Firearm discharges on US Airways flight

[FA Mikey]

Let me see here. Known flaw that will result in undesired weapon discharge, eventually?

Well if there was a known flaw, and the operator continued to use it without due care and consideration, then he is in fact negligent.

I, personally, would stand down the program until the flaw is addressed.

which shows you have a definite concern for your safety as well as your fellow crew members and passengers.

Based on a YouTube video by APA (where is ALPA in this?) I would ensure the entire trigger mechanism is exposed for easy verification of proper lock installation.

A possible explanation of badly designed locking mechanism.

As I said. It is a cheap, poorly implemented mechanism and procedure, now.

If it happened anything like that video, then the pilot was culpable and negligent.


what is the first rule of firearm safety we were all taught? Treat every firearm as if were a loaded. Now here is someone with a firearm he knows is loaded and with one in the chamber as should be. Did something to move the trigger all the way to the rear, releasing the hammer. It is what it is, negligent.

 

[sharktooth]

Well if there was a known flaw, and the operator continued to use it without due care and consideration, then he is in fact negligent.

He (as well as the rest of us) now know that there is a flaw, a flaw known previously by the manufacturer, government and a few FFDOs. That makes them negligent, not him.

which shows you have a definite concern for your safety as well as your fellow crew members and passengers.

I do, which is why I think "guns in a cockpit" concept is slop for weak minds, at least as it is structured today. See below.

If it happened anything like that video, then the pilot was culpable and negligent..

You didn't see, or, apparently, understand what they said in the video.

I am not going to embarrass you by pointing out your ignorance, nor insinuate things that are not true, like you did, at all.

I would like to point out, however, that a "hijacker", sitting on a jump-seat with a box-cutter, can slash the throats of both pilots long before they can react with their guns, Flight 11. A CD snapped in half keeps it's edge for at least five human throats. If you think about it, once the cockpit is attacked, the cabin people, for all intents and purposes, are dead. Your gun is there to simply to try to deny bad guys the use of an airplane to attack "high value" structures, Cheney with his F-16s, being the back-up.

The two best things done were armored cockpit doors and keeping "unknown jump-seaters" out of the cockpit. A longer term solution, IMHO, is to (legally) excise those elements of the US government who create terrorism and terrorists, starting with the White House.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

A true American! Guilty before proven innocent! I see.

 

[EastUS]

If it happened anything like that video, then the pilot was culpable and negligent.

I see. How, EXACTLY would YOU determine the position of the trigger..without any certain visual references by which to confirm it? Just curious. How about playing a combination of blind-man's-bluff with pin-the-tail-on-the-trigger a few thousand times and see how well it actually goes for you/anyone. This brilliant procedure's produced at least two accidental shots fired even within the supervised training enviornment. Trust me at least on this = things going "BLAM" unintentionally, and within any intensely supervised training enviornment...just isn't "normal", much less truly acceptable, in ANY way.

Regardless of anyone's enthusiastic proclivity towards instantly assigning negligence...wouldn't you think it best to dismiss such an utterly ridiculous procedure? You/several here are heartilly enthusiastic about wishing to immediately "hang" the person this accident involved. Wonderfull..perhaps there's some perverse personal agendas afoot for some postings...I don't know the motivational factors. Whether it's "Ha ha..a pilot screwed up" or variations on "I'm truly perfect..such a thing could NEVER happen to me"/whatever. What I wonder about's the lack of any apparent interest in actually addressing the issue in some reasonable fashion, so as to prevent future occurrences...which is what I'd think any actually sane people, with any real agenda towards enhancing safety for all of us, would be most concerned with. Let he who is flawless in all thought, deed and actions cast the first stone. For myself?..I've made plentifull mistakes over time, do not pretend that such isn't true, and fully realize that, "there, but for fortune", especially in cases like this one...go pretty much ANY/ALL of us....perhaps, most especially..those that cannot imagine any such thing happening to them.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Blah Blah Blah.

 

[EastUS]

Blah Blah Blah.

???? OK..your own signature: "Sorry, God will not let you sit next to him on Judgment Day."

 

[FA Mikey]

I see. How, EXACTLY would YOU determine the position of the trigger..without any certain visual references by which to confirm it?

Exactly, if you know of the inherent flaws and find resistance in that holster and continue to push knowing it could be the trigger, then you have the negligence for the negligent discharge.

This brilliant procedure's produced at least two accidental shots fired even within the supervised training enviornment. Trust me at least on this = things going "BLAM" unintentionally, and within any intensely supervised training enviornment...just isn't "normal", much less truly acceptable, in ANY way.

Its a voluntary program. No one is forced to join or stay in it, if they feel the policies are unsafe or too restrictive. Once you sign in to the program and accept the equipment locks and procedures. Its more than a bit, disingenuous to come back after and blame the lock the holster and the policies.

Regardless of anyone's enthusiastic proclivity towards instantly assigning negligence...wouldn't you think it best to dismiss such an utterly ridiculous procedure? You/several here are heartilly enthusiastic about wishing to immediately "hang" the person this accident involved.

At this point its semantics. Calling it what it is. The next question what is a safer and as secure procedure, to keep the FFDO program going and maintain safety and security of firearms past the security check points?

 

[EastUS]

The next question what is a safer and as secure procedure, to keep the FFDO program going and maintain safety and security of firearms past the security check points?

How about using some slight element of "common sense" and simply allow the FFDO's the same carrying protocols that are established for all other fed-designated people? Place whatever additional training that's deemed appropriate, and...here's a shocking thought: How about compensating them for their time and efforts in any said training?

I've zero arguments against any observations that the procedures currently in place are ridiculous, to say the least.

 

[sharktooth]

How about using some slight element of "common sense" and simply allow the FFDO's the same carrying protocols that are established for all other fed-designated people? Place whatever additional training that's deemed appropriate, and...here's a shocking thought: How about compensating them for their time and efforts in any said training?

I've zero arguments against any observations that the procedures currently in place are ridiculous, to say the least.

Kinda interesting to me that those of us who carried as a part of the flying job in the military are quite slow to blame and, seemingly, those who handle a weapon once a year at a firing range, if that, sort of the chickenhawk of the wingnut set, are so quick to toss accusations in between video combat sessions on their computers.

 

[767jetz]

How about using some slight element of "common sense" and simply allow the FFDO's the same carrying protocols that are established for all other fed-designated people? Place whatever additional training that's deemed appropriate, and...here's a shocking thought: How about compensating them for their time and efforts in any said training?

I've zero arguments against any observations that the procedures currently in place are ridiculous, to say the least.

I never thought I'd see the day that we agree on something!

I think you touched on the #1 reason these ridiculous procedures exist in the first place. Cost. While everyone in Law Enforcement knows what the correct solution is, the government, and certainly the airlines, do not want to incur the additional cost of training. Unfortunately, just like the FAA, the DHS is reactive instead of proactive. So unfortunately it will probably take even more serious incidents to initiate any change that would require additional funding.

IMO FFDO's should be allowed to carry their firearm at all times, while in uniform, and scheduled for a flight segment, in full view. This would eliminate the need to handle the weapon unnecessarily, and reduce the risk of a lost weapon. There is obviously a need for Air Marshals to travel incognito. But since the FFDO's are locked behind a secure door for 99% of the flight anyway, and their mission is to act as a last line of defense, there is no need for them to hide their identity. If the FFDO is on a DH leg or traveling out of uniform, the weapon should then be locked and stowed.

 

[N965VJ]

<SNIP> IMO FFDO's should be allowed to carry their firearm at all times, while in uniform, and scheduled for a flight segment, in full view. This would eliminate the need to handle the weapon unnecessarily, and reduce the risk of a lost weapon.

Exactumundo!

Unfortunately, there are too many people afraid of firearms to ever allow that to be implemented.

 

[sharktooth]

Unfortunately, there are too many people afraid of firearms to ever allow that to be implemented.

As you can probably tell, I am no doctor, but, I would be willing to state that it is not that people fear firearms but that, perhaps, because there would then become a perception that we are living in a police state, which might then lead to people realizing that they have given up quite a few "freedoms" for "security". Kinda reminds me of a quote somewhere.

 

[Jetsetter2Ord]

Could it be a reason why the pilots have yet to wear their new uniform? Is it because they are redesigning it to include a holster plus spurs on their cowboy boots?

 

[wopr21]

Exactumundo!

Unfortunately, there are too many people afraid of firearms to ever allow that to be implemented.

Are people afraid of police that have a firearm in full view?

 

[N965VJ]

<SNIP> I would be willing to state that it is not that people fear firearms but that, perhaps, because there would then become a perception that we are living in a police state, which might then lead to people realizing that they have given up quite a few "freedoms" for "security".

I dunno, the vast majority of States issue concealed carry permits to law-abiding citizens. I’ve had several homes in States that recently passed concealed carry legislation, and the progression has always been the same; much debate about “shootouts at the OK Corralâ€, eventual passing of the legislation, a drop in violent crime, and then the turmoil dies down. The only visible reminder are the occasional placards at a place of business that say they ban guns, which IMO, just creates an unarmed victim zone in reality.

The only reason I don’t currently have a concealed carry permit myself is I live in a rural area with a low crime rate. Besides, the girlfriend has one. So much for it being a “macho power tripâ€.

I’ve stated before that the FFDO program is not effective, and EastUS has posted some good examples why. That’s not to say I don’t admire those that participate in the program.