Airline Piliots - inside scoop - good news!

austin · Post by **austin** » Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:23 pm

I was mistaken for a FAM by a flight crew a few weeks ago, so I am not so sure they are easy to pick out.

Two six foot lengths of CAT5 cable are almost unbeatable during an in-flight emergency and anyone can carry them aboard. I keep mine in my laptop case and then transfer them to my jacket when I put my case under the seat in front of me.

TX Rancher · Post by **TX Rancher** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:47 am

This, by its very nature, is a loaded subject, and I for one donâ€™t â€œknowâ€? what the answer is.

Folks like Venus, Kauboy, and others have stated they feel CHLâ€™s should be allowed to carry on flights. I applaud folks that are willing to take responsibility for their defense/safety, get the proper training (which to me is more then just passing the CHL), and maintain proficiency by constant practice. In every class I have taken (CHL and non-CHL), there have been several folks that I would be comfortable with covering my 6 on any situation. Those folks should be able to carryâ€¦

TXI and several others have said no to civilianâ€™s armed (firearms) on aircraft. They are all â€œgun nutsâ€? or they wouldnâ€™t be on this forum, so itâ€™s certainly not an anti-gun agenda thatâ€™s driving their statements! I also suspect they trust their ability with a firearm on an aircraft. I think the rub is they are not sure about all CHL holders.

As stated above, in every class Iâ€™ve taken (civilian and military), there have been very good folks. But there have also been people I stayed away from due to the way they handled their weapons. There were folks who couldnâ€™t hit a barn, from the inside, with the door shut, and their answer to all situations was basically spray and pray (not the best approach on a crowded aircraft). Should those folks be allowed to carry? Would you want them in a seat 2 rows behind you?

Some of the folks in my CHL classes really shouldnâ€™t be carrying based on what I saw in the class. Iâ€™ve only been through the course twice so that doesnâ€™t make me an authority, but based on comments Iâ€™ve read on this forum, I suspect many had the same experience. Suffice it to say I wouldnâ€™t want them carrying on a flight I was onâ€¦

To me the discussion of the FAM is interesting, but not pertinent to the discussion since the odds are any given flight doesnâ€™t have one. Do they represent a deterrent? Absolutely, and I wish we had more of them.

So where do I stand? On this subject, Iâ€™m squarely in the middle. I see both sides to the discussion. If the rules were changed so I could carry, I would. Do I believe I should be allowed to carry? Yes, I should. Does not being able to carry keep me on the ground? No, if I needed to fly I would. I tend not to fly, but itâ€™s due to the cost, hassle at the airports, and being 6 ft tall so I donâ€™t fit well in the seats. Air safety doesnâ€™t enter into the calculation for me. Iâ€™m willing to accept the restrictions at this time since I donâ€™t think it seriously impacts my safety. I feel more at risk filling my tank at the local self serve station late at night or stopping at the local stop and rob then I do at an airport, or on an aircraft.

Liberty · Post by **Liberty** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:24 am

austin wrote:I was mistaken for a FAM by a flight crew a few weeks ago, so I am not so sure they are easy to pick out.

Two six foot lengths of CAT5 cable are almost unbeatable during an in-flight emergency and anyone can carry them aboard. I keep mine in my laptop case and then transfer them to my jacket when I put my case under the seat in front of me.

The flight Crew may not have been playing as close attention as a determined terrorist. The goal of the terorist will be to neutralize any potential resistance. They won't worry about false positives. As long as they get any potential FAMs first.

Edited: because it was confusing wrong, and just plane screwed up

KBCraig · Post by **KBCraig** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:19 am

austin wrote:Two six foot lengths of CAT5 cable are almost unbeatable during an in-flight emergency

How about the CAT5-o-nine-tails?

sparx · Post by **sparx** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:07 pm

+1 Tx Rancher, I agree, as I too have seen some CHLs that I wouldn't want to see using their weapon on any plane I was on. As being in a plane in the air puts us in a situation where we can't get up and leave at will, I do feel that extra precautions should be taken, but that puts us in a situation of setting aside our rights if we want to fly.

Although I have a fair amount confidence in myself, and my wife to a point (and growing continually with practice and training) to protect and defend ourselves in our home or out in public for the most part, I also know there may be times when it would behoove us to keep them holstered if a window fitting our skill-sets doesn't present itself (using common sense or course... if there's no way out, we'll both go down fighting... we hope).

However, we also know that there are many CHL holders out there as well that are FAR more experienced and skillful with weapons, self defence and personal protection that we are, or will likely become. To these people I tip my hat, and wouldn't mind seeing some of them armed on a plane. Unfortunately at this point there's no way to differentiate between them and another CHL holder other than knowning them personally or through other trusted sources.

I really wouldn't want to see getting a CHL become more difficult, even though my wife and I both did extremely well, as I believe in the 2nd amendment and feel that a basic right shouldn't be licensed (expensively at that). But, I also believe that on airplanes at least, I wouldn't want just anyone whipping out their concealed weapon and throwing lead around unless they were far more trained than I, even moreso on the plane's workings perhaps, as Murphy is always around. A rock and a hard place.

G.C.Montgomery · Post by **G.C.Montgomery** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:54 pm

austin wrote:I was mistaken for a FAM by a flight crew a few weeks ago, so I am not so sure they are easy to pick out.

Two six foot lengths of CAT5 cable are almost unbeatable during an in-flight emergency and anyone can carry them aboard. I keep mine in my laptop case and then transfer them to my jacket when I put my case under the seat in front of me.

You mean I'm not the only techie sneaking implements on board?! I took lessons from the mom of a childhood friend. She beat my friend and his siblings with AC extension cords. What can I say?...They had hard heads. Anyway, while that may have been considered abuse, I'm not concerned about any complaining that I abused a terrorist if there is no FAM onboard. So, I've been using standard six foot AC power cables...Heavier cable than CAT5 with slightly weighted ends that double as brutal impact devices and cutting heads. Really does sound like the old time bull whips from the movies.

gigag04 · Post by **gigag04** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:06 pm

I feel like I should comment since I started this post, but everything I want to say has been said.

TXI, LT, and some others sum up what I feel (as usual).

Thanks guys.

-nick

longtooth · Post by **longtooth** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:07 pm

Thanks guys. I learn something every day from someone. I dont fly but that will work in any posted place too.

Whats that & why do you have it?

ooops officer, forgot to take it out of my 5.11 vest pocket.

KBCraig · Post by **KBCraig** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:50 pm

sparx wrote:I too have seen some CHLs that I wouldn't want to see using their weapon on any plane I was on.

As have I, along with a sizable number of LEOs and military.

But I don't want to stop them from carrying. Not even on an airplane.

As being in a plane in the air puts us in a situation where we can't get up and leave at will,

The plane is no different from many (perhaps most) office or classroom hostage situations: no way out until the situation with the BG is resolved.

I do feel that extra precautions should be taken, but that puts us in a situation of setting aside our rights if we want to fly.

I resolve to never be "understanding" about it when rights are limited or set aside.

When you are "understanding" about it because of concern about how others might perform, you're advancing the exact same argument used to restrict carrying in schools, churches, hospitals, bars, movie theaters, liquor stores, public gatherings or performances, restaurants where alcohol is served, government buildings, parades, parks... the list goes on. (Not all of those are off-limits in Texas, but they're all off-limits in some states.)

Every case of restricted carry starts with people nodding their heads and "understanding" how it might be a problem if some worst-case individual reacted poorly.

Kevin

phddan · Post by **phddan** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:09 pm

Well, I am firmly in the camp of being able to carry anywhere, except if I am in jail

Since I'm not a politician or arm of the law, there aint nobody reasponsible for my protection except me!

Dan

40FIVER · Post by **40FIVER** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:06 pm

I've patiently read through all of the posts on this thread and there are excellent arguments both ways. But when the dust settles, KBCraig has stated the more important issue. Once you start giving in to the "more experienced", "better trained" mentality, before you know it, the government decides they are the only ones who can provide that and we lose our rights.

I don't want to be on a plane with some idiot CHLer who only shoots his gun when renewing his license, but I make that type of choice everyday when I leave my house. In reality, there are probably more idiot CHLers out there in the world than the dedicated CHLers who try to train and become better. And being in a stop & rob with one can get you just as dead.

Charlie

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:45 pm

sparx wrote:(using common sense or course... if there's no way out, we'll both go down fighting... we hope).

However, we also know that there are many CHL holders out there as well that are FAR more experienced and skillful with weapons, self defence and personal protection that we are, or will likely become. To these people I tip my hat, and wouldn't mind seeing some of them armed on a plane. Unfortunately at this point there's no way to differentiate between them and another CHL holder other than knowning them personally or through other trusted sources.

If there is a category where someone could fall into that agrees that you should be able to carry where and when you want, and understanding that it is very unlikely that you as a CHL holder would be in a situation like an inflight terrorist or other criminal activity...I just don't see it happening...

Remember we are not licenced or commissioned to act upon a threat like that, and even though there are some very qualified, and skilled individuals who have commented on this issue, I am still not convinced that it is something anyone who is not a FAM or a FDO should take on as a responsibility...

Now, I would rather focus on the issue that it shouldn't be an issue if we wish to (carry) fly with, pack in our checked bags, or on a carry-on bag, a firearm...Convenience being the key issue, and that since it seems to be the same old ninny-state issue about our RKBA in this entire country...

That seems to me to be more of what we should be focusing on...And not what we certainly would do in the case of a hijacking, and how we would respond in a situation like that...Whether we are armed or not...

I do understand that the physics and engineering risks and realities of discharging a firearm in a cabin environment, minus all the exciting Hollywood depictions of explosive decompressions and structural failures of aircraft are in reality a myth...

You can certainly start problems if you miss the BG's, but I just can't see where you can even begin to believe any engagement in an environment like that going anywhere near where someone could foresee...

I dunno...I'm not going to delete my ramblings because I believe the focus of this thread should be elsewhere, and I want to get back to the Cowboy game...

Be back later...

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:53 am

Liberty wrote:
austin wrote:I was mistaken for a FAM by a flight crew a few weeks ago, so I am not so sure they are easy to pick out.

Two six foot lengths of CAT5 cable are almost unbeatable during an in-flight emergency and anyone can carry them aboard. I keep mine in my laptop case and then transfer them to my jacket when I put my case under the seat in front of me.
The flight Crew may not have been playing as close attention as a determined terrorist. The goal of the terorist will be to neutralize any potential resistance. They won't worry about false positives. As long as they get any potential FAMs first.

Edited: because it was confusing wrong, and just plane screwed up

Experience has shown that potential terrorists do not operate this way. They have NEVER tried to take out other potential threats before beginning their assault in airplanes.

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:58 am

40FIVER wrote:I've patiently read through all of the posts on this thread and there are excellent arguments both ways. But when the dust settles, KBCraig has stated the more important issue. Once you start giving in to the "more experienced", "better trained" mentality, before you know it, the government decides they are the only ones who can provide that and we lose our rights.

I don't want to be on a plane with some idiot CHLer who only shoots his gun when renewing his license, but I make that type of choice everyday when I leave my house. In reality, there are probably more idiot CHLers out there in the world than the dedicated CHLers who try to train and become better. And being in a stop & rob with one can get you just as dead.

Charlie

I can leave a Stop & Rob. The potential area of fire for a Stop & Rob is 360 degrees. On a tube (airplane) that FOF is MUCH smaller.

Unlike some of you, I am not afraid of the government. I don't just sit around and ignore everything they do either. Only allowing LE to be armed on aircraft is not encroaching on your "rights" at all.

lrb111 · Post by **lrb111** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:10 am

Anyone guaranteeing a LEO or FAM is going to be on your flight?

Didn't think so...