Meh. The only people who crucify people - like the pilot, in this case - are the People Who Know Everything. There's two flavors of these People Who Know Everything:

1. The Press.

2. The people who say they "own MANY guns."

Neither flavor ever - EVER - knows what really happened, but that'll never stop them from accusing, attacking and crucifying others.

Your pal,
Meat.

The danger in making excuses for this guy, is that you can change the program, but you've not altered the proximate cause, which was operator error. You can have whatever sort of program you want, but unless you fix the problem, you're just addressing the symptom.

Even if they alter the program to be more "friendly" to novice gun operators, it still remains that you're GOING to have accidents (unfamiliar gun owners + guns = trouble) and if you don't address accidents sternly, you're not going to encourage people to pay attention to what the hell they're doing.

It was and still is I'm sure, a standard deal under most commands in Iraq that any AD is an automatic NJP (at the very least) for the operator and some semblence of punishment for the supervisor.

You can slice it, dice it, mix it up all you want. But the bottom line is the operator is responsible for when and where his weapon is discharged.

AMF, no changes to the program should be required. It's 'perfect' as it is written, no need to review the standards or policys concerning this incident. That pilot screwed up, plain and simple, fire his ass, take away his gun, he's an idiot. At least, I'm pretty sure thats what your saying...? The pilots union that called for a review of the gun handling procedures? Well, there just a bunch of pu$$ies I guess...

Wow - I have been gone awhile and I see this argument continues. We should
have the airlines all quit flying - that would eliminate that problem once
and for all. That may not take much time with Aloha and ATA going belly up
in one week - who's next?

...

When I was 9 or 10, I teased my mom about cocking a single shot .22 rifle that happened to be laying in the back seat of a car she borrowed from my young uncle to haul school kids. Later she had my dad check the rifle, which she had carefully placed in a closet. As I watched, he said, "nobody would be that dumb" (a famous saying of his) and promptly shot a hole through the glass window into our garbage can. Even I knew better than to actually cock it let alone pull the trigger. :JEKYLHYDE

When I was 16 I shot a dent towards the bottom of my own passenger door with my buddies .22 revolver. I was in the process of preparing to unload it at the time, while he was driving up beside me. I had been duly warned that, at best, it had a hair trigger or none at all. :rolleyes:

I think the pilots DA autos that have been discussed are considered somewhat safe as long as the hammer is not back. And for quick use, the DA will fire the first shot with a very deliberate trigger pull. Please correct me.

Still, I'm surprised that a round would be carried in the chamber or especially left stored (stowed) like that. I wouldn't do that, at least as having a loaded round in the chamber in an automobile etc. I'd suffer the consequence of having to laborously slide the action to chamber a round before firing ...like I insist upon when hunting. Would that render the weapon an unreasonable disadvantage in defense use? Maybe.

Wayne: As far as having a pilot lose his sanity and come out of the cabin screaming and rambling for God. Well much better that ...than fly us into the ground. And it's true that the world would be safer without any weapons at all. Cain wouldn't have killed Abel.

Actually, I guess I'm a bit more concerned with the pilots that don't risk the full analysis to be authorized as sane enough to carry a weapon. The only really trusted pilot in any case is a pilot certified to be rational in my book. If they can fly safely, they can also shoot safely. Alternatively, the only difference is in the number of victims. What the heck? :confused:

Or, maybe, with more world weapons, that, perhaps foolish, Abel would have been properly armed and we would be talking about the legendary Cain-Abel stand-off to this very day. ;)


...

One recommendation to come out of this is to place a Warning on the gun:

http://www.evilhumor.com/media/files...id_warning.jpg

:JEKYLHYDE

Won't work Ernie. It has to be in at least 3 languages for it to be legal. Besides when I was at my last safety class we had to shoot the way the FBI trains in pitch darkness and some nut shot the tip of his finger off. He was feeling for the end of the barrel to be sure he had the gun pointed away from himself. I was just amazed when he said that, and told him that if he had his finger on the trigger and inside the guard, the gun was not pointing at him unless he turned his hand around and pointed it back. He DID NOT pass nor get a permit.

Ron :LOL:

767, I think that you have been very patient and as informative on this, at least as much as you can be. Thanks for the insight. I still don't like the idea of firearms being on planes, even in the hands of well trained, good guys.

It is my humble opinion that there will never be another plane hi-jacking in North America. If some guy gets up making it look like he may try to hi-jack the plane, every man on that aircraft is going to jump on him and beat the crap out of him as they will believe that they have absolutely nothing to lose by doing so.

Terrorists are going to strike another type of target such as a sports stadium full of fans, a tunnel or a subway full of commuters, a dam with a lot of houses just down stream, etc.

Wayne

Actually a disarmed public is in more danger. Countless times we see these attacks and countless times an armed public could have stopped it.

Who the hell would attempt to hijack a plane full of potentially armed passengers?

9/11 tought one valuable lesson, the government has made us sheep just waiting to be led to slaughter. It's time to take our country back from the politicians and street gangs let alone a few terrorists.

I say no more Mr. Nice Guy...

That's beyond untrue. Public indifference, complacency, lack of patriotism and liberal teachers attempt to make us sheep. The government has very little to do with the equation.

If you want to 'take back' the country you need to have a fair and balanced curriculum taught by educators who don't have tenure, a union or an agenda. Remove the unions, the political perks and the liberals and you'll have your country back.

Your pal,
Meat.

Posted for your interest with no commentary from me. You be the judge. Whoever made this film broke MANY security clearances and security protocols. It certainly wasn't me. This film shows just the tip of the iceberg of what I was alluding to.

http://www.blutube.com/Clip.aspx?key=C62583DE87C4AAF1

Interesting video, certainly appears there needs to be some review of procedures on this matter.

The reasonable side of me understands that, after a 3 or 4 hour flight, the FFDO could be tired and try to do what the operator in the film did....jam it down with unintended consequence. The rational side of me marvels at how anyone, after having just set the padlock in place, could conceivably do something so careless.

However.

That holster design is obscene. A padlock? - beyond stupid.

The problem would not have been the gun(if there was one)-it was would have been the pilot.If there were guns on the planes on 9/11-things would have been VERY different.

False statement.All that matters is training.

767-i was going to ask about the holster design but the video just dropped my jaw.That holster takes stupidity to a whole new level.A Tucson cop dies as a result of a bad holster design.:(



So the idea of a lockbox in the cockpit never occured to these genius'?

That has got to be the most assinine thing I have ever seen.

Agreed.

Typical airline BS.:mad:

Bill,
The holster replaced lockboxes. They were heavy and bulky. Sorry to be so vague - there just isn't a whole lot I am permitted to say. You're all smart guys - you can clearly see what's going on here.

Pat,
It's not the airlines, they have very little to say in this. I believe the DHS would like to see a better solution as well, but their hands are being tied. Write your Congressman. :mad:
That's where the problem is.