Spanish carrier has ND in cockpit

[wink]

A Spanish regional carrier had a negligent discharge in the cockpit after the Capt took possession of a customs officers weapon. In good 'ol anti gun Europe apparently it is common practice to have trained law enforcement officers turn their weapons over to the cockpit. Net result, one grounded ATR turboprop and notice to all terrorists that Spanish airlines are not defended by armed law enforcement.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...tal-firearm-discharge-damages-binter-atr.html

 

[CAMike]

OK I'll bite.

If there was a standardized test for small arms ownership on flights (not just CONUS flights) and we allowed said folks to maintain control over their weapons during a flight...I submit not only would there be few if no accidental discharges on a/c but our sky's would be safer. I don't think terrorists or hijackers would be very motivated to execute illegal plans if the average flight had + - 25% of all passengers armed. Even a born again muslim wouldn't want to face such odds in a typical scenario. At least in general, I don't believe so.

Spain? They're just about as liberal as SF here in CA.

 

[Flash]

OK I'll bite.

If there was a standardized test for small arms ownership on flights (not just CONUS flights) and we allowed said folks to maintain control over their weapons during a flight...I submit not only would there be few if no accidental discharges on a/c but our sky's would be safer. I don't think terrorists or hijackers would be very motivated to execute illegal plans if the average flight had + - 25% of all passengers armed. Even a born again muslim wouldn't want to face such odds in a typical scenario. At least in general, I don't believe so.

Spain? They're just about as liberal as SF here in CA.

That has got to be one of the more absurd ideas I have seen on this forum.

Among many other issues, the government doesn't have the time or money necessary to do the background checks and training for every Joe Schmo who would want to carry a gun on a plane. Not only that, they haven't had the specialized training that the Federal Air Marshal's have had (they practice a lot) .

What we have now, with the FFDO program and the Marshal's, is good enough.

 

[a-6intruder]

Shortly after 9-11 I recommended to leadership (at the O-9 Vice Admiral level) that perhaps we ought to require all military members to travel in uniform in CONUS while traveling on orders. If you recall how hysterical the population was at the time, it seemed like a logical idea for four reasons:

1 - act as a natural deterrent against possible terrorist activity.
2 - act as a calming influence on a nervous traveling public.
3 - give the military member a sense that he / she might actually be doing something tangible in those early days after 9-11.
4 - be a potential recruiting tool.

Well, the Admiral actually replied to my e-mail, thanked me for my recommendation, and then basically spanked me for being an idiot because traveling in uniform would put a member needlessly at risk by highlighting him / her as a high value target.

I thought he was kidding - better to stay low key than to offer up a possible visual deterrent? He never did acknowledge that most Sailors traveling after graduation from Boot Camp to "A" School fly in uniform, but the concept pretty much fell on deaf ears. And regardless of whether in uniform or not, you can spot the military dude a mile away. He's the one carrying the duffel bar, helmet bag, or wearing the squadron logo on his shirt.

In hindsight, it hasn't been necessary because we haven't had an event since then.

Most of my brilliant ideas fall on deaf ears, both at work and around my house...

 

[wink]

The FAA has a program where EOD types, civil and military, are encourage to make their presence known to the Capt on any flight. My airline has a program they have promoted through law enforcement channels and pubs that encourages law enforcement to travel on us even on personal trips. They are given special boarding and asked to check in with the Capt. Even if unarmed, as in A-6's post, they are a valuable asset we want to know about.

Personally, I think every law enforcement officer should travel armed, even on personal trips. The regulations and local agencies make this difficult, so it rarely happens. I also think all military properly trained in the M-9, M-11, whatever, be encouraged to fly armed with the weapon concealed, whether they are in uniform or not, official business, or not.

 

[Flash]

I also think all military properly trained in the M-9, M-11, whatever, be encouraged to fly armed with the weapon concealed, whether they are in uniform or not, official business, or not.

I have no problem with law enforcement carrying, but including military is a bit much. I have known way too many people in the military that scare me when they are not armed, much less carrying on an airliner. I have qual'd on a pistol but I don't think I have the training and practice necessary to use one on a commercial plane in a hijack scenario. There are practical issues too; many non-citizens are in the military, many people with discipline issues, etc.

 

[lmnop]

The FAA has a program where EOD types, civil and military, are encourage to make their presence known to the Capt on any flight.

Really? Do you have any further info that you could shoot me on that program? The only thing being an EOD tech has gotten me is a whole bunch of extra attention at TSA checkpoints from test swabs ringing off for RDX or PETN. I had one genius scold me for not having a second unpolluted 'travel laptop' while I was flying through Phoenix on R&R from happy funland.

 

[MasterBates]

I have no problem with law enforcement carrying, but including military is a bit much. I have known way too many people in the military that scare me when they are not armed, much less carrying on an airliner.

Flash, being a LEO =/= firearms expert. I know some cops who can barely clean their weapon, and are downright scary with handling of weapons off of a range.

Being a cop does not make one superman.

I want to be able to carry on a flight, for many reasons. Hijackers is just one. Some airports or places I am going after the airport are in sketchy neighborhoods and I am almost always getting in really late at night or early AM.

 

[Flash]

Flash, being a LEO =/= firearms expert. I know some cops who can barely clean their weapon, and are downright scary with handling of weapons off of a range.

Being a cop does not make one superman.

I want to be able to carry on a flight, for many reasons. Hijackers is just one. Some airports or places I am going after the airport are in sketchy neighborhoods and I am almost always getting in really late at night or early AM.

I know that being a LEO does not make one an expert or even a minor superhero, but at least they have the legal authority to carry and enforce the law domestically, we don't. Having local LEO's carry on a plane would probably be just as impractical as having military carry on a flight though. Maybe that is just as well.

It really doesn't matter anyways, it will never happen that we could carry so there is not much use debating it.

 

[C420sailor]

I have no problem with law enforcement carrying, but including military is a bit much. I have known way too many people in the military that scare me when they are not armed, much less carrying on an airliner. I have qual'd on a pistol but I don't think I have the training and practice necessary to use one on a commercial plane in a hijack scenario. There are practical issues too; many non-citizens are in the military, many people with discipline issues, etc.

I shoot with a lot of cops. They're very knowledgeable with regard to weapon safety, shoot/don't shoot (as it pertains to the law), etc. Coming out of the academy, the practical skills seem to be lacking. When my best friend graduated the NYPD academy, I went shooting with him and his buddies. I was appalled to see the low level of marksmanship and individual weapons knowledge that they displayed. One of them came up to me asking if his S&W Model 59 was broken, because he couldn't cycle his weapon with an empty mag in. He couldn't grasp the concept that the slide would not go forward with an empty magazine in the weapon. I'm no crack shot, but their jaws dropped when they watched me shoot. And these are guys who have the authority to carry in all 50 states. A little scary if you ask me.

Do I think military should carry on aircraft? Hell no. Neither should normal LEO's. The government should put highly trained officers on more aircraft. Could you imagine if 25% of the pax onboard all started shooting at a perp? Mayhem!

I do think that qualification and training courses should be offered to military personnel that would then allow them to carry across the US under a version of LEOSA. I think that the "Military members don't have powers of arrest" argument is moot---LEO's only have arrest powers within their geographic area of employment. In other words, a local LEO in NY can only arrest an individual within NY state.

We would need much better weapons training though. Let's be real here---the standard M16 and M9 qualifications are merely marksmanship quals. No combat drills, no malfunction drills, etc.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Shortly after 9-11 I recommended to leadership (at the O-9 Vice Admiral level) that perhaps we ought to require all military members to travel in uniform in CONUS while traveling on orders. If you recall how hysterical the population was at the time, it seemed like a logical idea for four reasons:

1 - act as a natural deterrent against possible terrorist activity.
2 - act as a calming influence on a nervous traveling public.
3 - give the military member a sense that he / she might actually be doing something tangible in those early days after 9-11.
4 - be a potential recruiting tool.

Well, the Admiral actually replied to my e-mail, thanked me for my recommendation, and then basically spanked me for being an idiot because traveling in uniform would put a member needlessly at risk by highlighting him / her as a high value target.

I thought he was kidding - better to stay low key than to offer up a possible visual deterrent? He never did acknowledge that most Sailors traveling after graduation from Boot Camp to "A" School fly in uniform, but the concept pretty much fell on deaf ears. And regardless of whether in uniform or not, you can spot the military dude a mile away. He's the one carrying the duffel bar, helmet bag, or wearing the squadron logo on his shirt.

In hindsight, it hasn't been necessary because we haven't had an event since then.

Most of my brilliant ideas fall on deaf ears, both at work and around my house...

I believe, even post 9-11, that the official stance of DHS and FAA regarding hijacking, that the crew and passengers are supposed to obey and not resist. Someone who is a crewmember please clarify!

We are becoming a nation of sheep, I sometimes feel. e.g. We are coming to the point were it is illegal for us to defend ourselves from violence or life threatening circumstances; a la the United Kingdom.

"It is the goivernments job to protect you - and they are the only ones empowered to use force on your behalf"

Ugh.

 

[wink]

I I have qual'd on a pistol but I don't think I have the training and practice necessary to use one on a commercial plane in a hijack scenario.

For the record, I said properly trained. By that I meant something more then the basic military qual and less then Air Marshall standards. But as to your personal feeling, even given the training you have, I am sure you would wish you had a gun if you were on a hijacked plane on 9/11. How much training does it take to keep hijackers from flying a plane into a building? You have to understand that post 9/11 airline crews think in terms of losing the entire plane plus innumerable innocents on the ground verses a half dozen innocents on the plane in a shoot out. I have to tell ya Flash, whether you feel comfortable or not, I would want you with a gun on my plane any day rather then launch without anyone watching my back. Certainly, Air Police, MPs, MA, and Spec Ops types should be able to watch the FAAs Flying Armed video just as required by all cops, and the be able to fly on an airliner. No special training required. They are not there to get involved in a dispute between passenger and Flight Attendant. The circumstances requiring action would be clear, guys with weapons trying to get into a cockpit. Forcible entry into a cockpit is tantamount to deadly force these days. Deadly force is an appropriate response. It isn't law enforcement. It is survival.

I believe, even post 9-11, that the official stance of DHS and FAA regarding hijacking, that the crew and passengers are supposed to obey and not resist. Someone who is a crewmember please clarify!

Not true. Crew is no longer passive. Details classified. Passengers follow crewmembers instructions!

 

[Zissou]

Absolute drivel.


Wink is dead on.


You guys can argue all day long about who should and should NOT carry on board.

When the time comes the men will answer. Whether you arm them or not.

This debate, alive since 9/11, is why Im unarmed and people I pass/fail are armed on flights. I dont give a damn. So long as I have teeth, fists, and a pulse the enemy will meet resistance.

For those of you in love with the FAM program? It was badass for about two years, then EO took over. Once the standards got modified the pipe hitters went elsewhere.

Your flight deck is the last line of defense.

And some of those older pilots are hard as wood pecker lips.

On point, your only regulating the GOOD GUYS with this nonsense.

C420? Shipmate, I dont know where to begin my argument with your opinion. Hell, I agree most cops SUCK at gunplay. But dude, have you seen the enemy train??? Yes thats a valid argument. I dont care if your a national marksman paper target killer first class. If you havent the sand to carry? You're just not part of the game!

You give me a crappy shooting cop, who's stepping up to the game?

Ill give him seven holes in the airplane and one shot in the badguy's head.

I train MIL/LEO guys for a living... I dont give a damn how they shoot, I care that they instinctual STEP IN TO THE FIGHT!

I can make a monkey shoot good, I cannot make a coward a killer.

My buddy shares a cubicle with me. He can barely score expert with a carbine, yet killed 22 people in May of 04. One month. Why? Because when he sees badguys he shoots them in the face, whether that takes one round or 100. He sucks on the one way range.

Ive been shooting with him and heard people say things to the effect of " Im surprised, I expected him to be a better shot"

Punching paper is no measure of a warrior.

Just arm the good guys or not. Its a moot point because warriors will man up regardless.

This is about the TARGET's survival, Not the airplane.

 

[BACONATOR]

Zissou: Agreed.

C420Sailor: Agreed, some fresh new cops out of the academy may suck at marksmanship. HOWEVER, if you can't get within 15 yards of a bad guy on an airplane and put a hole in him (strictly marksmanship, situation notwithstanding): you suck at life and I doubt they could graduate from the academy.