By: Logan Dierker
Security and Training of the FFDO Program
Issue of Citizens with Carry Permits on Flights
This image is for the argument that regular citizens with carry permits should be able to carry their concealed loaded weapons on flights. While it does make a good point that if there were terrorists who made it obvious that they were going to attack in some way, that there would be an armed passenger that could stop the attack by killing the terrorist. This is a logical, emotional, and ethical appeal to this issue. However, this image is assuming that there would be enough capable armed passengers in the right place at the right time to see the event that is taking place. That passenger could react accordingly in order to take down the terrorist without endangering any other passengers on the flight (meaning the path of the bullet would not shoot another passenger). This is also assuming that the armed passengers and even unarmed passengers would not be paranoid, freak out, and shoot an innocent passenger because they fear that said innocent passenger is a terrorist for some reason. Also, the cabin of an airplane is a very small area. Regular passengers with carry permits are not trained like Federal Air Marshals and Federal Flight Deck Officers. The Federal officers have special training to identify terrorists (Sweet, 61-61), and air marshals are highly trained, and “are some of the best marksman in the world” (Sweet, 65). Regular citizens with carry permits do not have this type of training.
Thus, allowing passengers with carry permits is a safety and training implementation issue, and it would not be safe to allow them to carry guns. Overall, the idea of the Air Marshal program is that the bad guys will not know what flight has a Marshal on it, since there are not enough Marshals to be on every flight.
Issues with Expandning the FFDO Program to Allow Pilots to Carry Gun Outside of Cockpit
This image depicts the view that pilots should be armed. However, this shows the pilot in the cabin of the plane with his weapon, which is not the point of the FFDO Program. Under the FFDO Program, the loaded gun stays in the cockpit of the plane. The purpose of arming the pilots while they are in the cockpit is to prevent someone hijacking the plane.In the House Report 107-555 as quoted previously, the FFDO Program will “base the requirements for the training of Federal Flight Deck Officers…on the training standards applicable to Federal Air Marshals…[but] shall take into account the differing roles and responsibilities of Federal Flight Deck Officers and Federal Air Marshals” (107th Congress). This means that FFDOs and Federal Air Marshals have different obligations, where the Air Marshals have much more training than the FFDO pilots. Federal Flight Deck Officers have initial training in a one week long class to become certified and also participate in re-qualification courses on all on their own time and expense (Sweet 173). Federal Air Marshals are “some of the best marksman in the world. They are highly trained, and their firearms training requirements are some of the most stringent in law enforcement” (Sweet 65). Only Federal Air Marshals are trained sufficiently to carry loaded guns in the cabin of the plane solely based on training requirements.
Both images show that Americans are aware of the idea of having armed persons on board an aircraft to deter and prevent terrorist attacks, and have positive feelings about allowing pilots to be armed. However these images do not tell the whole story. I have tried to tell the whole story in my analysis in the areas of breaches in aviation security, the role of politics, and safety and training implementations.