Weapons

[landlover]

thanks for the spell check

 

[stupidpilot]

I made no reference to the FFDO program. It's pretty clear that it doesn't apply to charter.
If you have no intention of using them when you arrive at your destination, why bother?
They may be safe sitting there in the cockpit of an empty plane, but useless. They'd be just as safe at home. Hence, unless you really feel you're going to have a use for them at 35,000ft on a charter, what would be the point of bringing them?

Remember, if you actually think you'll have a need for it at 35,000ft, then you are making an excellent argument for the security screening of your passengers.

I agree with you on most points. Why would someone charter a plane to commit an act of terrorism? It just seems silly to think you need a weapon on board a chartered aircraft.

 

[Spoolingbyu]

I think it's silly too! two! to! too!

It just seems silly to think you need a weapon on board an aircraft.

Yeah those silly terrorists had silly box cutters and flew silly airplanes into those silly buildings.

Oh wait it's 135 so terrorists are not allowed to be on board. Oops my bad!

 

[timmay]

I am willing to bet anyone that the first shooting involving an FFDO will be them self or the other pilot, not a terrorist.

 

[avbug]

The aircraft is private property. Noone has the authority to enter it without your consent dumba$$

Wrong. Particularly when you land that aircraft at a public airport with a security perimeter, and particularly when that aircraft is being operated under an operating certificate such as Part 121 or 135. Law enforcement most certainly can search the aircraft without your authorization.

"Dumba$$?" Really? What might you say if you were a college graduate?

Ya, they're going to spend tens of thousands chartering a small jet in order to ram it into a building.

Yes, they are. And have. 09/11 wasn't a small, nor inexpensive operation.

Let me let you in on a little secret, (it probably would only kill the guys on the aircraft and about 5 other people). Terrorists want to make a big statement, even a G550 wouldn't create enough damage to do that.

A very little, misguided secret, apparently. You see, the purpose of terrorism isn't to kill or maim, or even hurt large numbers of people. Simply to terrorize. That's why they're called "terrorists," you see.

09/11 involved airline aircraft, but it had the ripple effect of shutting down large numbers of flight schools and disrupting all types of flying throughout the country, with after effets being felt still today. With respect to the effects, the number of dead is inconsequential. Time four or five corporate or charter type aircraft in an attack to occur at the same time, and the successful end result of the terrorist action will be to shut down and severely restrict air travel in most sectors...especially private aircraft. Again...this is why it's called terrorism. Even if it's just "five other people."

Again, we see why "stupidpilot" fits you like a glove. You wear it well.

 

[BoeingBaller]

I love how you are a complete d$ck to everyone you don't agree with. The aircraft is private property. Noone has the authority to enter it without your consent dumba$$

No one....

 

[paranode]

Aside from any FARs, you are at the mercy of whatever jurisdiction you land in. If you have a license to carry a concealed weapon which is recognized by reciprocity in each state you travel to, then in theory you shouldn't have any problems. However there are issues to be aware of, such as whether the place you are landing is considered a "secured" or "sterile" area of an airport, which in some states is an exception to the places you can legally carry. In other states they may not let you carry in any part of an airport. Then there is the issue of unplanned or forced landings in a jurisdiction that is anti-gun. You may find some protection under 18 USC 926A but I do not know if this law has ever been applied in the aviation world as it was written more for ground transportation.

If you meet the definition of "air transportation" or "intrastate air transportation" in 49 USC 40102 then you would be subject to 49 USC 46505 "Carrying a weapon or explosive on an aircraft". Then there are TSA regulations that may or may not apply to you. Basically you need to do a lot of research.

 

[avbug]

If you have a license to carry a concealed weapon which is recognized by reciprocity in each state you travel to, then in theory you shouldn't have any problems.

Painful.

In theory, you shouldn't have any problems if you have a license to carry a concealed weapon, which is recognized in each state to which you travel.

 

[paranode]

Nevermind...

 

[stupidpilot]

Wrong. Particularly when you land that aircraft at a public airport with a security perimeter, and particularly when that aircraft is being operated under an operating certificate such as Part 121 or 135. Law enforcement most certainly can search the aircraft without your authorization.

So when you are traveling on a public highway law enforcement has every right to search your vehicle? You are completely wrong. Every citizen has the right to refuse illegal search and seizure. Again, the aircraft is private property and cannot be searched without a search warrant. Sounds like you're the stupid one. You don't have a clue as to what the law is.

 

[pilot error]

I am willing to bet anyone that the first shooting involving an FFDO will be them self or the other pilot, not a terrorist.

if that happens, it will be because of the current regs, not despite them.

 

[avbug]

So when you are traveling on a public highway law enforcement has every right to search your vehicle?

Do you understand that we're talking about airplanes, and not cars? Airplanes don't travel on a highway, as a rule. Perhaps yours do, stupidpilot. This wouldn't be a great surprise, given some of your other comments.

Law enforcement most certainly does have the right to search your vehicle, given reasonable suspicion, or a number of other considerations depending on location and circumstance.

Park your car inside a secure area in which you are subject to search...and yes, your car may be searched.

Park your airplane inside the perimeter fence of an airport acting as a secure area, in which weapons are prohibited, and yes, your airplane may be searched.

So far as concealed weapon permits...most do not authorize the carriage of a firearm into places where firearms are prohibited, which include locations serving alcohol, post offices, schools, government buildings, and yes...in many cases, airports. Additionally, many airports and the authorities which operate them will prohibit weapons. Land there with a weapon on board and you're in violation.

Perhaps you're simply inexperienced enough to have had a very thorough customs inspection before...but without any permission on my part, they've gutted my airplane, smashed a liquor cabinet, and left no apology...simply because they had a question about a passenger on board. As it turned out they did search him, without his permission (because they didn't need it), and he was carrying a weapon...and he certainly was caught. As was one of his traveling companions. Not only could customs have damaged the airplane (they did...during a 135 charter flight)...they could have confiscated it.

Your "private" property can just as easily become someone else's property. Don't try waving your rights around too much, stupidpilot. They're not as broad as you might think.

 

[stupidpilot]

Then perhaps you can explain to me how you can get a weapon on to checked baggage oh my wise one?

 

[TWA]

Folks, can you do us all a favor and avoid typing out a how-to guide for hijacking a chartered aircraft? Thanks...

 

[TWA]

Then perhaps you can explain to me how you can get a weapon on to checked baggage oh my wise one?

Declare it at the counter, show that the chamber is open, have the firearm and ammunition in proper containers with non-tsa locks. A very simple and easy process.

 

[TurboHonda]

Folks, can you do us all a favor and avoid typing out a how-to guide for hijacking a chartered aircraft? Thanks...

God forbid that we should know what can happen, how it can happen, and what to do to prevent it from happening.

Several sayings come to mind:

Ignorance is bliss. Forewarned is forearmed. A stitch in time. Etc.

 

[TWA]

Loose lips sink ships.

 

[timmay]

Do you understand that we're talking about airplanes, and not cars? Airplanes don't travel on a highway, as a rule. Perhaps yours do, stupidpilot. This wouldn't be a great surprise, given some of your other comments.

Law enforcement most certainly does have the right to search your vehicle, given reasonable suspicion, or a number of other considerations depending on location and circumstance.

Actually the police can't legally search your car based on suspicion. The term is Probable Cause which is a long way from a cops suspicion. That is why when you watch "cops" the police always ask if they can search the peps car.

 

[stupidpilot]

That's correct Timmay! Also I've had hunters bring weapons on my aircraft and TSA just watched us walk into the FBO with them and didn't utter a word.

 

[avbug]

Actually the police can't legally search your car based on suspicion. The term is Probable Cause which is a long way from a cops suspicion. That is why when you watch "cops" the police always ask if they can search the peps car.

You watch too much television...and yes, law enforcement most certainly can search a car based on reasonable suspicion. Moreover, the cause for making a stop on a potential violator may be made on reasonable suspicion, and the search itself may be based on reasonable suspicion, or other probable cause.

A subject's demeanor may not be probable cause, but may invite such reasonable suspicion as to do a stop. It may also cause the officer to detain a subject, perform a search, and even a subsequent seizure of property based on that reasonable suspicion.

Probable cause exists when sufficient evidence exists; reasonable suspicion doesn't necessarily need to rely upon a preponderance of evidence in making the stop or search. Both probable cause and reasonable suspicion are acceptable for search and subsequent enforcement action. Both are frequently used to establish the reason for a search, and yes, based on reasonable suspicion, your aircraft may be searched.

Then perhaps you can explain to me how you can get a weapon on to checked baggage oh my wise one?

What has this to do with the price of tea in China?

We discuss the carriage of a firearm by a pilot on board a flight in which the pilot is acting as pilot in command, and you want to know how to check your firearms as luggage?

Check them. Simple. Locked container, ammunition in a separate acceptable container. Not exactly complex. Declare the firearm. You don't know or understand this?

I check my own firearms regularly. No problem. You...given your commentary here, would probably be best prohibited from owning weapons...let alone checking them.

Also I've had hunters bring weapons on my aircraft and TSA just watched us walk into the FBO with them and didn't utter a word.

Also irrelevant to the conversation. Why bring it up? You're making a point, then? You're surprised that TSA might allow a legal act to take place?

Apparently Stupidpilot is as stupidpilot does.