Armed and Unharmed “I can’t believe they haven’t instantaneously allowed pilots to defend themselves given the gaps in the current system,” said Representative John L. Mica, Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on aviation (West). He is referring to pilots of commercial airliners defending themselves by use of` weapons; such as firearms. The use of these firearms would be very beneficial to airliners and should have action taken in favor of it. The benefits of allowing pilots to be armed in the cockpit are numerous. It would be helpful in providing a last line of defense and fending against terrorist attacks. The pilots that would wield the weapons would have requirements to keep them, and their passengers,
…show more content…
Terry Price also stated, in reference to the arming of pilots with guns, “Arming pilots is at least a 95% deterrent, if not more. Terrorists won’t attempt an attack that has a high probability of failure (Scott).” This is made obvious when looking at communities where guns have been introduced. There is almost always an immediate decline in crime in those communities. When there are criminals however, they are often stopped by people carrying firearms. It has also been shown that terrorists, and other mass killers, almost always attack unarmed civilians, and stay away from those with guns. This is why arming pilots could be very helpful without others ever being in danger …show more content…
This refers to weapons, which are not firearms, which are capable of disabling attackers without killing them. They are considered to be safer than having firearms aboard the airplane. This assumption is brought on by the notion that if a bullet hits the side of the plane, it will depressurize and tear out the side and suck out passengers to their death. Though this imagery may seem scary, it has been proven false through numerous tests (West). Aside from that however, there were other points brought up about less-than-lethal weapons. There are currently six that are being looked into. They are electric shock, chemical, impact projectile, physical restraint, light, and acoustic. A few of these are still being developed and have yet to be released and ready to use. For those that are available they often present a common problem, which is that they are not permanent. And many of these weapons effects can be altered or resisted making them, at times, useless (Information…). The ALPA (Airline Pilots’ Association) said during one of its filing reports that, “Less-than-lethal weapons are not suited for countering hijackers and terrorists (Scott).” Less-than-lethal weapons will never be as effective as a firearm, and the risk for both is
Terry Price also stated, in reference to the arming of pilots with guns, “Arming pilots is at least a 95% deterrent, if not more. Terrorists won’t attempt an attack that has a high probability of failure (Scott).” This is made obvious when looking at communities where guns have been introduced. There is almost always an immediate decline in crime in those communities. When there are criminals however, they are often stopped by people carrying firearms. It has also been shown that terrorists, and other mass killers, almost always attack unarmed civilians, and stay away from those with guns. This is why arming pilots could be very helpful without others ever being in danger …show more content…
This refers to weapons, which are not firearms, which are capable of disabling attackers without killing them. They are considered to be safer than having firearms aboard the airplane. This assumption is brought on by the notion that if a bullet hits the side of the plane, it will depressurize and tear out the side and suck out passengers to their death. Though this imagery may seem scary, it has been proven false through numerous tests (West). Aside from that however, there were other points brought up about less-than-lethal weapons. There are currently six that are being looked into. They are electric shock, chemical, impact projectile, physical restraint, light, and acoustic. A few of these are still being developed and have yet to be released and ready to use. For those that are available they often present a common problem, which is that they are not permanent. And many of these weapons effects can be altered or resisted making them, at times, useless (Information…). The ALPA (Airline Pilots’ Association) said during one of its filing reports that, “Less-than-lethal weapons are not suited for countering hijackers and terrorists (Scott).” Less-than-lethal weapons will never be as effective as a firearm, and the risk for both is