Doug Fiedor
Arming Commercial Pilots
(Newsletter #271 - A Weekly View from the Middle of an Asphalt Jungle)
Who is the "Captain" of the ship -- in this case a commercial
airship? There’s a pilot up front driving the aircraft. But, is he or
she really in charge? Maybe. But only when some younger guy riding in
back allows it.
Judging by the disgruntled antics of some buttinski bureaucrats in
the federal government, commercial aircraft pilots should no longer
be called "Captain." They are quickly becoming "drivers" and little
else.
Ask one what types of hoops these "Captains" have to jump through
to get to the ship they supposedly command. They are searched and
examined by every minimum-wage "security" person along the way
before boarding their aircraft.
In all appearances, outwardly and privately, the "Captain" of the
ship is not trusted by government. Any lawyer can walk past security
in any courthouse without being checked. But, our commercial aircraft
pilots may not board the aircraft they are said to command without
being searched first. Apparently, big government trusts lawyers more
then those who fly an aircraft transporting hundreds of people.
Worse, if there is a young sky marshal on board an aircraft, they
may command the pilot to do whatever they wish. Which means, the
"Captain" is not in command. The young federal employee with the gun
is.
Last fall, Congress authorized the Transportation Department to
arm commercial airline pilots. Currently, all that is available to
the pilot and second officer is a fire ax and (usually) some
interesting little flare shooters. These can be formidable weapons in
skilled hands, but a gun is handier and more efficient.
Apparently, though, administration bureaucrats do not trust the
pilots who transport humans everyday for a living. Congress debated
and approved arming pilots, but administration bureaucrats can’t seem
to make a decision. Instead of running with the ball for a score that
would benefit everyone, they punt.
That’s a damn shame, too. And sooner or later, it will cost lives.
These bureaucrats should shut up and do as they were told. They are
not a one man Congress, just paper pushers.
As U.S. Rep. John N. Hostettler (R-IN) reports: "The American
people support the idea. In a Time/CNN poll conducted just weeks
after the September 11 terrorist attacks, 61 percent said they
favored allowing pilots to carry guns. Two more recent polls
conducted by the Wilson Center and the Winston Group found support
for arming pilots has risen to 75 percent. Airline pilots themselves
overwhelmingly favor this option. . . . The pilots make the very good
point that they are the first line of deterrence and the last line of
defense on their aircraft. And few professionals are better equipped
to be armed. Pilots endure rigorous screening before they can work
for a major airline. More than 70 percent of the pilots at the major
airlines have military training."(1)
Hostettler also admits that the federal government is far from
prepared to provide much security: "There are nowhere near enough
federal marshals to cover the 35,000 flights that take place in the
United States daily. Federal baggage screeners will not be in place
at the nation’s 429 airports until November. Meanwhile, knives, mace
and even an occasional gun have slipped through the intensified
screening process."
John R. Lott, Jr., a resident scholar at the American Enterprise
Institute(2), agrees: "Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta has
based airline security on three policies: improved screening, air
marshals, and strengthened cockpit doors. While all are helpful, no
one can ignore the evidence from the last couple of weeks that all
three policies are simply not enough. If the administration is going
to be serious about keeping terrorists out of the cockpit, Mineta and
Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge need to begin considering something
they have long resisted -- arming pilots."
According to Lott: "Of the three pilots’ unions, 83 percent of the
Allied Pilots Association, 78 percent of the Southwest Airlines
Pilots’ Association and 73 percent of the Air Line Pilots Association
support arming pilots. More than 70 percent of the pilots of major
airlines have served in the military and are familiar with guns. They
know more about their planes than the marshals. All the pilots’
groups have agreed to training programs before being armed."
As the Wall Street Journal said so distinctly last Wedensday:
"Arming pilots is an important security measure. Federal air marshals
will never be able to protect more than a small fraction of flights.
Reinforced cockpit doors, while an improvement, aren’t impregnable
and will still need to be opened periodically during flight. Stun
guns, favored by Mr. Mineta, can be rendered ineffective by thick
clothing, and they immobilize attackers for mere seconds.
"In short, the same Transportation Secretary who’s letting the
phony issue of racial profiling stand in the way of effective airport
screening is now refusing to authorize the best defense should
terrorists get on board an airplane again. Maybe it’s time for the
White House to exert some policy supervision over Mr. Mineta and his
bureaucracy. Failing that, we’re all for Congress taking the law back
into its own hands. It shouldn’t take another disaster before we get
serious about keeping hijackers out of the cockpit."
Exactly! The pilot and co-pilot are in command of the ship. Anyone
else may assist. But the "Captain" should be in ultimate command and
responsible for all decisions made while the aircraft is in
operation.
All commercial aircraft pilots I know were also well experienced
military pilots. One has 4,300 hours in a B-52 and quite a number of
hours successfully leading his Wing bombing North Vietnam. We shall
not ask how many hours he also has driving a fully armed B-52 over
the United States, but it’s a lot. And, he happens to be a very good
shot with a handgun.
To deny a capable commercial airline Captain like that the means
of protecting his aircraft, crew and passengers is nothing short of
legal negligence. As a (non)frequent flyer, I would feel comfortable
knowing that all commercial airline pilots were armed anytime they
were in uniform.
There is a petition available that is a coordinated effort between
the Airline Pilots’ Security Alliance (APSA), the Allied Pilots
Association (APA), the Southwest Airline Pilots Association (SWAPA),
the Coalition of Airline Pilots Association (CAPA), and the
Independent Pilots Association (IPA). Everyone interested is invited
to sign it.(3)
Doug Fiedor