Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

  • Advertisements

Fight over pilots who want to pack guns

Supporters see it enhancing safety, but critics worry about bullets piercing the fuselage



  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This
  • Permissions

By Alexandra Marks, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor / February 20, 2002

NEW YORK

When an agitated passenger kicked in the cockpit door on a United Airlines flight to Buenos Aires earlier this month, the incident reignited an emotional debate: Should pilots be armed?

Congress voted after the Sept. 11 attacks to allow screened and specially trained pilots to carry a gun. Polls showed Americans were overwhelmingly in favor - by more than 75 percent. Surveys of pilots indicated they were equally enthusiastic.

But lawmakers attached a set of as-yet unmet conditions - including approval from the Department of Transportation and the airlines. That has kept the issue unresolved and simmering behind the scenes.

Now, pilot advocates are intensifying their fight to try to speed the approval process.

They contend, as the last line of defense in the event of another terrorist attack on an airliner, that they should have the resources to protect themselves, their passengers, and their crew. Even without approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) yet, United Airlines will start training its pilots to use stun guns next month.

But opponents are just as passionately concerned that the presence of any firearm in the cockpit could create as many safety and security concerns as it potentially could mitigate.

"When you talk about handguns, it's like talking about abortion: There are some very hard lines that have been drawn in the sand," says United Airlines Capt. Herb Hunter, a spokesman for the Air Line Pilots Association. "But we believe it should be a viable option. When all else fails, the people who are sitting at the controls of the aircraft have to be able to defend those controls."

Before Sept. 11, the prospect of a firearm in the cockpit was almost unthinkable.

Aviation safety experts feared that if a gun went off, it could pierce the fuselage and depressurize the cabin, destroy equipment, or worse, injure an innocent passenger.

Vigilantes in the sky

Those same concerns motivate many of the current opponents, including the Air Transport Association (ATA), the major airlines' trade group.

"It would create a dangerous vigilantism in the sky," says ATA spokesman Michael Wascom. "It just raises too many unknowns."

Mr. Wascom maintains that increased security measures on the ground, the further reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the presence of armed air marshals on selected flights will provide enough security so the pilot can focus on flying the plane, if there is another incident.

Some pilots agree with the ATA, although polls show they are in the minority.

"Arming pilots with weapons of any kind ... creates enormous logistical and security problems, poses a tremendous distraction for pilots to perform the duties they are really trained for, and risks far more in potential injury to personnel and damage to aircraft than would be warranted for deterrence of hijacking," American pilot Gert-Jan Visser wrote to the FAA, which is taking comments on the issue.

Page: 1 | 2 Next Page

  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This
  • Permissions