• 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?


  • Total voters
    53
If a Pilot is armed and behind his locked door, how can he get off a good shot at the bad guys?? should there be a remote chain gun maybe?
 
If a Pilot is armed and behind his locked door, how can he get off a good shot at the bad guys?? should there be a remote chain gun maybe?

Fact: On any civilian liner you have a pilot and co-pilot.
Fact: A red herring does not an argument make.
Fact: A reinforced door does nothing to protect passengers.
 
If a Pilot is armed and behind his locked door, how can he get off a good shot at the bad guys??
When the bad guys break down the door.

should there be a remote chain gun maybe?
This is a serious matter -- and as such, you should at least TRY to have a serious discussion.
 
.
Fact: A reinforced door does nothing to protect passengers.

Fact: Passengers are expendable. Pilots are not. If the passengers manage to just let the terrorists kill them all whilst they sit in their seats waiting to die. Then that is their fault.
 
Fact: Passengers are expendable. Pilots are not.

Considering the passengers are the people paying for everything and everyone working for the airlines, I think they feel a bit differently. :roll:

Fact: The airlines will never say that, period. So yours is not in any way a fact.

If the passengers manage to just let the terrorists kill them all whilst they sit in their seats waiting to die. Then that is their fault.

And just one armed pilot could put an end to that quickly.
 
No, pilots are responsible for flying the plane and keeping it stable. Having armed security on planes is what air marshals are for and I support having one on every plane in international airspace.

If you believe it's economically feasible to have an AM on each flight, but I don't think it is.
 
If you believe it's economically feasible to have an AM on each flight, but I don't think it is.

I don't think the airline industry itself is economically feasible. Which is probably why my money goes to subsidize the major airlines.
 
I think a Red Rider BB gun would be most appropriate. It wouldn't pierce the fuselage and you can put a terrorist eye out with one. :lol:
 
I don't think the airline industry itself is economically feasible. Which is probably why my money goes to subsidize the major airlines.

True. Most of us wouldn't be able to afford the ticket prices if they were not subsidized.
 
True. Most of us wouldn't be able to afford the ticket prices if they were not subsidized.

Which is kinda funny because we're still paying for it. It's just in taxes and not what we charge on our credit card.
 
Which is kinda funny because we're still paying for it. It's just in taxes and not what we charge on our credit card.

No, it's not really funny. Just the simple fact that airline traffic can't support itself with ticket prices. Spreading out the cost to everyone makes airline travel affordable to those that use it. Or do you want the government to pay for it all? :mrgreen:

And I'm glad the government allows me to afford it. Two hours in a jet aircraft sure beats driving 20 hours and 1200 miles to Florida to visit the folks. It's not only less time consuming, it's cheaper (no food stops or lodging on the way), not to mention all the wear and tear on the car and the increased danger.
 
A gun will be such a comfort to a pilot as he plummets to earth, ready for any emergency, after the bomb explodes unannounced.

I guess that's one way to look at it. But don't you think the pilots on the two airliners that crashed into the trade center buildings would have wished they had them against the boxcutters?
 
I guess that's one way to look at it. But don't you think the pilots on the two airliners that crashed into the trade center buildings would have wished they had them against the boxcutters?

The issue was not lack of arms, it was lack of action. People didn't do anything because they thought they were merely going to be landed on a tinpot airstrip somewhere and ransomed off as opposed to being rammed into the WTC.
 
No, it's not really funny. Just the simple fact that airline traffic can't support itself with ticket prices. Spreading out the cost to everyone makes airline travel affordable to those that use it. Or do you want the government to pay for it all? :mrgreen:

Basically what you're doing though is charging people for flight, and supporting subsidies from the people who've paid but don't fly. I shouldn't pay for any of that, I don't fly. I pay for roads, I drive. Less hassle.

And I'm glad the government allows me to afford it. Two hours in a jet aircraft sure beats driving 20 hours and 1200 miles to Florida to visit the folks. It's not only less time consuming, it's cheaper (no food stops or lodging on the way), not to mention all the wear and tear on the car and the increased danger.

You can only afford it because you've stolen my money to pay for your flight. That's it. Quit stealing.
 
Fact: On any civilian liner you have a pilot and co-pilot.
Fact: A red herring does not an argument make.
Fact: A reinforced door does nothing to protect passengers.
Are you suggesting that one of the "pilots" open the door, and confront the assailants then? Seems a "Trained security guard", stationed outside the door would make more sense to me.
 
I guess that's one way to look at it. But don't you think the pilots on the two airliners that crashed into the trade center buildings would have wished they had them against the boxcutters?

Box cutter ain't anything special. Just a razor. Couldn't have taken out all the people on that flight with it. The problem was that no one reacted. Everyone accepted the authority, the one with the weapon, and no one made action to do something against it. Typically, it was sorta the way it was. Hijackers take a plane, demand something, if you're quiet and do as you're told you probably weren't going to get hurt. But it's changed now, and more people would take action now. Maybe the gun in the cockpit would have helped, but so would people standing up and doing something instead of sitting around waiting to be saved by some government organization.
 
Box cutter ain't anything special. Just a razor. Couldn't have taken out all the people on that flight with it. The problem was that no one reacted. Everyone accepted the authority, the one with the weapon, and no one made action to do something against it. Typically, it was sorta the way it was. Hijackers take a plane, demand something, if you're quiet and do as you're told you probably weren't going to get hurt. But it's changed now, and more people would take action now. Maybe the gun in the cockpit would have helped, but so would people standing up and doing something instead of sitting around waiting to be saved by some government organization.

I think you got it wrong. The hijackers stormed the cockpit without warning, the pilots were probably strapped in and in a vulnerable position facing forward, The hijackers could easly deal a fatal cut in seconds. The pilots did not have a chance. Could not even get out of their seats. THe entire takeover probably took 30 seconds.
 
When the bad guys break down the door.


This is a serious matter -- and as such, you should at least TRY to have a serious discussion.

I never take these discussions seriously. This is merely entertainment until I have to go back to work next week.:lol:
 
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.
 
No, it's not really funny. Just the simple fact that airline traffic can't support itself with ticket prices. Spreading out the cost to everyone makes airline travel affordable to those that use it. Or do you want the government to pay for it all? :mrgreen:

And I'm glad the government allows me to afford it. Two hours in a jet aircraft sure beats driving 20 hours and 1200 miles to Florida to visit the folks. It's not only less time consuming, it's cheaper (no food stops or lodging on the way), not to mention all the wear and tear on the car and the increased danger.

I'd rather drive vs.flying. You get to see such nice scenery up close and personal, and you don't have to endure some wannabee cop bullying you around all on the pretense of your safety.
 
I think a Red Rider BB gun would be most appropriate. It wouldn't pierce the fuselage and you can put a terrorist eye out with one. :lol:

They sure worked at running the neighbor's cats out of my yard.:mrgreen:
 
Ticket prices have sure gone up, since they made us all "Safe"
 
Back
Top Bottom