Firearm discharges on US Airways flight
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
The whole gun thing is a bit over the top now IMO. Now I'm speaking as a flight attendant who would be locked up in the cabin with a potential terrorist. I'm one who could possibly be killed in the cabin yet I have nothing more than a coffee pot, wine bottle...improvising. Ya get the point. I understand that they wanted the gun as a last defense. Ya know what....if someone is charging that cockpit you can GUARANTEE that more than half the plane would be on top of WHOEVER was trying to muscle their way in. All the while visions of two towers falling and wanting to live most likely vivid in their minds. We don't need GUNS in the cockpit. Get rid of them or I want a pistol for my apron. 
The whole gun thing is a bit over the top now IMO. Now I'm speaking as a flight attendant who would be locked up in the cabin with a potential terrorist. I'm one who could possibly be killed in the cabin yet I have nothing more than a coffee pot, wine bottle...improvising. Ya get the point. I understand that they wanted the gun as a last defense. Ya know what....if someone is charging that cockpit you can GUARANTEE that more than half the plane would be on top of WHOEVER was trying to muscle their way in. All the while visions of two towers falling and wanting to live most likely vivid in their minds. We don't need GUNS in the cockpit. Get rid of them or I want a pistol for my apron.
Ever hear of the word suprise or stunned? There are plenty of videos on the net of many people standing around in shock at some violent or horrifying act and doing nothing. Now if there is plenty of time to digest and think and plan like UA in PA, then the pax will react like you mention, even in seconds. Not much help if all your adversaries need is 1 second. The idea is to prevent a takeover of the aircraft, a last defense layer. I doubt you'd want to be in back wringing your apron for your last 20 minutes of life waiting for the 4 AIM-120's to enter the aft cabin at Mach 4.
signals
Veteran
First let me say that I totally agree with you
Apparently the flying public has taken a UA in PA mentality, because I've read many times of passengers going after a deemed threat moreso than marshals and crew. If TSA doesn't tick you off enough to want to kill somebody...
But I would rather a pilot have a gun rather than using the Archie Bunker principal of giving all the passengers guns as they board the plane and take them back when they exit!
signals
Veteran
The whole gun thing is a bit over the top now IMO. Now I'm speaking as a flight attendant who would be locked up in the cabin with a potential terrorist. I'm one who could possibly be killed in the cabin yet I have nothing more than a coffee pot, wine bottle...improvising. Ya get the point. I understand that they wanted the gun as a last defense. Ya know what....if someone is charging that cockpit you can GUARANTEE that more than half the plane would be on top of WHOEVER was trying to muscle their way in. All the while visions of two towers falling and wanting to live most likely vivid in their minds. We don't need GUNS in the cockpit. Get rid of them or I want a pistol for my apron.
Your security is served!
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
At this day and age I DO NOT believe people would just be paralyzed and stunned if someone was trying to get in the cockpit. Highly unlikely. While I understand the reason behind pilots being allowed to carry a gun I don't think it's necessary. As talked about LONG ago I just don't get the leverage a pilot sitting fwd would have at someone coming after them from behind standing. I just don't feel that it's needed. Just another gun on the airplane and the terrorist would most likely NOT be alone so.....gonna take both out? It's silly. 
At this day and age I DO NOT believe people would just be paralyzed and stunned if someone was trying to get in the cockpit. Highly unlikely. While I understand the reason behind pilots being allowed to carry a gun I don't think it's necessary. As talked about LONG ago I just don't get the leverage a pilot sitting fwd would have at someone coming after them from behind standing. I just don't feel that it's needed. Just another gun on the airplane and the terrorist would most likely NOT be alone so.....gonna take both out? It's silly.
Thanks for the input.
Obvious from two posts that you really don't have a grasp on human behavior in terms of seconds. I have know doubt you or your passengers would react given enough time. The problem is there are still situations that could arise where you don't. We all do it. It's the old saying "did I just see what I think I did?"
No, I guess not since the pilots are issued guns that only fire one shot.
I guess we'll disagree. Just remember, even if they get rid of the guns on the airlines, some of your FO's and CA's might still potentially deal with an airliner problem with 20MM Cannon shells or missiles while on their days off in the Guard/Reserves. Great logic.
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
It's just a gun thing with me. Not gonna change. I don't think pilots should have them. Thats just my opinion along with many, many, many, many flight attendants who are on the UNARMED side of the door. Say as a f/a I get my throat slashed by a possible terrorist.....I don't think a pilot having a gun would do me or anyone else much good. It's just a far stretch overall. I don't like the idea and never will.
It might do some people on the ground some good. Maybe a large crowd of people or those in a prominent building. Maybe the majority of your surviving passengers. It was never going to help those like yourself that would be "made example of" in an attempt to terrorize a cabin. It might help most from a rather ugly last few minutes of flight as they watch helplessly.
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
Wouldn't we be shot down anyway? I mean really. Again...don't like guns and never will. pointless.
I am absolutely just stunned at what I have been reading. Has anyone read the 9-11 Commission Report? Shortly after September 11, it was reported that a flight attendant was gutted by a terrorist at the front of the cabin on one of the flights to keep the pax under control. On three of the flights, flight attendants were killed. Do you really think anyone would be able to jump a terrorist after seeing your coworker slit from stomach to throat and dropped in a bloody heap? Weapons get through our wonderful TSA all the time. Just read the stats. And on the flight that crashed in Pa, the flight attendants were boiling water to use against the terrorists. All I can say is, if that is what you want your last line of defense to be, good luck. I just hope I am not on your flight.
Not if an armed pilot was able to delay a cockpit attack long enough to land. Maybe 1 attacker loses, maybe a group succeeds, a weapon is definately not a perfect lightsabre.
Sacrificing others for a political view is not uncommon when it comes to guns. More than a few think that way.
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
Who's to say what someone's reaction would be in a situation like that. Would a gun in the cockpit that day have stopped the people from being killed? This could be debated to our last breath. I don't believe in guns in the cockpit. That won't change. Having a gun in the cockpit sure would'n't have helped those poor flight attendants from getting "gutted" now would it?
Hula Girl,
T.P. has her/his own views on guns. Most of the responses regarding scenarios are written to conform to her/his political view on them. I've found out that logic or analysis will not intrude in these debates. It's freedom of speech.
For a good little essay, google "Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs - Grossman" It's a good explanation on the views that people have, even after 9/11.
Cheers to all
T.P. has her/his own views on guns. Most of the responses regarding scenarios are written to conform to her/his political view on them. I've found out that logic or analysis will not intrude in these debates. It's freedom of speech.
For a good little essay, google "Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs - Grossman" It's a good explanation on the views that people have, even after 9/11.
Cheers to all
roabilly
Veteran
- Feb 17, 2008
- 2,136
- 2,355
At this day and age I DO NOT believe people would just be paralyzed and stunned if someone was trying to get in the cockpit. Highly unlikely. While I understand the reason behind pilots being allowed to carry a gun I don't think it's necessary. As talked about LONG ago I just don't get the leverage a pilot sitting fwd would have at someone coming after them from behind standing. I just don't feel that it's needed. Just another gun on the airplane and the terrorist would most likely NOT be alone so.....gonna take both out? It's silly.
Travel…
Are yahh familiar with tha terminology…
Deterrence?
