained you are, sometimes people miss. I wouldn't mind if they carried a tranquilliser gun, a taser, or perhaps used something like the ceramic rounds Vader mentioned. But I took the question to mean a normal weapon with normal ammunition, so I said no.
Click to expand...
Did you see the mythbusters where they broke out a window on plane? I hate to spoil it for you, but the plane did not depressurize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom