Another hit at the 2 A (Merged)

Another hit at the 2 A (Merged)

This is a discussion on Another hit at the 2 A (Merged) within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; FYI ... they are taking our rights away, slowly !!! NEWS RELEASE CCRKBA, BELLEVUE, WA OBAMA EFFORT TO END ARMED PILOTS PROGRAM AN OUTRAGE, – ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array jfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Palm Beach County, FL
    Posts
    1,485

    Another hit at the 2 A (Merged)

    FYI ... they are taking our rights away, slowly !!!

    NEWS RELEASE CCRKBA, BELLEVUE, WA

    OBAMA EFFORT TO END ARMED PILOTS PROGRAM AN OUTRAGE, – A revelation by the Washington Times that President Barack Obama is trying to quietly end the armed pilot program, making air travel more vulnerable to terrorist attack, should outrage travelers, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

    “The Washington Times nailed it,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, who proposed arming pilots just hours after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and championed the armed pilot program. “ What Obama is doing is risking public safety, as the newspaper put it, ‘in the name of an anti-gun ideology’.”

    The newspaper reported in its Tuesday edition that President Obama is “quietly ending the federal firearms program” by diverting some $2 million from the training program to hire “supervisory” staff, whose job, it appears, will be to harass armed pilots through unnecessary field inspections.

    “How dare the president, or anybody in his administration, take measures to erode the safety of air travelers,” Gottlieb questioned. “The armed pilot program provides a guaranteed level of security to the public. There may or may not be an air marshal aboard every airplane, but there is definitely a pilot in the cockpit.

    “We trust commercial airline pilots with $500 million aircraft,” he continued. “We can certainly trust them with $500 pistols to defend those planes, and th e lives of their passengers.

    “Certain individuals have never liked the armed pilot program,” Gottlieb acknowledged. “These anti-gun, anti-self-defense bureaucrats seem more interested in their own power, and protecting their little empires, than they are in protecting the public. And now, Obama is catering to their anti-gun bigotry.”

    Call the White House at (202) 456-1111, or send a comment by visiting Contact Us.
    The first rule of a gunfight: "Don't be there !"
    The second rule: "Bring enough gun"

    jfl
    (NRA Life Member/Instructor - GOA - IDPA - GSSF - ex-IHMSA)


  2. #2
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 14,650'
    Posts
    12,554
    I wrote the White House.

    Please write, e-mail, or call the President!

    This is an incremental attack on 2A and we need to respond!

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array Zsnake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    628

    Pilots' Defensive Weapons

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

    Tuesday, March 17, 2009
    Comment
    Print
    Font Size Share
    Got a Question?
    You Report
    Click-2-Listen
    Buzz up!After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

    Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

    The Obama administration this past week diverted some $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots.

    This looks like completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots. The 12,000 Federal Flight Deck Officers, the pilots who have been approved to carry guns, are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency. There are no cases where any of them has improperly brandished or used a gun. There are just a few cases where officers have improperly used their IDs.

    Fewer than one percent of the officers have any administrative actions brought against them and, we are told, virtually all of those cases “are trumped up.”

    Take a case against one flight officer who had visited the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles within the last few weeks. While there, the pilot noticed that federal law enforcement officers can, with the approval of a superior, obtain a license plate that cannot be traced, a key safety feature for law enforcement personnel. So the pilot asked if, as a member of the federal program, he was eligible. The DMV staffer checked and said “no.” The next day administrative actions were brought against the pilot for “misrepresenting himself.” These are the kinds of cases that President Obama wants to investigate.

    Since Mr. Obama's election, pilots have told us that the approval process for letting pilots carry guns on planes slowed significantly. Last week the problem went from bad to worse. Federal Flight Deck Officers - the pilots who have been approved to carry guns - indicate that the approval process has stalled out.

    Pilots cannot openly speak about the changing policies for fear of retaliation from the Transportation Security Administration. Pilots who act in any way that causes a “loss of confidence” in the armed pilot program risk criminal prosecution as well as their removal from the program. Despite these threats, pilots in the Federal Flight Deck Officers program have raised real concerns in multiple interviews.

    Arming pilots after Sept. 11 was nothing new. Until the early 1960s, American commercial passenger pilots on any flight carrying U.S. mail were required to carry handguns. Indeed, U.S. pilots were still allowed to carry guns until as recently as 1987. There are no records that any of these pilots (either military or commercial) ever causing any significant problems.

    Screening of airplane passengers is hardly perfect. While armed marshals are helpful, the program covers less than 3 percent of the flights out of Washington D.C.'s three airports and even fewer across the country. Sky marshals are costly and quit more often than other law-enforcement officers.

    Armed pilots are a cost-effective backup layer of security. Terrorists can only enter the cockpit through one narrow entrance, and armed pilots have some time to prepare themselves as hijackers penetrate the strengthened cockpit doors. With pilots, we have people who are willing to take on the burden of protecting the planes for free. About 70 percent of the pilots at major American carriers have military backgrounds.

    Frankly, as a matter of pure politics, we cannot understand what the administration is thinking. Nearly 40 House Democrats are in districts were the NRA is more popular than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. We can't find any independent poll in which the public is demanding that pilots disarm. Why does this move make sense?

    Only anti-gun extremists and terrorist recruits are worried about armed pilots. So why is the Obama administration catering to this tiny lobby at the expense of public safety?

  4. #4
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,665

    Come on now R&G

    Quote Originally Posted by Rock and Glock View Post
    I wrote the White House.

    Please write, e-mail, or call the President!

    This is an incremental attack on 2A and we need to respond!
    Come on now R&G. How can stopping something that wasn't allowed throughout most of modern aviation history be an attack on 2A.

    Whether it is wise to undo this program is questionable, but it is hardly an attack on 2A. More than likely the program is costly, far from "trouble" free, and considered of very limited benefit in actually protecting an aircraft.

    Let's see, so far we have had one really well publicized incident of an AD in the cockpit and no (thank goodness) incidents of armed pilots foiling an attempt to take over an aircraft.

    The score is 0 to 1; too little data to make a good choice in a complex situation.

    Personally, I like the armed pilot concept, but I just don't see abolishing the program, (if that is being contemplated), as an attack on 2a.

    If I had to guess, I'd think the airlines themselves have convoluted reasons of cost, inconvenience, and paranoia about liability which would drive a program change.

  5. #5
    Member Array KralBlbec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    416
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Come on now R&G. How can stopping something that wasn't allowed throughout most of modern aviation history be an attack on 2A.

    Whether it is wise to undo this program is questionable, but it is hardly an attack on 2A. More than likely the program is costly, far from "trouble" free, and considered of very limited benefit in actually protecting an aircraft.

    Let's see, so far we have had one really well publicized incident of an AD in the cockpit and no (thank goodness) incidents of armed pilots foiling an attempt to take over an aircraft.

    The score is 0 to 1; too little data to make a good choice in a complex situation.

    Personally, I like the armed pilot concept, but I just don't see abolishing the program, (if that is being contemplated), as an attack on 2a.

    If I had to guess, I'd think the airlines themselves have convoluted reasons of cost, inconvenience, and paranoia about liability which would drive a program change.
    If I remember correctly that shooting was while putting on a bad gun lock asis required under the law, so really it is the fault of the anti crowd that wanted the gun locks in the first place.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,801
    First we take the targets...
    Next we take the bullets...
    Then we take your permits...

    But we won't touch the guns...

    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  7. #7
    GMS
    GMS is offline
    Member Array GMS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Come on now R&G. How can stopping something that wasn't allowed throughout most of modern aviation history be an attack on 2A.
    Not exactly accurate.

    Armed pilots have been allowed through most of aviation history. Early air mail service pilots were generally armed and I think even required to be armed. The ruling also extended to require pilots to be armed in any type of aircraft (including passenger service) if carrying US mail. Also, in 1961, in response to the Cuban missile crisis, the FAA instituted a rule allowing for commercial pilots to be armed if the pilot's airline put them through a training course. The rule was only just discontinued in mid 2001.

    Even if this does not qualify as a direct attack on 2A, there is no sense in allowing policy makers to get any idea that they can mess with any firearms related laws. The slightest hint that a more restrictive or complete abolishment of an existing statute is being considered should yield a flood of immediate negative feedback to state and federal representatives. It's easier to stop a wagon before it gets rolling, than trying to stop it at the bottom of the hill.

    I don't hold-out much hope for removing restrictions in the next couple of years, but at least we can prevent more restrictive policies from being enacted.
    Last edited by Captain Crunch; March 20th, 2009 at 01:53 AM. Reason: Fixed quote tags.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,980
    But Hopyard, how about the pilots' Rights? Don't they surrender their Right to carry just because of their occupation? What if they were to decide that because trucks are involved in interstate commerce they would pass a federal law prohibiting truckers from carrying in their rigs even if they have a permit?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  9. #9
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,925
    This is just one of many of Obama's schemes.

    First of all, there was no downside to the program.

    A man that has the skills to pilot an aircraft, certainly has the hand eye coordination to defend it with a gun.

    Personally, I like the armed pilot concept, but I just don't see abolishing the program, (if that is being contemplated), as an attack on 2a.
    Thats the problem...Obama doesn't see it as an attack on the second amendment either. Fact of the matter is this, when you make it illegal to carry a gun for self defense ANYWHERE, it is an attack on the Second Amendment.

    What is absolutely sickening to me is that good people that appear intelligent are unable to make that simple distinction.

    Thus...the drum beats and we lose our right to bear arms....a little here and a little there until one day we wake up and have none.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 14,650'
    Posts
    12,554
    One of the "Take Aways" from Hillary's failed attempt for "Health Care Reform" during Bill's first term was to "Never State the Real Goal" and never "Tell the Whole Truth", cause then folks'll rise up in arms (pun).

    That is exactly what they'll be doing the next four years on RKBA.

  11. #11
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Still trying to connect the dots on ending the program...the articles say diverted 2Mil to oversea field inspections...not end the program. And I wonder if the field inspections would also include the Fed Air Marshals...hence, I think the articles leave out the whole picture and is more a "sky is falling" piece. Seems a lot of those lately...

    Rick

  12. #12
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 14,650'
    Posts
    12,554
    Money is the key. Without funding, the program withers and dies. A well used and well worn tactic in DC. Pull the funding and ........"Poof"

    And it's not like the Washington Times is a bastion of conservatives.......

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,798
    Personally, I always thought they should have a barrel of loaded .38's at every gate and every passenger "has to " take one before they board an airplane.

    Can you imagine any idiot standing up with a gun or a knife and saying "I'm hijacking this airplane".

    I'm betting it would be the last thing they ever said.

    White House email sent.... encouraging them to "maintain the pilot's capability to carry guns as a last line of defense against any hijackers or terriorists" and to "protect American citizens and our airways safe".

  14. #14
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock and Glock View Post
    Money is the key. Without funding, the program withers and dies. A well used and well worn tactic in DC. Pull the funding and ........"Poof"

    And it's not like the Washington Times is a bastion of conservatives.......
    Hummm...don't see the DOE, DOT, Education etc. withering and dying when funds were diverted under the last administration.

    Money is always the key...only so much in the pot...or better yet, only so many IOUs in the pot. One only has to look at the deficit.

    Nope...not convinced. Another sky is falling...until proven otherwise. I suspect the FFDO program will continue...perhaps streamlined...but continue nevertheless.

    Rick

  15. #15
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by bandit383 View Post
    Nope...not convinced. Another sky is falling...until proven otherwise. I suspect the FFDO program will continue...perhaps streamlined...but continue nevertheless.
    Without the 'sky is falling' posts we would eliminate half the traffic here.

    There are competing interests. Our airspace is directly tied to national security. The Federal government has a definite interest. The airlines are, ostensibly, private companies and can implement any firearm regulations they see fit.

    Pilots are not LE. Pilots are not military. There is no way a pilot should be mandated to carry and be proficient in firearms or their tactical use. Pilots are highly skilled and passengers rely on their skills and training. They are not defenders of the plane.

    Want to defend the plane? Armed Federal marshals.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. Do you let LEO's know? (Merged)
    By Kaneco in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: February 19th, 2009, 04:50 PM
  2. Do you let LEO's know? (Merged)
    By bigjake in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 12th, 2009, 07:10 PM
  3. NRA vs GOA: MERGED
    By DrLewall in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: January 27th, 2008, 03:07 AM

Search tags for this page

ffdo 135 operations

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors