Blog

Search | Archive | Categories
On May 21, John Magaw, an undersecretary with the Department of Transportation, made the comment in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee. "After a lot consultation and realizing my experience in law enforcement, I will not authorize firearms in the cockpit."

Though I'm a Second Amendment supporter, I don't really believe airline pilots should have handguns either. But not for the reasons that the government is supposedly giving.

The government seems to say that the pilots primary job is to fly the plane, not to defend the plane. That is for airplane marshalls.

But, are there going to be marshalls on every single flight? Also, what if the marshall(s) were overpowered by terrorists?

The reason I don't believe that pilots should have handguns is that by the time a terrorist is in the cabin, it's too late to use a gun. Guns are not very effective as close range. Plus, to be effective in using a gun, you must practice using it. I doubt all airplane pilots would go to the shooting range a half hour a week to practice their shooting.

But I do believe that pilots should have some sort of weapon to use against terrorists. It could be mace, a stun gun, a knife, or other similar weapon. It doesn't take much practice to use these things. And these are all effective at close range.

Sources:
No Guns for Pilots; They’re Too Busy, or Something
DOT Says No Guns in the Cockpit


Posted: 2002-05-22 08:57:23


<< Creationism vs. Evolutionism DebateThe Rise and Fall of Cocaine Cola >>

RSS/XML