Debate:Armed pilots in airplanes

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Should pilots be armed?

[]

Background and Context of Debate:

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Defense: Would arming pilots improve the security of airplanes?

[]

[]

Yes

• Arming pilots is the only certain way to defend a cockpit. "Armed pilots equal safer airplanes". USA Today. February 14th, 2007 - "Currently there is no surefire method of defending the cockpit from a team of terrorists on a plane over the North Atlantic, three hours from any airport. That is why it is imperative that the U.S. government expand agreements with foreign governments to allow armed pilots."

[]

[]

No

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Abuse: Can pilot abuse be avoided?

[]

[]

Yes

• Guns would be kept in safe boxes, preventing pilot abuse Dave Kopel & David Petteys. "Air Neglect". National Review Online. July 2, 2003 - "Although pilots would technically be designated as federal law enforcement officers, they would not be authorized carry their guns in ordinary holsters as every other law enforcement officer does, but only in special locked boxes to be kept in the cockpit during flight. Accordingly, the pilots would not be faced with the myriad of situations in which a federal law enforcement officer with emotional problems might an inappropriate decision about defensive gun use-such as when an undercover officer is challenged to a fight in a seedy bar. Thus, the psychological screening used on FBI agents is unnecessary for airline pilots, and is silly in light of the fact that every pilot already controls a weapon thousands of times more powerful than a handgun."

[]

[]

No

• It's better to arm pilots and risk abuse than risk another 9/11. Dave Kopel & David Petteys. "Air Neglect". National Review Online. July 2, 2003 - "the airline executives would rather risk another 9/11 than take the (tiny) chance that an armed pilot might use his gun illegally, and the airline might be sued."

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Slippery slope: Would arming pilots not lead to a slippery slope of arming?

[]

[]

Yes

[]

[]

No

• Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge - "I don't think we want to equip our pilots with firearms. Where would it end?"[1]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Training: Would the training of pilots be straight-forward, easy?

[]

[]

Yes

• Gun-training for pilots would be easy; they face a simple scenario Dave Kopel & David Petteys. "Air Neglect". National Review Online. July 2, 2003 - "It should be remembered that an armed pilot resisting a hijacking faces a much simpler scenario than a typical defensive shooting by an FBI agent, a police officer, or a citizen with a concealed handgun permit. These latter three must be prepared for surprise attacks, and for the possibility of using firearms in any of the hundreds of places where a person might be during the course of a day. Law-enforcement officers must confront the additional difficulty of being forced to intervene in situations (such as domestic disturbance) in which it may not be immediately clear who is the aggressor and who is the victim. In contrast, the armed pilots would only use firearms in a place they know extremely well: their own cockpit..."

[]

[]

No

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Alternatives: Are there no good alternatives to arming pilots with guns?

[]

[]

Yes

[]

[]

No

• Pilots should be armed with stun-guns, not real guns.

[]

[]

[]

[]

[]

Pro/con resources:

[]

[]

Yes

• "Armed pilots equal safer airplanes". USA Today. February 14th, 2007

[]

[]

No

[]

References:

[]

Related pages on Debatepedia:

[]

External links and resources: