TexasCHLforum.com

I was making conversation today with a pilot on our shuttle to the airport from the parking lot where we park.

I mentioned the FDO or whatever it's called - federal flight deck officer program, where they arm pilots. He seemed intentionally vague but he said that a great many of airline pilots had pursued that qualification and that they were a majority.

I smiled and told him I had a CHL and carried alot and that I thought that them arming themselves was a great thing. I also got a strong vibe that he had done it, but didn't/coudln't divulge that info.

This is just FYI.

-nick

Thats great...

Even though it only took about 5 years to get to the point where you could have a vague conversation with a flight deck crewman about the subject...

I always figured it be something you'd want to shout from the mountain tops about our program that you just never know who might be participating in the program, as a deterrent to anyone desiring to try to take an aircraft again...

I personally thought that it should have been manditory for one person on the flight deck team be the FDO on all domestic and international flights inbound and outbound...

Then let the nervous ninnies cry all they want about that...

But thats just my opinion...

They should be allowed to carry and the doors to the cockpit
should be bullit proof with portholes to shoot from.

My solution would be to completely sever the cockpit from the rest of the plane. A solid sheet of 1in thick steel should be inserted(like a disk) through the front of the plane to replace the current cockpit portal and the pilots enter through a separate side entrance door into the cockpit. That way, regardless of the events that take place in the cabin, no one could EVER take over that plane.

Until this becomes logistically possible, arming the flight crew is a more than acceptable measure.

kauboy wrote:My solution would be to completely sever the cockpit from the rest of the plane.

The pilots do like to go to the bathroom, eat, and flirt with the flight attendants.

The threat is not hijacking now. It's blowing up the plane.

- Jim

I think they should let CHL holders like ourselves wear our handguns on the plane. Just as it is in the mall, you never know who might be packing.

We still have the treat of someone blowing up the plane, but at least we've got a decent deterrent/response to hijacking.

But never mind. This would make way too much sense.

We should just stick with being limited to 3 oz. of toothpaste or face the gestapo.

Venus Pax wrote:I think they should let CHL holders like ourselves wear our handguns on the plane. Just as it is in the mall, you never know who might be packing.

We still have the treat of someone blowing up the plane, but at least we've got a decent deterrent/response to hijacking.

But never mind. This would make way too much sense.

We should just stick with being limited to 3 oz. of toothpaste or face the gestapo.

I actually think that's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Anyone with a clean background can get a CHL. And just because your background is clean, doesn't mean you aren't on your own jihad. The fact of the matter is that we have to, unfortunately, rely on the men and woman who serve us in our airports to be diligent.

Just because you can get a CHL DOES NOT mean you are a good person. A CHL is not a badge of sanity, or moral aptitude. It only means you have a clean background, a few extra bucks and some patience.

TheRising wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I think they should let CHL holders like ourselves wear our handguns on the plane. Just as it is in the mall, you never know who might be packing.

We still have the treat of someone blowing up the plane, but at least we've got a decent deterrent/response to hijacking.

But never mind. This would make way too much sense.

We should just stick with being limited to 3 oz. of toothpaste or face the gestapo.

I actually think that's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Anyone with a clean background can get a CHL. And just because your background is clean, doesn't mean you aren't on your own jihad. The fact of the matter is that we have to, unfortunately, rely on the men and woman who serve us in our airports to be diligent.

Just because you can get a CHL DOES NOT mean you are a good person. A CHL is not a badge of sanity, or moral aptitude. It only means you have a clean background, a few extra bucks and some patience.

+1 - I made this comment on the other thread that went this direction, so hopefully we don't have to revisit it...BUT

CHL means you can carry, not that you can shoot. I don't want some of the CHL's that I have seen playing cowboy action shooting at some potential terrorists with a few hundred "innocents" around.

I more or less trust the sterility of the airports...I go through security everyday on the way to work. Plus, you would have to be out of your mind to try and take a plane now - remember the guy trying to blow up his shoes? There will be more of that to come, regardless of what the hijacker(s) arm themselves with. Good ol' beatdown.

-nick

TheRising wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I think they should let CHL holders like ourselves wear our handguns on the plane.

I actually think that's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

gigag04 wrote:+1 ...
CHL means you can carry, not that you can shoot. I don't want some of the CHL's that I have seen playing cowboy action shooting at some potential terrorists with a few hundred "innocents" around.

I hope you both realize that your arguments against carrying on planes, are exactly the same arguments made against legal concealed carry in public places.

gigag04 wrote:I more or less trust the sterility of the airports...

That's a mistake that will prove tragic someday. Probably not for you, but for at least one planeload of people, somewhere, who feel the same way.

gigag04 wrote:Plus, you would have to be out of your mind to try and take a plane now - remember the guy trying to blow up his shoes?

Here, we agree. I have no intention of flying commercially unless a family emergency demands it.

Oh, okay... I confess: we might fly to Manchester, NH this coming fall, to rent a car and spend a week enjoying foliage season. But I'll be disgruntled about flying, and could very well wind up on the news.

Kevin

KBCraig wrote:
Oh, okay... I confess: we might fly to Manchester, NH this coming fall, to rent a car and spend a week enjoying foliage season. But I'll be disgruntled about flying, and could very well wind up on the news.

Kevin

Security is almost always another term for taking away freedom. Flying used to be a very pleasant experiance. Now its a similar experience to visiting a prison. The biggest difference being that the folks running the prisons are friendlier.

In the meantime fewer of us are willing to fly, and more airlines are facing bankrupcy. And all the security still has the gangs stealing our luggage and trashing them into the dumpsters.

Yup I don't fly any more if I can help it. I know longer fly to Florida or Arizona anymore I just drive.

TheRising wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I think they should let CHL holders like ourselves wear our handguns on the plane. Just as it is in the mall, you never know who might be packing.

We still have the treat of someone blowing up the plane, but at least we've got a decent deterrent/response to hijacking.

But never mind. This would make way too much sense.

We should just stick with being limited to 3 oz. of toothpaste or face the gestapo.

I actually think that's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Anyone with a clean background can get a CHL. And just because your background is clean, doesn't mean you aren't on your own jihad. The fact of the matter is that we have to, unfortunately, rely on the men and woman who serve us in our airports to be diligent.

Just because you can get a CHL DOES NOT mean you are a good person. A CHL is not a badge of sanity, or moral aptitude. It only means you have a clean background, a few extra bucks and some patience.

The FAM (Federal Air Marshall's)and I assume the pilots carry some kind of "special" load in their weapons. It's some kind of round that supposedly will not pierce the body of the plane, causing loss of cabin pressure. I know nothing about bullets and very little about the physics behind them so I'm not how that works but I've seen that reported and read in various places.

Now, how do you assure that all passengers that carry concealed have the same ammo that FAM's carry?

Furthermore the FAM's have some of the stringent weapons qualifications due to the fact that should they have to engage a target they are going to have to do it in a space no wider then about 10ft wide and a couple of hundred feet long. Not to mention all the innocent bystanders.

Bottom-line, the idea of allowing the public to fly armed is absurd. Not to mention the laws one would break after flying from say DFW to Chicago, or DC, or any other anti-gun region of the country that does not support right to carry. Logistically this is absurd and logically it's absurd. But has with most of my opinions I'm subject to change my mind, tell me why I'm wrong.

Someone probably will. Lets do it w/ thickly padded gloves. All on the board are not as well armorred as others.
This is a good thread guys. Great points on both sides.

Not all that long ago, my ol' lady and I sent her kid up to the Miny Apples to visit her dad.
on the return flight, now mind you this was at DFW, they let MoM and I both go into the secure area so that we could meet the kid at the gate.
I thought this very cool that they let me go with her, as it would have been a rather boring wait, especially since the flight was delayed.
no, I wasn't packing my smoke wagon.

From speaking with both FDO's and FAMs, the ammo they carry is not some magic bullet that won't penetrate the aircraft. It most certainly can.

It has been shown that a bullet hole will not cause a catastrophic loss of cabin pressure.

FDO's carry to protect the flight deck ONLY.

FAM's protect passengers and the aircraft. Part of their training is knowing where the critical electrical, hydraulic and fuel lines run. They also receive extensive CQB firearms training, and in aircraft are probably the most capable shooters there are.

Armed passengers would be a nightmare for a FAM, and in the tight space and critical time restraints on an aircraft at 30,000 feet any passenger producing a gun would most likely become deceased.

txinvestigator wrote:From speaking with both FDO's and FAMs, the ammo they carry is not some magic bullet that won't penetrate the aircraft. It most certainly can.

It has been shown that a bullet hole will not cause a catastrophic loss of cabin pressure.

FDO's carry to protect the flight deck ONLY.

FAM's protect passengers and the aircraft. Part of their training is knowing where the critical electrical, hydraulic and fuel lines run. They also receive extensive CQB firearms training, and in aircraft are probably the most capable shooters there are.

Armed passengers would be a nightmare for a FAM, and in the tight space and critical time restraints on an aircraft at 30,000 feet any passenger producing a gun would most likely become deceased.

Evidently I stand corrected. I just Googled FAM and came across a couple of interesting sites:

http://www.thegunzone.com/fam-lawman/fam-qual.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal

One interesting note from the Wiki site:

"According to an anonymous Air Marshal, they are trained to "shoot to stop", typically firing at the largest part of the body (the chest) and then the head to "incapacitate the nervous system".

Here is the source that Wiki references the above item too, it's about halfway down:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 ... hals_x.htm