If law permitted CCW on Airlines with a 8 hour training course would you do it?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I know I guy who tried out for the first air marshall wave, way back when - before 9/11.

In a simulation, he pulled his gun - fired and sent a round through a whole long row of 'passenger' heads. Needless to say, his career plans took a change.

[GoOfY-FoOt]

sent a round through a whole long row of 'passenger' heads. Needless to say, his career plans took a change.

It's funny how paper targets don't duck when the guns start blazing...lol

[Mrgunsngear]

I voted maybe because I don't think I should have to take some silly course. The 2nd Amendment doesn't say anything about carry permits, registration, or any other BS the people with "D" or "R" next to their name make us go through. Imagine if you had to take a course and carry a special piece of paper to utilize your freedom of speech--it would never happen so why is it okay for another amendment?

Point is, don't get wrapped up in the details, while this would be a step toward freedom, it isn't the end goal.

I do think lots of armed citizens on planes would certainly be a great deterrent though. I worked for US Airways for 4 years during college, both pre and post 9/11, and I can tell you there just aren't enough air marshals to keep us safe.

[Don P]

I don't fly so the point is mute. Can't handle the pat downs.

[Single Six]

The guys on Discovery Channel's "Mythbusters" program pretty much proved that the "bullet-hole-in-plane-wall-equals-passengers-sucked-out-of-plane" thing is not gonna happen. But to answer the question: Nope, you ain't getting me on no plane, period. It's not a fear of flying...it's a fear of CRASHING.

[Glockfan36]

I would as long as the Government was willing to to provide the wapon and All ammo for said weapon, along with the appropriate holster(s). A few conditions they would have to meet before I'd ever even think of carrying:
1. Weapon must be from my own list: Glock, Springfield XD, Smith&Wesson M&P, or Sig (only as a last resort- I'm not a big fan of Sigs).
2. I prefer to carry on my strong side, IWB, with a spare mag holder on my holster.
3. Ammo would have to be Glaser Blue Safety Slugs in 9mm or .357 sig.
4. The Government would be responsible for an and all medical and/or funeral expenses.

[American Eagle]

It's just not a good idea to have a bunch of people armed to the teeth inside an airplane. What's to keep the terrorists from infiltrating a few sleepers into this country, acting like good citizens for a few years, and then getting guns and shooting up a plane? Leave the guns to the Marshals.

Besides, a gun fight inside a plane full of 200+ passengers will not end well, for anyone!!!

[Ozzieman]

At 40,000 feet I don’t want some mall ninja “saving the plane” with your suggested training, taking out a window.
Having seen what explosive decompression can do when I was flying in P3-C’s in the 70’s says this is a really bad idea.

[TimW77]

Silly and a total waste of time to even think about.

It will NEVER happen...

[zxcvbob]

Besides, a gun fight inside a plane full of 200+ passengers will not end well, for anyone!!!

How about a knife fight?

[GoOfY-FoOt]

The last flight that I was on, I observed three individuals trying to take over the airplane with verbal belligerence...During the ensuing battle of wits, myself, along with several like-minded passengers, attempted to subdue the would-be hi-jinxers with a nonlexical approach. After that failed, we began a barrage of yo-momma's followed by a quick succession of potential epitaphs in an alternating colloquial dialect...The ensuing bewilderment not only squelched the uprising, it nearly silenced all of our critiques...

All six of us came out nearly unscathed. All except for Bubba. He caught a bit of shrapnel in his leg from an errant f-bomb, or two...

To be completely honest, I'm rather surprised that the TSA hasn't instituted a mandatory gag order for all subsequent flights...

[shortwave]

Right.

How about telling us what percentage of domestic flights within the US actually have air marshals on board.

Hint: It ain't 100 percent. It fact, it's not even close.

Can't tell ya the percentage. Don't know.
I can tell ya I'd feel safer if it was 100 percent.

I can also tell ya, I'd feel safer in the confined,restricted quarters of a plane if I knew the only persons on board that were armed had extensive training in dealing with hijacking scenarios. That that was their sole job.

Sitting in a plane, lined up like cordwood with the possiblity of someone cutting loose down the isle with a 9mm FMJ isn't something I think I'd enjoy....and yes, since there are those that cc guns with FMJ, it could very possibly happen.

I can think of more negative scenario's than positive ones to cc on comercial airlines. So, I still vote no.

YMMV.

[Scubasimmons]

FAR 25.841(a) says 8000 ft for normal operation. Most modern commercial airplanes will have a cabin differential no greater than 8.6 psid. No bullet hole is going to cause a cabin depressurization. We are allowed to carry on a loaded subway in concrete tube why not an airplane?

[JohnKSa]

With quarters being as close as they are, I could visualize mass casualties of innocent passengers very quickly.

The last thing I recall reading on the topic indicated that if a plane is hijacked and the flight crew is either under coercion or incapacitated, current standard operating procedure is to shoot the plane down to prevent it from being used as a flying bomb that could kill thousands.

EVERYONE on the plane dies. Sorta puts things in perspective.

The downsides of armed passengers pale in comparison to the outcome of a successful hijacking. (Successful in terms of the hijackers actually being able to take control of the airplane.)

[mrvco]

It's just not a good idea to have a bunch of people armed to the teeth inside an airplane. What's to keep the terrorists from infiltrating a few sleepers into this country, acting like good citizens for a few years, and then getting guns and shooting up a plane?

Exactly.

Besides, you can already carry on airplanes... just not on commercial airliners.

[ClydeFrog]

To answer the forum questions about the real # of FAMs on US flights, I'd say an educated guess is around 5-10% of all US airline flights.
That # may be even lower.
The FAMS(Air Marshals Service) is not well funded, well run or able to meet staffing or hiring needs. Many sworn trained FAMs quit or get seperated after 2-3 years. I've seen & heard of media reports that documented the FAMS's serious problems.
There have also been a few lethal force incidents too. While doing a security contract job in south Florida in late 2005, I heard of 2 FAMs who smoke-checked a unstable man who claimed to have a bomb in the Miami airport.
Now, I'm not saying that everyone with a CWP or license needs to play Passenger 57 but to allow screened/trained passengers to act as FAMs sometimes may help cover those gaps.

ClydeFrog
ps; If you never saw Passenger 57, check it out. It's a older film(1992) but a decent action film www.IMDb.com

[shortwave]

Agree JohnKSa .... you could also say that if the hijackers are rigged with explosives that the hijackers can touch off if they come under fire then everyone on the plane dies also.

[egor20]

I voted no.

The first time, Someone on the airplane see's something wrong and pulls a firearm.............

Its going to be like a Benny Hill chase scene, on a plane, except with live ammo.

[ClydeFrog]

I meant to add that to my understanding, FAMs are issued the SIG Sauer P229R .357sig with Speer Gold Dot 125gr JHPs.
I think they use the same SIG DA/SA(decocker) format the US Secret Service uses. I'd also heard they field tested a few "exotic" loads like Glasers & Extreme Shock USA Air Freedom rounds but these frangibles lacked the desired results.

If I were a "sky marshal" or FAM, I'd want a S&W model 296(the 642/442 type snub hammerless in .44spl) with a CT lasergrip or maybe a P229R DAK in .357sig. The DHS issue HK P2000 .40 LEM could work too with a sub-compact P2000sk as a second gun. The HK mags could be used in either pistol.

[Scorpion8]

Ya know, I boarded a plane in Dutch Harbor, AK once full of fisherman who just wanted to get home. Each one wore a crab knife or gutting knife on their hip. Anybody who messed with the scheduled travel of that flight was going to look like a seamstress's pin cushion within seconds. I never felt safer.

I think if you took the time to do the training, you would not have a lot of buckaroo cowboys shooting at anything that hiccupped. Especially if you were concealed, then who'd know from which direction anything would come?

I voted yes, with a certification course.

[Brett1961]

No.

The risk of hitting an innocent person or systems necessary to safely operate the aircraft is far too great.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by ClydeFrog

To answer the forum questions about the real # of FAMs on US flights, I'd say an educated guess is around 5-10% of all US airline flights.
That # may be even lower.

I knew it was a low percentage of flights, but even I didn't know it was THAT low.

Sorta makes all the notions of "the Air Marshals will save us" comments rather meaningless, doesn't it?

[Don Glock]

If all federal and state laws were changed to allow CCW/CHL holders could carry on board national flights would you take such a course and carry on planes?

since civilian ccw's will never be able to do this, i'm not sure about the point of discussing it.


i believe airline pilots are allowed to, if they take required classes.

[Nordeste]

I voted no.

Even though you guys have a Constitutional right to carry weapons and a firearms culture that involves both knowledge and responsibility (which I both envy, to be honest), there have to be certain limits. Personal rights come to an end wherever someone else's rights begin, that was one of the first things Dad tought me, and that before rights, there are responsibilities. With this in mind, I think another person's right to life is before someone else's right to carry a firearm. It takes months of training, and a lot of shooting and practice for tactical response-swat-air marshals or whateverwecallit people to get proficient in how to adequately respond to an emergency inside an aircraft. I don't think any kind of "qualification course" will make the average civilian equally proficient than a properly trained professional, who, besides, uses the appropiate type of ammunition.

You wanna travel with your handgun with you?. Fair enough, Sir. Please drop it in its case and hand it over to the aircrew for safekeeping. You'll be able to retrieve it on destination, and leave the counter-terrorism thing for the guys who have trained for it.

[rodfac]

I had 40 yrs of pilot flying experience when I retired, including 30 with the airlines. Re-read Mleake's comments regarding aircraft systems and components (tires and landing gear, hydraulics, oxygen systems, fuel tanks, with their feed lines not to mention the THE PILOTS etc.) then think about your last visit to the range and the number of yahoos that you encountered. Think about the gov'ts ability to train and certify LEO's, think about the number of reported false identies floating around and the relative ease with which they can be procured. And then have them all traveling on the airlines, with their gov't certified CCW's, with your wife and kids in the next row...if that doesn't scare the daylights out of you...you've got a bolt loose somewhere.

Arm the pilots, bolt the cockpit door, and profile and search where necessary, every passenger and piece of luggage (as they do on El Al) and you'll stop hi-jacking. If we as gun owners and CCW holders travel with weapons, let's pack them in checked baggage...we don't need mall ninjas "helping" out in the cabin at 35,000 feet.

Rod