Guns in Airline Cockpits

[GreenRado]

I'll start this one off.  Yes, I think the pilot/crew should be able to protect themselves and their passengers.  But I do wonder how "safe" it is for the plane and occupants with bullets flying around, especially when the plane is at explosive decompression altitudes?

 

Maybe guns w/ a combo safe door and tamper/bullet proof camera surveillance - I say, if someone breaks into the cockpit, the co-pilot blows his terrorist a$$ to he**   :exclaim:

[pacodiablo]

i think they should have tazers (sp?) as a primary weapon and guns in lockboxes as a last resort

[kennedycpa]

Why would you not want them to have guns as the last line of defense?  Every time you get on a plane you are putting you life in the pilots hands, so we should give him whatever he needs to keep control of the plane.

 

I have seen it stated many time that it is totally fake in the movies when a bullet hole causes massive damage to a plane like a giant hole opening up and sucking people out.  The compressors that provide proper compression on a plane are designed to maintain compression with a hole in the plane - a hole bigger than a bullet would make.

 

I is thought that the flight that was brought down by the passengers on 9/11 was done so because the pilots were already dead.  Had there been a gun in the cockpit perhaps things would have been different and those heroic people would not have had to sacrific themselves to save possibly thousands more.

 

Why a tazer instead of a gun?  How many times can you fire a tazer, what happens if you miss, is that it.  They only work at very close range right?  So if you missed you would have to get to the box, unlock it, and get the gun all before the terrorist stops you.  

 

I say a gun with each of the cockpit crew and the door sealed.  The crew can not open the door no matter what is happening on the other side.  The guns would be used if the terrorist some how got the door opened.  A person standing the the small door way would be an easy target to hit.

[pacodiablo]

a tazer would disorient a terrorist enough to allow him to be restrained.  a gun shot could cause people to panic putting everyone in an even worse situation.  and say that gun ended up in the terrorist's hands?

[kennedycpa]

If the door to the cockpit is locked and reinforced, then the terrorists are trying to get the door opened and the passengers on the plane probably already know what is going on and are in a state of panic, with or without the sound of gun shots.  The only way the gun would fall into the wrong hands is if they get the door open.  If they get the door opened to the un(or under)armed flight crew, its all over, you are no longer a passenger on a plane, now you are riding on a missle with a psyco in control that will kill himself in order to kill you, the rest of the people on the plane, and the people in what ever they might choose to crash into.

 

The governments answer is to not let the pilots have the opportunity to stop the hi-jackers.  They would rather just have some poor fighter pilot shoot down the plane.  If it is going to come to that why not let the pilots have a chance first.

 

I just don't think a tazer is a sufficient weapon against multiple bad guys.

[chevy4x4trucks]

I saw some special reports that they do have guns w/ "safety" bullets that don't bust the glass in the airlines so loss of cabin pressure wouldn't be an issue.  But, then you have to worry about a few hundred passengers in a very confined space and the chance for a bad shot or a richochet killing an innocent person are pretty high.  But, then you also have to figure that if there's already guns on the plane it would make the job for terrorists easier, since they could just find a way to get a hold of one of them.

 

An idea that I heard which sounded pretty cool was have sleep gas rigged in the planes vents, in case of a problem the pilots just flip a switch and knock everyone out for a little while then they can safely land w/o any loss of life.

 

These are just ideas though.  I really think that right now you'd have a lot of problems if you wanted to hijack a plane.  IMO after the events of 9-11 the other passengers on the plane wouldn't be bullied around and would do there part and take out any terrorists, I know I would.

[pacodiablo]

I saw some special reports that they do have guns w/ "safety" bullets that don't bust the glass in the airlines so loss of cabin pressure wouldn't be an issue.  But, then you have to worry about a few hundred passengers in a very confined space and the chance for a bad shot or a richochet killing an innocent person are pretty high.  But, then you also have to figure that if there's already guns on the plane it would make the job for terrorists easier, since they could just find a way to get a hold of one of them.

exactly.  they should try to use a tazer/gas/ whatever first then use the gun.  they will not be defenseless, and they will not accidently harm any passengers.  the bullet may not cause a loss of pressure, but it can still cause serious damage to the plane.  also if the people are already panicked and they hear a gun shot and they do not know who/where it is coming from they will get even more upset.  guns are extremely powerful and should only be used if they are absolutely needed.  if a tazer can do the job, use a tazer

 

i like the gas idea

[RyanbabZ71]

I say No.  Teach em all hand to hand combat

 

Kick their but then let all the passengers get in on it

[chevy4x4trucks]

I say No.  Teach em all hand to hand combat

it's a good idea, but I'm a pretty quick guy, but a bullet will still outrun me.  if the terrorists have a weapon whether it be a gun or even a knife you'd have to be very well trained to take it from them in the whole 3' of aisle space on most airplanes.  IMO, locking the doors to the cockpit is the best plan, no one aside from the pilots need to be in there and a simple metal bar and the hinges being on the inside will keep anyone out.

 

But, let's not forget that good security is the best way to keep this from happening.  I really don't mind a big security hassle when going to fly, I mean, you're going a few hundred miles an hour 30,000 feet above the ground, if something happens there isn't a lot you can do.  I was going through security in philedelphia and I took out my wallet, key's, phone, sunglasses, etc... and went through the metal detector.  Well, I put my stuff back in my pocket and realized that I still had my watch on.  Kind of odd that such a big piece of metal didn't set it off.  But, I suppose if you really want to smuggle something aboard you can always find a way to do it.

[Torque Junkie]

If someone's HIJACKING a plane they obviuosly have their own weapon, so a weapon for the unarmed pilot to fight back and save their lives and the lives of the hundreds of passengers is a bad thing how?

 

Granted, at the sound of a gunshot would cause panic on board, but less panic than the sight of a missle heading towards the plane when the F-16's that are following it realize it's heading for the White House.    And silencers aren't a bad idea either, if the sound of a gunshot is the issue.

 

Some people are worried that a stray bullet will hit a passenger?  Oh, and a missile sent to take the plane to the ground wouldn't hurt a passenger or two?

 

And about stray bullets causing holes that suck people out like in the movies?  Yeah, if they're using an AK-47 maybe.   A 9mm has very little penetration.  In fact, thats why SWAT teams use the MP5, becuase the 9mm cartirdge will not penetrate the thin walls of motels, trailer houses, etc.  But a 9mm will surely stop a man.

 

IMO, if the pilots had the means and training to use lethal force to subdue a threat, 9/11 wouldn't have ever happened.  The liberal media makes guns out to be such bad things, when in fact, in the right hands, they can save more lives then they take in the hands of criminals & thugs.

 

*lock & load*  Bring it on you terrorist b*stards

 

-Mike

[pacodiablo]

if they have guns, use a gun.  if they have box cutters and plastic knives you can probably get away with using a tazer.

 

personally id rater beat the $hit out of them instead of giving them a quick painless death.

[gandolphxx]

Give them guns and training and stop putzing around with this "security guard" 6.50 an hour crap.

[Tobes]

you know.....we already have guns on military planes....Ever since sept 11 we always arm at least three crewmembers with hollowpoints.  This way the bullet probably will not exit the plane.  Besides they would do some damage to the perp....

 

I bet someone will think twice about doing something on a plane if they knew that the crew was armed and allowed to shoot.  With proper training I see no problem in arming crewmembers......my two cents

[Z71GUY]

I say yes without a doubt.  The main reason most people do not want pilots armed is because they dont trust them & think it will be a safty hazzard.  Well, these people better wake up....if a plane is every to be hijacked again & heads towards a building...our military WILL shoot it down now.  All they have to do is place these guns in secure lock boxes (they should never leave once placed in the plane) in the cockpit.

 

The govt says they dont want them armed because of safety risks...well, that does not make sense because if it is hijacked...the govt wants it shot down.... make sense?  not to me.

[CityTruck]

I'd have to say "No" to the gun idea.  There are probably quite a few pilots that probably could use one effectively and safely, but there are many that couldn't.  For the ones that couldn't , it's just as likely that the 'would be' terrorists would use their own guns agains them (don't even have to bother bringing any themselves).  I think the solution is better screening of passengers and securing the cockpit.  If they keep weapons off the planes and make the cockpits secure than 9-11 couldn't happen again.  There is no "bulletproof" plan.  You take a risk every day just by existing, but I think the above is reasonable.

Now...  if I could design a plane...

The cockpit entry would be staged.  You enter a pre-cockpit room (that is fully securable) before entering the cockpit (which is also fully securable).  This would allow a pilot to enter the cabin area without leaving the cockpit unsecure.  Also, I like the sleeping gas idea.  You'd have to get every passenger to sign a waiver before every flight, but I'd be willing to sign it.  The Dual stage entry to the cockpit would also make it easier to ensure none of the gas made it to the pilots.  (I believe cockpits in todays larger aircraft already have their own seperate environmental recirculation systems).  This, of course, would be too expensive to implement.

Like I said above, it the cockpit is secure, let them try to take on a plane full of Americans with a box cutter.