Yet ANOTHER reason our FFDO's need conceal carry!

[ultrarunner]

NEW YORK (AP) - Authorities say a JetBlue pilot lost his government-issued handgun after a passenger on another flight mistakenly picked up his carry-on luggage.

An official familiar with the incident tells The Associated Press that the pilot was waiting at Kennedy Airport for his New York to Pittsburgh flight on Thursday morning when a passenger picked up the bag. Inside was a gun that the Transportation Security Administration had given him as part of a program that trains pilots to fight off hijackers.

The passenger realized she was carrying too many bags and notified a flight attendant.

The official was unauthorized to speak publicly about the incident and spoke on condition of anonymity to the AP.

The Transportation Security Administration was investigating. JetBlue says it's cooperating with the investigation.

 

[Lake Alice]

You cannot defend this no matter how hard you try.

 

[ultrarunner]

You cannot defend this no matter how hard you try.

No, you cannot. But what this incident, along with a few others, does is to underscore a terribly implemented plan. And the TSA really needs to re-think the entire program, and how it is set up.

You deputize these folks, then make 'em carry around their handgun in a locked box....For christ sake!

There is no argument what-so-ever against NOT having these FFDO's issued a federal conceal carry permit.

 

[Mr Wu]

Maybe the guy should have had the NDB in his possession and control at all times like he's supposed to do.

 

[Draginass]

The FFDO program violates every rule of CC I know of. The stupid procedures that they mandate are the primary cause of the incidents that I know of so far. Procedure needs to be simple and effective. The current ones are neither.

The TSA and airlines don't want FFDOs in the first place and they are doing whatever they can to make it fail and make it look like the pilots' fault.

 

[filejw]

The FFDO program violates every rule of CC I know of. The stupid procedures that they mandate are the primary cause of the incidents that I know of so far. Procedure needs to be simple and effective. The current ones are neither.

The TSA and airlines don't want FFDOs in the first place and they are doing whatever they can to make it fail and make it look like the pilots' fault.

Does that include the guy that shot a hole in his cockpit wall ? We all new the rules when we signed up, what is needed is people who follow them as required.

 

[SKC]

...and make it look like the pilots' fault.

HELLO, it WAS the pilot's fault. The TSA didn't make him do that. The FAA didn't make him do that. The airline didn't make him do that. The pilot knew the rules that were in place at the time and he chose to be careless with his firearm.

If you drive down a highway that you KNOW has a speed limit of 70 mph. You choose to drive 90 and get stopped by a patrolman. You can't, at that point, claim that the speed limit should be 90. You knew the rules, and broke them.

 

[Draginass]

Rules that make the chance of an accidental discharge and loss of control much more likely are stupid. That's the biggest reason I won't do it.

 

[StarChecker]

The FFDO SOP absolutely sets you up to fail. It is the most half-assed program I've ever seen. Either do it right (weapon carried on duty) or don't do it it all. Absolutely absurd.

 

[clr4theapch]

Just a note of caution: this thread was started on another section about this incident.. right about here in that conversation security rules and hints at process and procedures were starting to be discussed.. this after I warned them as well. it did not stop, so the thread was closed...

Please continued to "generally" discuss but leave out the details that would violate the law and the TOS resulting in the same action my us..

thanks, clr4 Mod

 

[Lake Alice]

Specific processes and procedures do not need to be discussed. In the end if you sign up to carry a gun under the FFDO program they tell you don't put it down and don't let it out of your sight. All you have to do is follow directions.

The program didn't set anyone up to fail. If you are too stupid to follow directions quit. Get gun, carry gun, don't put gun down, don't lose gun. Common sense people, common sense.

 

[Headfake14]

I agree with the idea of full time CC. BUT...that requires a lot more training. Probably at least another week's worth.

...gotta be able to defend against someone trying to get that thing off of ya.

 

[Caveman]

The net result of the FFDO carry policy is most of the FFDOs I fly with never take the weapon out of the NDB. They have the weapon with them but they just don't bother. I can't say I blame them. The policy is ridiculous. No other LEO has to put up with Barney Fife rules. The people that never wanted to arm pilots won because, in effect, pilots aren't armed. They might as well put them in checked baggage.

OTOH, any other LEO with a piece of paper from his Chief can carry a concealed weapon on the plane while the guy responsible for the overall security of the a/c can't. Yeah, that makes sense.

 

[ultrarunner]

The net result of the FFDO carry policy is most of the FFDOs I fly with never take the weapon out of the NDB.....

Given how the program is structured, or NOT-structured as the case may be, that's not a bad idea.

On a typical 1-day, 3-leg trip, an FFDO is going to pack and unpack the NDB along with the weapon, trigger guard, and holster a total of 6 times or so. Multiply that by a 3-day or 4-day, and you get some pretty impressive numbers in handling that weapon. It's a wonder we're not reading more about AD's, as the chances only increase with the number of times you handle that loaded firearm.

 

[Caveman]

Given how the program is structured, or NOT-structured as the case may be, that's not a bad idea.

On a typical 1-day, 3-leg trip, an FFDO is going to pack and unpack the NDB along with the weapon, trigger guard, and holster a total of 6 times or so. Multiply that by a 3-day or 4-day, and you get some pretty impressive numbers in handling that weapon. It's a wonder we're not reading more about AD's, as the chances only increase with the number of times you handle that loaded firearm.

100% correct and that's my beef. Besides being onerous the policy/procedure is unsafe. If you increase the number of opportunities for error you also increase the incidence of error. Less manipulation will equal less opportunities for error and by default less errors. Not to mention it's difficult to have your weapon stolen when it's physically attached to your person.

 

[ultrarunner]

This is exactly what happens Caveman when an "organization" (insert your own 4 letters) wants something so bad, they're willing to settle for a half-assed implementation. So now, you've got a firearm sitting in the flight deck in a box that is 1. Locked, 2. Unloaded, and 3. Not able to be used quickly.

Again, which defeats the entire purpose of being able to defend yourself quickly and efficiently. Which is the entire reason you brought the friggin firearm to work in the first place!!!!


HELLOOOOO....Mcfly!!! ANYBODY IN THERE......

 

[slackass]

I've carried a weapon my entire adult life. Mostly related to another occupation. Never did I misplace it. Now my primary responsibility is safe operation of the aircraft. That includes preflight and planning duties. Too many distractions can lead to a misplacement or theft of the weapon. 48 of 50 states allow concealed carry with far less training than the FFDO program. This is just another example of how the politicians and bureaucrats jack up a potentially effective program.

 

[Mr Wu]

Doesn't matter if FFDO's have open carry or concealed carry. The failures in the system so far have been caused by guys not following the rules/guidelines. There will be just as many failures with open/concealed carry.