Pilots' Union Accepts Use of Sky Marshals

[pinto]

By JANE WARDELL
Associated Press Writer

January 6, 2004, 7:45 AM EST

LONDON -- A pilots' union says it reluctantly accepts the use of armed sky marshals on British flights, but it wants assurances from the government about dealing with the "unknown risks" of the policy.

Jim McAuslan, general secretary of the pilot's union BALPA, speaking Tuesday before a meeting with Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, said it was crucial that pilots remain in command of the plane at all times and know the identity of sky marshals and where they are sitting.


http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-britain-air-security,0,4889326.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines

[RoeBear]

1. I just can't understand why...

...they wouldn't want an armed air marshal on their flight.
But then they are Brits, and are used to their police being unarmed.
But still...

As to whether the pilot should know who and where the marshal is located is an interesting thought. I'd like to hear the arguments for and against that.

[Sir_Shrek]

2. Agreed....

...I only have a private pilots license, but I went to a professionally oriented flight school (i.e. these are folks who are not learning to fly for fun, but for a career) and the consensus always that as the pilot-in-command, you are ultimately responsible for your own and everyones safety aboard your flight in every aspect.

I remember a fair amount of students being of the opinion that if a gun (whether carried by the pilot or an air marshall, or in some kind of similar circumstance) enhanced the safety of that flight, than it should be pretty strongly considered.

[Spentastic]

4. Perhaps

It's because they think that the the threat of hijack could more effectively dealt with than by placing armed air marshalls on their planes.

You're right, us Brits have been largely conditioned to think that keeping guns off of planes was a good idea and now we are being TOLD that we are in fact wrong and the U.S / Israel know best.

Personally I have a concern about the efficacy of Marshalls in terms of countering the threat of suicide attackers. Is it not likely that the hijackers will commit an offence to force the marshalls hand? The remaining hijackers may then decide to commit themselves to disarming / killing the marshall. Furthermore, will this move discourage passengers from dealing with issues themselves? Richard Reid was stopped by fellow passengers / cabin crew. The delay that may have occured whilst people to waited to see if a marshall was aboard could have cost the flight.

What is the danger of becoming "collateral damage" if a marshall has to deploy his weapon? Compare that to cancelling a flight. Are marshalls good for public safety or is it an image thing?

[SheilaT]

3. I'm not a pilot

but I'm often a passenger on commercial flights, and I fail to see how an armed guard is going to make me any safer. Guns going off inside an airplane at high altitude strike me as an exceptionally bad idea.

What bothers me a lot is that no one seems to be questioning the fundamental reasoning behind all of this security nonsense. If every single passenger really is a potential hijacker then let's just shut down the entire airline system entirely. I realize that a lot of people would be put out of work, but the Bush administration does give a shit about millions of others being put out of work.

The real motive behind all this is to make us acquiesce to living in an overt police state.

In March of 2001 we made a family trip to Australia. Great country. I was struck by the difference in entering that country compared to returning to my own. Guess which one made me feel like a criminal trying to do something illegal, and guess which one made me feel like a welcome and honored guest? And this was six months before Sept 11.

[RoeBear]

5. Eventually the whole world...

...will realize that "guns going off inside an airplane at high altitude strike me as an exceptionally bad idea" it's not what you see on TV. People will not be sucked out the windows. The plane will still land.

this plane landed (it had nothing to do with terrorists, it was metal fatigue)
:

Dead terrorists are better than dead tourists.

[SheilaT]

6. Ah, yes, the Hawaiian air

thing. Metal fatigue. I'm something of an airplane crash junkie, which stems from my ten years as an airline employee.

If guns going off inside an airplane are so not a big deal, why don't they just let anyone who wants to carry one on? After all, how many states have a conceal carry law?

Shucks, while we're at it, let's make gun ownership mandatory.

[RoeBear]

7. Where did I say anything about...

...letting 'anyone who wants to carry one on'?

There is no way that CCW will be allowed on commercial airplanes in my lifetime, and I'm not advocating it. One of the reasons is simple math. Only 2% of the population has a permit to carry concealed. That would mean on a 100 passenger plane only 2 citizens are likely to be carrying. All the terrorists would have to do is send 10 guys on packing and they could control the plane.

[October]

8. As a former flight attendant

Not only were we supposed to have special firearms paperwork for federal agents boarding our planes with prisoners and such, but if there was another armed passenger on board, it was our duty to (quietly) inform each armed passenger where the other one was seated.

The rationale (and fear) was that in the event of an incident, the two armed passengers might end up shooting each other -- thinking they got the bad guy! This paperwork and information was alway given to the Captain.

Federal law at that time prohibited the handcuffing of prisoners while on the airplane because it would have prevented them from escape in the event of an emergency. I don't know if the Patriot Act changed all that.

[SheilaT]

9. As a former airline ticket agent myself,

we were required to ask a prisoner if he wanted to board the flight, and if he said no, too bad, he wasn't going. I was also under the impression that handcuffs weren't allowed because it tended to make the other passengers nervous, although being able to escape in case of an emergency makes a lot more sense.

And I realize that no one is actually advocating concealed carry, except for me being sarcastic, but it makes as much sense as letting on a marshall.

I also know that back in the old days when we had marshalls on board the planes, back in the 70's, they were the most arrogant a-holes I've ever met. Complete and total self-important jerks, to a man.