Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Guns on a plane Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/03...obama-bee.html


    The Washington Times is reporting that the Obama administration is quietly ending the federal firearms program that allows pilots to carry guns if they've completed a federal-safety program. This past week, the administration apparently diverted $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots. Since Barack Obama was elected, the approval process for pilots to carry guns on planes "slowed significantly." And with this move last week, the process has completely stalled. The question is, why? As of right now, 12,000 pilots have been approved to carry guns. There are zero cases in which those pilots have improperly brandished or used those guns. Doesn't matter to PrezBO though. The Democrats are in charge, and Democrats don't like for the people they wish to control to be armed. All that simple.

  3. #3
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    I thought Hussein was too busy worrying about the economy to worry about gun issues? Right, Donkey, etc? Looks like the libtards were wrong.....AGAIN. Duh.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    There has been one incident of apilot onUS Airways discharging a gun during a flight last year. I don't think that alone justifiesthe current steps apparently underway by the White House.

    Next up - - - a "new and improved" AWB.



    http://www.wcnc.com/news/topstories/....1c4cabd1.html

  5. #5
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    405

    Post imported post

    joseph wrote:
    There has been one incident of apilot onUS Airways discharging a gun during a flight last year. I don't think that alone justifiesthe current steps apparently underway by the White House.

    Next up - - - a "new and improved" AWB.



    http://www.wcnc.com/news/topstories/....1c4cabd1.html
    Hmm.
    12,000 gun-qualified pilots, millions of flights per year, one ND.

    Do plastic spoons have a safety record that impressive?

  6. #6
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post



    <<SNIP>> "If that bullet had compromised the shell of the airplane, " he said, "i.e., gone through a window, the airplane could have gone down."

    Explosive decompression from a bullet hole in modern airplanes is a myth, even shooting a window. The type of ammo they are required to carry in those firearms is of little to no danger to the shell of an airplane.

    http://apsapilots.org/FAQ.php

    "On May 2, 2002, Mr. Ron J. Hinderberger - Director, Aviation Safety Boeing Company - testified before the House Aviation Subcommittee “Commercial airplane structure is designed with sufficient strength, redundancy and damage tolerance that single or even multiple handgun bullet holes would not result in loss of the aircraft.” He further stated that a bullet hole would almost certainly not cause a loss of cabin pressure. Even if it did, a loss of cabin pressure is a problem that pilots are trained to deal with quite easily. The Federal Air Marshals have correctly judged that arming their agents with firearms does not present an undue risk. Moreover, recalling that a FFDO would only use a firearm as a last resort, final line of defense, any outcome that may occur is preferable to having the airplane used as a guided bomb or shot down by a U.S. military fighter."

    In this case of the OP, the pilot should pay for the damage to the plane and revenue lost do to negligence. That will help him remember to be more careful in the future. If that kind of repair bill doesn't drive home the point, he shouldn't be flying. If you cant trust him him with a simple mechanical device like a firearm, you cant trust him with a infinitely more complex device like an airplane. IMHO



  7. #7
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    The MythBusters did a big test on the idea that a bullet, or any hole in the shell of a plane or the window would cause explosive decompression, and it's just not true. You would have a small hole which would decompress the cabin; it'd be bad news, no doubt, but you wouldn't have a huge rip in the shell of the plane and people flying out like in the movies. You would have the oxygen masks come down and the plane would have to land at the nearest airport....that's it.

    Gunfire could cause damage to the avionics equipment and such causing other issues, but I can't imagine that enough damage could be done in a realistic shooting situation on a plane to down it. Much less than using said plane as a guided missile. But so long as the people allow it, everywhere, people will be disarmed for their own "safety" on airplanes.

    This is why I determined long ago, if I cannot drive, walk, take a train or boat, I'm not going there. If I have to fly somewhere, I'm getting my pilots license and flying my own plane. Screw this "being reliant on the government" crap. The government fails it's people with alarming regularity, and who answers for it? Nobody.

  8. #8
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Also, a bit more info that points the finger more at TSA policythan the pilot. The pilot in my opinion was stillnegligent, but its understandable given repetition of the flawed practice of the TSA policy, it was bound to happen.

    http://apsapilots.org/doc/PRESS%20RE...N%20MISHAP.pdf

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    242

    Post imported post

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/federal-off...

    "Federal Officials Deny Report That Obama Seeks to End Pilot Gun Program
    Federal officials are denying a report that the Obama administration is attempting to end a program that allows trained airline pilots to carry guns.

    By Joshua Rhett Miller

    FOXNews.com

    Wednesday, March 18, 2009

    Federal officials are denying a report that the Obama administration is seeking to end a program that allows trained airline pilots to carry guns.

    In an editorial published Tuesday in The Washington Times, the newspaper wrote that "President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology."

    Sterling Payne, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, denied the report and said the program that oversees a reported 12,000 federal flight deck officers (FFDO) is actually expanding.

    "It's inaccurate, this program continues to grow," Payne told FOXNews.com of the editorial. "TSA continues to recruit and put new FFDOs on planes, and we continue to train them and do recurring training."

    Payne said TSA officials have recently opened a training center for FFDOs in Atlantic City, N.J., with others planned to open in Texas and other states. She declined, citing security concerns, to say how many federal flight deck officers are authorized by the agency, citing security concerns.

    "We have thousands of FFDOs right now and we add thousands each year," Payne said.
    Representatives from The Washington Times did not return a request for comment. A White House spokesman declined to speak on the matter, saying it was being handled by TSA officials

    In a statement issued Tuesday, the Airlines Pilots Association International -- the world's largest airline pilot union, representing nearly 52,250 pilots in the U.S. and Canada -- said the Times editorial "couldn't be further from the truth."

    "ALPA representatives met with TSA executives this afternoon and were told in no uncertain terms that TSA embraces the FFDO program, that there are no plans to reduce or restrict its growth, and that in fact the agency fully intends to grow and expand the program," the statement read. "Government representatives acknowledged that the program needs additional funding to achieve these goals, and that they are actively seeking same."

    TSA officials are currently training up to 1,500 pilots annually for the program, which was instituted after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to ALPA's statement.

    "The size of the FFDO cadre has grown so large that additional resources are needed to provide greater structure and oversight to this important program, which TSA referred to [Tuesday] as 'an important layer of defense.'"

    According to TSA's Web site, the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks "demonstrated the need for a multi-layered approach to securing commercial airlines -- and in particular the cockpit -- from terrorist and criminal assault." "

    People - PLEASE save your ire for TRUE stories, okay? Pete

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •