Tyler Stembridge
Steve Stewart
English 1101
November 17, 2016
Is There a Need in This World for Armed Airline Pilots or Not?
In today’s world, most people have vivid and detailed thoughts when it comes to the dangers of flying on commercial airlines. The events of 9/11 will continue to flow through the minds of people for eternity. A great debate has begun in regards to the airline pilots being allowed to carry weapons on board the aircraft in which they control. Questions were asked from both sides of the debate in hopes of determining the safest options for passengers and the airline companies. One can only ponder the thought of “what could have been” if the pilots during the 9/11 attacks had weapons with them. At the same …show more content…
(Aviation) This screening process uses scanners and metal detectors in an attempt to eliminate any possible weapon from being brought aboard an aircraft. While security has become better and more proactive, nothing in this world is one hundred percent accurate. There will still always be the possibility of a weapon finding its way on board an aircraft. The screening process has created a dangerous situation for airlines due to the fact that the terrorist knows that there will be no weapons on board. If a terrorist is able to sneak a weapon on board of an aircraft, they know they will have complete control over the plane. (Aviation) Many airlines pilots believe that the public and terrorists knowing that the pilots are armed will make the airlines safer thus creating a higher demand for passengers. (Scott) Just arming the pilots alone would not create a safer environment for travel, training the pilots to handle such situations would also give great concern to any potential terrorist from attempting to hijack an …show more content…
We have all seen the countless movies where someone fires a weapon and the bullet pierces the outer skin of the aircraft essentially sucking all the passengers out to ultimately fall to their deaths. The aircraft manufactures insist that these results are mostly Hollywood special effects and are highly unlikely actually to happen. (West) If these highly dangerous results were a reality, why would air marshals be put on planes? Wouldn’t the same result happen if an air marshal fires a weapon? There are some alternative weapons that would potentially be used to subdue any hijacker. This type of weapon is considered as a type of stun-gun. A stun-gun can be used in two different ways. There are the kinds that the user has to hold against an attacker while electricity is pushed through the attacker’s body or, the kind which shoots darts out while pushing electricity through an attacker’s body. (Journal) This type of weapon would prevent the misfiring of a gun or the potential for a stray bullet hitting an innocent passenger. There are two major problems with the use of this type of weapon by airline pilots. First, the airline pilot would have to get incredibly close to the attacker to deploy the weapon. Secondly, this type of weapon is only good to be used when there is only
Steve Stewart
English 1101
November 17, 2016
Is There a Need in This World for Armed Airline Pilots or Not?
In today’s world, most people have vivid and detailed thoughts when it comes to the dangers of flying on commercial airlines. The events of 9/11 will continue to flow through the minds of people for eternity. A great debate has begun in regards to the airline pilots being allowed to carry weapons on board the aircraft in which they control. Questions were asked from both sides of the debate in hopes of determining the safest options for passengers and the airline companies. One can only ponder the thought of “what could have been” if the pilots during the 9/11 attacks had weapons with them. At the same …show more content…
(Aviation) This screening process uses scanners and metal detectors in an attempt to eliminate any possible weapon from being brought aboard an aircraft. While security has become better and more proactive, nothing in this world is one hundred percent accurate. There will still always be the possibility of a weapon finding its way on board an aircraft. The screening process has created a dangerous situation for airlines due to the fact that the terrorist knows that there will be no weapons on board. If a terrorist is able to sneak a weapon on board of an aircraft, they know they will have complete control over the plane. (Aviation) Many airlines pilots believe that the public and terrorists knowing that the pilots are armed will make the airlines safer thus creating a higher demand for passengers. (Scott) Just arming the pilots alone would not create a safer environment for travel, training the pilots to handle such situations would also give great concern to any potential terrorist from attempting to hijack an …show more content…
We have all seen the countless movies where someone fires a weapon and the bullet pierces the outer skin of the aircraft essentially sucking all the passengers out to ultimately fall to their deaths. The aircraft manufactures insist that these results are mostly Hollywood special effects and are highly unlikely actually to happen. (West) If these highly dangerous results were a reality, why would air marshals be put on planes? Wouldn’t the same result happen if an air marshal fires a weapon? There are some alternative weapons that would potentially be used to subdue any hijacker. This type of weapon is considered as a type of stun-gun. A stun-gun can be used in two different ways. There are the kinds that the user has to hold against an attacker while electricity is pushed through the attacker’s body or, the kind which shoots darts out while pushing electricity through an attacker’s body. (Journal) This type of weapon would prevent the misfiring of a gun or the potential for a stray bullet hitting an innocent passenger. There are two major problems with the use of this type of weapon by airline pilots. First, the airline pilot would have to get incredibly close to the attacker to deploy the weapon. Secondly, this type of weapon is only good to be used when there is only