Quote:
|
If we allow airline companies to foot the bill for their own training programs, eventually these airlines will cut costs and curtail profit loss by slashing "certain" programs as they see fit.
|
Balanced against the federal bureaucracy making a "training program" so cumbersome and costly to the individual pilots and flight crew that they will not take the training? Balanced against federal "guidelines" or rules requiring the handling of a loaded gun multiple times each flight? Balanced against a mandated "safe storage" mechanism that actually increases the risk of an accidental discharge? etc.
The simple truth of the matter is that individuals and groups who apparently disagreed with the matter of pilots having access to firearms (being armed) added so much junk into the "requirements" as to discourage pilots from completing the "necessary training", and added a host of other potentially dangerous requirements in order to have onboard firearms stored "safely". This is a documented fact, and has been discussed at length, both on this board and elsewhere.
So we are left with the choice of allowing the airlines to determine an efficient and cost effective program that meets basic safety parameters (and risking financially strapped airlines canceling the program when convienient to their bottom line), the bloated cumbersome and possibly dangerous govt concieved program as it currently exists, OR unarmed pilots.
Somehow, the simple common sense approach desired by the American people got lost in the shuffle.