• No, pilots should not be armed.

    Just because pilots are charged with the safety of their passengers does not give grounds for them to carry a gun. That is like allowing a bus driver to carry a gun just in case the bus gets hijacked. There is no difference. Having the pilot armed would make every passenger feel uncomfortable and unsafe. The present air marshal's are just fine.

    Posted by: esmond10
  • Its your own good.

    Pilots would use them properly if they were trained in flight school. They would be used only in severe emergencies. So, people would feel more safe. And, if we let it be known that our pilots have weapons and know how to use them, terrorists will keep their distance. So, it's for your own safety!

  • Its for your own safety.

    Pilots would use them properly if they were trained in flight school. They would be used only in severe emergencies. So, people would feel more safe. And, if we let it be known that our pilots have weapons and know how to use them, terrorists will keep their distance. So, it's for your own safety!

  • Pilots are probably our most valued "taxi drivers"

    I believe that pilots should be armed because while the chances of a plane being hijacked are much lower now because of airport security, the reality is that a plane is still very easy to hijack. Arming pilots would not only make it harder to hijack the plane, but if we let it be known that our pilots were armed, it would make terrorists less likely to even try to hijack the plane, therefore taking the risk of the plane being hijacked and making it even lower. While it is true that bullets could rip a hole in the plane's casing, that's a very low risk compared to not having the gun there at all, and besides, there are other ways to arm your pilots, such as hand to hand training courses, or tasers, or even batons such as the police use. Arming our pilots would only bring benefits to the safety of airplanes.

  • Pilots don't always have to carry a actual bullet casing gun.

    Pilots should be allowed to carry both a taser and a gun that is capable of shooting a hollow point bullet. I think that if a terrorist got hit with one or the other that he would just go down. Even if the pilot missed the terrorist, and hit the plane, a hollow point bullet shell would do no damage because they would disintegrate on impact, but it would do some damage to a human body. It is the responsibility of the pilot to ensure the safety, not only of them and the plane, but the passengers too. So I believe that a pilot should be allowed to carry both a taser and a gun in the cockpit.

  • Definately

    Despite all of the increased airline security, things will get past, it's only a matter of time and the person's willingness to go to extremes. They will eventually get past them and once they do, there isn't going to be an air marshall there to stop them. If the pilots are armed, once the hijackers attempt to take over the cockpit, they won't get passed the pilots. I highly doubt they will be expecting to be shot, and of all people, by the pilots. They will have the firearms for OUR safety.

  • Ofcourse

    Pilots should be armed so that the planes can have a little more security. Besides, if you are going to trust a pilot to fly an airplane thousands of miles from the ground from one location to the next, why not trust him with a weapon. Either way, he is the one controlling your life line at that moment.

  • Innocent people will get shot? What not if you're careful

    My argument to this is that you don't need regular bullets give the pilots tazers or rubber bullets! Why would this work? you would have a weapon that can still incapacitate a foe but it is non-lethal! Yeah, it'll hurt like hell if a bystander gets hit but would you rather have a little pain and be safe or have nothing and a terrorist or someone cause the plane to crash and then die? Easy for me to decide, give them something to defend themselves and the passengers!!!!

  • yes

    For one thing what's it going to hurt if they're armed? All it could possibly do is benefit us all. I mean even though they have doubled up on airport security, it's still possible for anything to happen while you're on a plane. I think that they should become sort of like cops. A fight could break out, a terrorist could be on board or anything like that. I don't believe anyone has any good reason why airplane pilots shouldn't be armed. It couldn't possibly hurt anything.

  • Yeh

    It doesn't mean like, all of a sudden, no terrorist will ever be able to attack a plane ever without being foiled by the Captain (although having a title like that's a good step towards becoming a superhero), but it will increase safety somewhat. Terrorists assumably would be able to overcome unarmed pilots (or they wouldn't even bother trying to hijack), so all arming pilots does is give them a higher chance of thwarting the attack. Ideally, all the airline staff should have guns too, so even if the pilot and co-pilot get taken out, there are reinforcements.

  • No, this is the worst idea ever.

    Arming pilots will not change a thing except for putting our countries citizens lives at risk. We will never be able to predict when and where a pilot will lose his mind and decide to shoot up the airport or airplane full of innocent citizens or may even decide to take their own life. It'll only make our citizens feel "uncomfortable". There isn't a high percentage rate for terrorist attacks for occur anyway, so why arm pilots? There are US Marshalls on the flights whom were trained for such an event if one every occurred.

  • Never the best case scenario.

    Critics of the idea show a rather different viewpoint in this matter looking at the consequences of firing a weapon and not having the best case scenario all of the time. Bartholomew Elias, a specialist in aviation security and technology, stated in his report to Congress that there is a potential risk factor for a catastrophic event in where a firearm is discharged, even if accidental, could result in harming of avionics, electrical systems, and other sensitive areas of the aircraft (8). Any of these situations can result in a serious problem. The destruction of navigation systems or even control systems as a result of an accidental discharge or and other situation can result in the malfunction of the plane which would ultimately cause it to crash. The crashing of the aircraft and the loss of life is the same situation for the purpose of arming pilots but it can also cause this situation. In an information letter to the Senate Gerald Dillingham, Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues, stated that even trained law enforcement officers only have a hit ratio of 18 to 22 percent in armed confrontation (6). This shows that even with the same training a law enforcement officer does not always get the perfect shot and in the crammed quarters of the cockpit this percentage could be lower on a plane (Dillingham, 6). Also, according to the Violence Policy Center, 21% of officers killed with a handgun where shot with their own weapon (qtd. In Dillingham, 6). This statistic also shows how the use of a firearm does not always bring the best case scenario. Of all the shots fired it is only necessary for only one to hit an essential flight equipment or even a passenger to cause a disaster. This is why the arming of pilots would not be beneficial because of the risk of injuring a passenger or essential equipment.

  • Nope, nope nope, pleanty of reason to not arm pilots.

    1) Ever since 9/11, airport security has increased so much that now a high jacking would be stopped before the terrorist got onto the plane. 2) If the terrorists somehow got past security, their selection of weapons would be very limited, thanks to the ban on items such as nail clippers and bottles. Most people do not understand how such small and dangerous items, can be considered dangerous on a plane. Since guns are not allowed on planes, they can use separate items to build a gun on a plane. The new security pretty much ensures they cannot board with any type of weapon. 3) If the pilots or staff were armed, they would pretty much be doing all the hard work for the terrorists, because all they would have to do is steal from the staff or pilots. 4) Guns on a plane; a small tin packed with people with hardly any elbow room is not exactly the best place to have a firearm. If any security weapons should be on the plane, they should be non leathel such as phontonic disruptor, stun weapons, and heck, maybe even a baseball bat. Pretty sure that there will never be a high jacking of a plane in America again unless it is somehow by a remote computer or something.

  • Thought about it, no.

    Let me start off by saying that terrorist strikes on airplanes happens only on super rare occasions. There must be hundreds of thousands of flights around the world each day, and the total number of them that were involved in terrorist hijackings must be in the single digits. So the chances of planes being hijacked are way too low to warrant allowing pilots to have guns. Secondly, if terrorists do want to hijack the plane, they are coming up behind the rear of the pilots and they arent suspecting an attack, so giving guns to pilots would most likely result in a struggle in the cockpit by terrorists just to get the guns. Assuming the terrorists are armed with other devices, it wouldnt take long for them to get the guns and then use them on the pilots if they needed to.

    I dont see any reason to arm pilots since terrorist hijackings happen at a ridiculously low rate and pilots with guns doesnt automatically make the plane safer.

  • No, airline pilots should not be armed, because hijackers could end up getting their guns.

    With tight airport security, it is almost impossible for a hijacker to bring a gun or a knife on a plane. The most they would probably be able to get through would be a pair of box cutters. They would not be able to bring down the entire plane, or be able to bust open the pilot's cockpit doors with a pair of box cutters. If the pilots had a gun, the hijackers could ambush the pilots when they came out of the cockpit and the hijackers would end up having the guns and the passengers would be defenseless.

    Posted by: labusy
  • Airplane pilots should not be armed as they should be focused just on flying.

    Airplane pilots should not be armed as they should be focused just on flying. They are not soldiers or police officers. They would not get the training or experience to know when to use or not use the weapons. There are potential risks of attack in the cockpit, but there have been so few that it's not worth the risk or the distraction.

    Posted by: H0bi3Invader
  • Airline pilots should not be armed because they're pilots, not soldiers or policemen.

    The job and responsibility of an airline pilot is to pilot a plane from A to B. The pilot is not expected to carry out any other duties because he/she is not trained for that and because his main job is already very involved. Ideally, no one should be armed in a plane because that weapon may be stolen by some ill-thinking person and used erratically.

    Posted by: NWinters
  • I don't agree that pilots should be armed, security can be provided outside the cockpit.

    A pilots number one concern should be the safety of the passengers. There is so much at stake when we fly and i want to be secure with my pilot knowing that his main focus is on flying the plane. If security needs to be improved than an armed guard can be in place outside of the cockpit for the whole flight to protect the cabin. I don't even want security in the cockpit, the only ones who should be allowed in should be the pilot and co-pilot.

    Posted by: C0ImEIite
  • They have a complex job and they need to work on that!

    Our world has come to a state that we can no longer travel safely. I agree that air travel is a safety issue and sadly it is not going to end soon. Pilots are to control and guide the plane. I think airlines should have sky marshals with arms to prevent terrorist attacks. The job of a pilot is very complex and I am sure everyone wants to reach safely on ground. Pilots should carry on their work as pilots. They should concentrate on their work. The airport security and sky marshals could do the job quite well. May be air hostesses and stewards could carry guns.

    Posted by: N4rrGet
  • No, airline pilots should not be armed--it's too dangerous, for several reasons.

    In the wake of recent airline hijackings, we are seeking new options to ensure the safety of onboard passengers. We went through this problem back in the Seventies and we are experiencing it again today. Sky marshals have returned--legally-armed passengers--which leads to another question, as to whether or not the pilots themselves should be armed. The answer is no--because pilot training is complicated enough without learning the proper handling of firearms in closed quarters, the possibilities of a stray shot in the cockpit (thereby depressurizing the chamber and ensuring an airplane crash) or the dangers of a hijacker having access to the pilot's firearms are only a few problems that could arise from arming the pilots.

    Posted by: ElwBoardin

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.