No gun-totin' in the cockpit

[lancair1]

I think the majority whom are against arming pilots refuse to admit the usefullness of having a handgun at hand. You're scared that if you do admit that a .40 caliber has any usefull purpose you're anti-gun stance is cut to crap.

I've got an idea. I'll sit in my bathroom on the toilet with my .40 caliber, you try to come in and take over the bathroom.

As I see it, anti-gunners have two options in life: remain stupid or learn to get through their ignorance about the purpose and value (micro and macro) of personal protection.

Had to vent.

 

[dash8driver]

ahh yes.. the pilots should concentrate on flying. that is exactly right. if they can shoot the hijacker when they come into the cockpit, they can get back to flying the plane like they are supposed to. somehow i think its easier to concentrate on flying with a dead al queda on the floor than a live one cutting open your throat.

oops! the 1st shot missed and hit the coffee maker!? oh well, we can MEL it. a bullet thru one of the redundant hydraulic lines? i'm sure the pilots have a checklist or two to cope with that. i dont think there is a checklist for "your throat is cut and someone else is driving the plane". whatever else it hits i'm sure will cause much less damage than a missle or worse yet, the terrorists driving it into another building.

if guns in the planes are so dangerous, especially with all the people around. why arent they applying all the same worries to the air marshalls. what if they hit the plane? what if they hit a passenger? its more likely they're gonna hit someone else since they are back there with everyone else. what if the terrorists get his gun? after all, from an air marshalls position in the plane, he can be jumped from all sides. so a couple of terrorists are sandbagging and a couple more make a commotion to flush out the air marshall (if he's on the plane), the others jump him, take his gun and proceed to the cockpit with a gun the air marshalls just got onto the plane for them. nothings in their way now! thats if they dont take his gun while he's sleeping.

bottom line... give the pilot the tools he needs to do his job, to get the plane on the ground safely....even if it includes a pistol

 

[HAL]

Sorry guys, but after the last couple posts, it's my turn to vent.

Do I admit a .40 caliber has a place? Yes - on the shooting range or in a policeman's hand. The cockpit is not a shooting range, and last I checked, I wasn't an officer of the law. I'm a pilot - THAT's my job. The last thing I want is some scared to death captain waving a gun around the cockpit while I'm trying to get the plane on the ground. So the hijackers bust through the cockpit door. The captain gets one or two, but the crush of people knocks the gun to the floor, and in a few seconds we're all dead anyway. Is that how it happens? Who knows. But it's just as likely as being hero with a gold star on your chest.

Look at the reality - pilots are big kids with bigger egos. Of course we feel we can defend the cockpit - we're supermen and can do everything. Time for a reality check. How often in the past 20 years would having a gun on board really made a difference by causing a smaller loss of life. The answer is (maybe) four flights on one day. That's it. What would have happened if guns had been in the cockpit (and walking through the terminal every day on the pilots that are packing) for those 20 years. I'd say a whole lot more death by accident (and purpose) than we've already had. Not by the hundreds, but in ones and twos.

Let me say it again: PUTTING GUNS IN THE COCKPIT HAS DONE THE HARDEST PART OF THE JOB FOR TERRORISTS - GETTING GUNS ON THE PLANE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!

Enough ranting. I know the gundamentalists will never be swayed from their position, just as those that oppose it won't either. I'm just glad rational heads in Washington have prevailed this time.

HAL

 

[aero99]

The last two post are why the Bush Admin decided against guns. Sure, some pilots wanted them....and some don't.

To pass a law for this would have required EVERYONE to carry. There is almost nothing more dangeous than a person with a gun that doesn't like or want the gun.

I would like to see a large scale poll of pilots who wanted guns and those that did not.

As long as there was one "do not's", it is not safe.

 

[lancair1]

Sorry Hal,

I was going to let someone else respond, until I read your last sentence.. "rational heads in washington"... Are you smoking crack man?

It may take some self-empowerment seminar or something, but many people have got to learn that they have the capability, if correctly prepared, to defend themselves.

About your not being a police officer, police train less than one week in the academy on how to utilize their side arm.

I don't care if people don't feel the urge or self-empowerment to protect their own house and family, but anything that will improve the cockpit's chances at retaining control for the cost of a $400 .40 cal sounds like a good investment to me.

Pilots may need a checklist to keep from accidentally discharging their sidearm once in a while, but last time I checked, though we may have decent sized egos, the ability to respect the importance of not pulling the trigger while in the terminal for kicks shouldn't be too dificult to curb

Lastly, I'll sit in my bathroom on the toilet. You and 5 other guys try overtake the thrown, I'll win. Besides, last time I saw a cockpit door, I don't think it was wide enough for anything but single file entry.

 

[350DRIVER]

As I see it, anti-gunners have two options in life: remain stupid or learn to get through their ignorance about the purpose and value (micro and macro) of personal protection.

What a beautiful "attempt" at comparing a bathroom to the flight deck- I think the post speaks for itself and probably would not do justice to even respond to that part of your post however...... Who said "we" are against guns completely as you called us "anti-gunners".?? I for one am not against guns IF they would be in the best interest of SAFETY and in this case guns on the flight deck would not have made the situation any safer or for the best of everyone involved. IF they get on the airplane THEN the ground security really screwed up SO common sense would illustrate to revamp the ground security system completely to insure that the pilots can do what they are paid to do which just in case you are not aware Lanc- to get the pax safely from point A to point B not harmed & also not to ding a piece of metal in the process.


To make such a ludicrous assumption with absolutely NO factual knowledge regarding us let alone the gun subject itself. IF you took the time to actually research the issue instead of making false assumptions you may just find out why it was opposed by a large majority of people in DC.

BUT guess what?- Hmmmm...It is a done deal so don't worry about it!!

C H E E R S
3 5 0

 

[dash8driver]

or the one or two they take out is just enough so the pax can handle the rest... either way, at least they had more of a fighting chance. the cockpit would have been taken over anyways.

probably just as many mishaps as they've had with air marshalls and cops in the terminal with guns.

the idea is they are trained and voluntary. people that dont want em, dont have to have em. properly trained, like the air marshalls...the risks wouldnt be any greater.

its too bad the suckers in DC want to just roll over for the terrorists. its too bad that our last line of defense is a high school diploma or GED getting paid a little more than min wage to look at an xray machine for 8 hours. you know he's going to be paying attention to every little detail. no one's gonna get past him!

 

[eriknorth]

I'd just like to make a simple observation with no sides taken. Both sides of this issue have very good arguments. You would have to be one cracked out suicidal terrorist to break down a door to a small room with two people with guns waiting on you, regardless of how strong the door was.

"Here, sir, I'm done with your soapbox. You can have it back now."

 

[~~~^~~~]

Just wondering if anyone knows where I can get a PMA'd gun rack for a CRJ, a big ol' DIXIE flag, and a 25 foot long VOR antenna with a tennis ball rated for 700 MPH, or so. Wonder if some big mudders would fit it the main landing gear bay...

Bocephus rules!

 

[AeroBoy]

Pilots don't need guns!! They already have a last-resort weapon built into their aircraft. It's called the pressurization system. Don the emergency oxygen masks and dump the cabin pressure. Wait a few moments at altitude, tell ATC of the situation, find a suitable airport to land, and dive to get there. The would-be hijackers will just be waking up on the ground as they are being handcuffed by the police. Don't worry, they'll bring their own guns with them when they storm the cabin.