Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pilots Refused Right to Keep Guns in Cockpit, Mr. President, Fire this Incompetent Today
Cato Institute ^ | 5/22/02 | Unknown

Posted on 05/22/2002 9:11:50 AM PDT by B. A. Conservative

House, Senate Agree on Bioterror Legislation Pilots Refused Right to Keep Guns in Cockpit O'Neill, Bono Tour Africa, Speak on Development

House, Senate Agree on Bioterror Legislation House and Senate negotiators agreed yesterday on the final version of legislation meant to ensure a sustained, comprehensive effort to shore up the nation's defenses against a bioterror attack, according to The Washington Post.

The bill, likely to win swift approval from Congress and prompt signature by President Bush, includes provisions calling for the stockpiling of drugs and vaccines and other initiatives to help prevent, detect and treat terrorism-related health threats.

In "America Is Not Prepared for Bioterrorism -- And Here's Why," Veronique de Rugy writes, "The administration should make the smallpox vaccine available to the public immediately. After being apprised of the risk of vaccination, people should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to be inoculated with the vaccine."

De Rugy is the coauthor of the Cato study, "Responding to the Threat of Smallpox Bioterrorism," in which she and Charles V. Peña argue that an ounce of prevention in the form of a partially vaccinated population against smallpox will be more effective -- both in deterring and responding to an attack -- than leaving the American public unprotected and completely at risk.

Pilots Refused Right to Keep Guns in Cockpit Airline pilots may not carry guns, the government said yesterday, rejecting the demands of thousands of pilots who petitioned for the right to keep firearms in the cockpit as a last line of defense against hijackers, according to The Washington Post.

Transportation Security Administration Director John W. Magaw told the Senate that it is more important to keep pilots focused on flying their planes and that other steps are being taken to protect them.

Magaw said he is still considering proposals to let pilots and crew members carry nonlethal weapons such as stun guns or collapsible metal batons.

Members of Congress immediately vowed to fight the agency's decision with legislation permitting guns in cockpits.

Law-enforcement officers can't be everywhere, but an armed, trained citizenry can be. That's why pilots, flight attendants, and even trained passengers should be allowed to carry arms onboard aircraft if they want to, says Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies Robert Levy in "Invitation To Terror: This Plane Is A Gun-Free Zone."


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; commonsense; libertarians; nra; secondamendment; veroniquederugy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
Not only should pilots be armed, but the unconstitutional restraints on passengers should be removed immediately.

Mr. President, what the government is doing in airline safety on your watch is unconscionable. The Second Amendment is explicit, "..the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The words except when flying on commerical airlines does not appear anywhere in this document. You are violating the oath you took to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Mr. President, if you do not reconsider your position on airline safety immediately, I hope the House of Representatives will move with immediate dispatch to Impeach and remove you from office because of your transgressions against the Constitution.

1 posted on 05/22/2002 9:11:51 AM PDT by B. A. Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Terrorists arround the world are laughing their asses off....no profiling.. no guns for pilots.
no real immigration restraints...sheesh
2 posted on 05/22/2002 9:17:44 AM PDT by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The United States Government response to stop terrorism...

Explicitly eliminate the ability for the good guys to carry protection for use when the bad guys attack...

Explicitly in the place where the terrorism actually occurred... And could very well occur again...

Ask yourself this:

If the government actually was playing for the other side, (and therefore wanted to make it easier for terrorists), how would their actions have been any different from what they actually did???

Total elimination of the ability of the innocent to protect their one and only lives...

3 posted on 05/22/2002 9:21:04 AM PDT by Ferris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: joesnuffy
Worldwide Memo To All Terrorists

We are begging you... Pleeeeaze come and attack us. Our government is daily coming up with new ways to make your job easier. Pleeeeaze???

5 posted on 05/22/2002 9:26:59 AM PDT by upchuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Mr. President, if you do not reconsider your position on airline safety immediately, I hope the House of Representatives will move with immediate dispatch to Impeach and remove you from office because of your transgressions against the Constitution.

I want properly trained pilots, be given the okay to carry firearms on plane flights and I want the Bush administration to support such an approach. But how the feds unwillingness, to agree to this action, leads to the House impeaching President Bush is beyond the pale. There is nothing, ansolutely nothing, in the law or the Cosntitution, that would authorize such an outrageous process to occur.

Frankly, I think this is irrational thinking and inflammatory rhetoric that has no basis in fact. If you've got a good explanation, that shows some legal precedent and isn't just more incoherent rantings, give it to us.

6 posted on 05/22/2002 9:28:54 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Transportation Security Administration Director John W. Magaw is a former ATF agent of course he doesn't want anyone to be armed. He also seems to think airliners can manuver like jet fighters also. He's watched Airplane too many times.
7 posted on 05/22/2002 9:31:01 AM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
So what part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand. Pilots and passengers are allowed to carry. And it does not even have to be concealed.

Read the patriot act if you can stomach it.

Lot of treason going on in the marble halls of Washington these days.

8 posted on 05/22/2002 9:34:04 AM PDT by eFudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: Reagan Man
"If I may say so,the President has little real power. He is mired by baseless accusations of corruption-the Democrats are incharge now."
10 posted on 05/22/2002 9:41:28 AM PDT by Senator_Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: eFudd
No one is having their individual right to carry a firearm infringed upon.

The airline industry is a private enterprise and the federal government has no right interferring in their internal business operations. If airline conpanies, want to restrict what a customer carries onto one off their planes, thats their own business. The Constitution says nothing about the rights of the people, coming before the rights of private businesses. The same applies to ballparks, football stadiums, indoor arenas, shopping malls, bars/saloons, or anyother privately owned enterprise.

I personally support the 2nd amendment and have a concealed carry permit, but these extreme reactionary absolutism is being carried too far.

Btw, the Patriot Act is proper law under the current state of national emergency and military conflict.

You're all just pissing in the wind.

11 posted on 05/22/2002 9:43:37 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
The terroroists are right. Our leaders are weak willed and more interested in posturing than solving problems.
12 posted on 05/22/2002 9:46:48 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
There ARE federal laws against carrying on an airliner. Those laws ARE unconstitutional.

Why is where I piss any of your business?

13 posted on 05/22/2002 9:47:38 AM PDT by eFudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Transportation Security Administration Director John W. Magaw told the Senate that it is more important to keep pilots focused on flying their planes and that other steps are being taken to protect them.

What an idiotic statement. Most of these pilots are ex-military. They commonly carry a sidearm with them on missions. Somehow they manage to remain focused on performing violent combat maneuvers while carrying a sidearm, but they can't remain focused on flying a commerial plane if they are carrying?

14 posted on 05/22/2002 9:52:40 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Guns for pilots would serve only to remedy old school hijackings. The strategy of telling pilots to fly the plane and allow every single passenger to be killed is absolutely correct. Even if 95% of the time a pilot with a gun could leave the cockpit and subdue hijackers, the 5% risk of putting a hijacker in the cockpit is too risky.

The pilots have a 2nd Amendment right to carry a gun, but they don't have any Constitutional right to fly. They can choose.

15 posted on 05/22/2002 9:57:14 AM PDT by Kaisersrsic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eFudd
Why is where I piss any of your business?

You can piss anywhere you want, I could care less. But when you piss in the wind and blow it in my face, I'm gonna speak up. Part of living in our free and open society, is a constitutional right to carry a firearm. I've already explained to you, that doesn't apply to privately owned businesses. The Constitution doesn't give you the right to do anything you want. We live in an orderly society that is based on the rule of law. This isn't the old west and you ain't some cowboy gunslinger. American's don't support chaos and anarchy.

16 posted on 05/22/2002 9:57:47 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
I saw former ATF agent Magaw on a press conference and he said the cockpit doors have not been reinforced. That's what he said in September. What has he been doing all this time? Isn't it possible to overlay those doors with ballistic kevlar for protection? That would be like fiberglassing a boat. It would take a day. In government, incompetence is a lifestyle.
17 posted on 05/22/2002 9:59:06 AM PDT by henderson field
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
So, if the airlines said "No problem" for pilots to carry you think that's okay and legal right?
18 posted on 05/22/2002 10:02:58 AM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: henderson field
Well I see another person is saying that airlines are private business or industry. The 2nd doesn't apply there. Well then why should the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT have say IF the pilots are armed or not? If the poster believes his own words then the airlines alone should have the legal authority to tell their pilots to arm themselves. Somehow I think they are being REGULATED. Including the regulations that will stall having the doors put on for the next 10 years.
19 posted on 05/22/2002 10:04:32 AM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Transportation Security Administration Director John W. Magaw is a former ATF agent ...

Magaw works for Sec. Transportation Norman Mineta, a Clinton Democrat holdover from the last administration. I have said this many times: Bush's failure to purge his administration of the Clinton 5th column, will cost him a second term. These holdovers are working tirelessly to bring him down.

20 posted on 05/22/2002 10:05:14 AM PDT by bimbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson