Chicago Aviation Security Police

Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:35 am
  #1  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Platinum, etc etc etc
Posts: 2,341
Chicago Aviation Security Police

So I dont know if people are aware but these "officers" involved in the situation on board flight 3411 are Chicago Aviation Security Police, they are not allowed to carry firearms, and have been subject to multiple government officials believing they should be carrying firearms because they wear police uniforms, and are POST certified officers.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics...curity-report/

My question is will the safety of other officers be in jeopardy because after this whole affair there is not a chance in hell these officers will EVER be allowed to carry firearms? The ole the sins of a few will punish the whole group, few rotten apples spoil the bunch etc.

I thought I would share for folks these are not security guard, UA security personnel, or "rent a cops" these three involved are fully certified police officers who clearly went outside their realm of authority. If these officers worked at Chicago PD, NYPD, or your local county/town/city police they would be carrying firearms with full police powers. I wish people would stop writing the behavior off as they are not just security guards.
vincentharris is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:40 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by vincentharris
My question is will the safety of other officers be in jeopardy because after this whole affair there is not a chance in hell these officers will EVER be allowed to carry firearms? The ole the sins of a few will punish the whole group, few rotten apples spoil the bunch etc.
I don't think that any police officer should be carrying a firearm while handling a situation in an airplane because 1) it's difficult to use it with lots of passengers around and 2) it's easy for a 'bad hombre' to take it.

Wouldn't be tasers airside be enough?


PS: Too many UA3411 threads lately...
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:41 am
  #3  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Platinum, etc etc etc
Posts: 2,341
Originally Posted by WorldLux
I don't think that any police officer should be carrying a firearm while handling a situation in an airplane because 1) it's difficult to use it with lots of passengers around and 2) it's easy for a 'bad hombre' to take it.

Wouldn't be tasers airside be enough?


PS: Too many UA3411 threads lately...
In any other airport/city the officers boarding the flights are carrying firearms.

Also no a taser is not enough. There is a good phrase for this one "Never bring a knife to a gun fight"

The TSA has a failure rate of finding firearms and other prohibited items 95% of the time which means guns airside with people who shouldnt have them is a very real possibility. When the failure rate of TSA is at 0% and there is an absolute guarantee that NOBODY has firearms airside then yes tasers become enough.
vincentharris is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:44 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by vincentharris
In any other airport/city the officers boarding the flights are carrying firearms.
I know, but you have to agree that carrying a firearm in an aircraft is potential dangerous for LEOs, crew and passengers. With so little space around, it's easy for someone to grab the firearm.

BTW: Airport cops abroad carry firearms too.
WorldLux is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:48 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,712
I don't want guns aboard aircraft -- in anybody's hands.

A cop with a sidearm who leans into a window seat to grapple, both-handedly, with a Dr. Dao is a sitting duck to have the weapon fished out of its holster by someone inches away.

Shooting a hole in the fuselage, or in a person, will likely result in the delay or cancellation of your flight.
BearX220 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:48 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: MCO
Programs: Hilton Diamond, AA PP
Posts: 541
Originally Posted by vincentharris
So I dont know if people are aware but these "officers" involved in the situation on board flight 3411 are Chicago Aviation Security Police, they are not allowed to carry firearms, and have been subject to multiple government officials believing they should be carrying firearms because they wear police uniforms, and are POST certified officers.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics...curity-report/

My question is will the safety of other officers be in jeopardy because after this whole affair there is not a chance in hell these officers will EVER be allowed to carry firearms? The ole the sins of a few will punish the whole group, few rotten apples spoil the bunch etc.

I thought I would share for folks these are not security guard, UA security personnel, or "rent a cops" these three involved are fully certified police officers who clearly went outside their realm of authority. If these officers worked at Chicago PD, NYPD, or your local county/town/city police they would be carrying firearms with full police powers. I wish people would stop writing the behavior off as they are not just security guards.
Unfortunately it seems the behavior of at least one of them was certainly not indicative of being a fully certified police officer.
Annerk is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:53 am
  #7  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Platinum, etc etc etc
Posts: 2,341
Originally Posted by WorldLux
I know, but you have to agree that carrying a firearm in an aircraft is potential dangerous for LEOs, crew and passengers. With so little space around, it's easy for someone to grab the firearm.

BTW: Airport cops abroad carry firearms too.
Anybody who is law enforcement (Local police, county, state, and federal) go through training to make sure in situations that are less than ideal (large public gathering, large fights, close quarters, etc.) to protect their firearm from being taken from their holster.

I think we need to give more credit to law enforcement that they know where their firearm is at all times. If we are talking about its close quarters so if fired its dangerous to utilize a gun then in those above places officers should not carry firearms. In addition Air Marshals should not carry either as the potential for collateral damage to happen would be there.

With all the stories of officers boarding flights for whatever reason (remove someone, trouble on board, etc.) I dont recall (which means I can be wrong and there could be stories i never read) that nobody has pulled their firearm out on board. 99.999999999999999% of officers will only pull a firearm as an absolute LAST resort. Heck in a lot of places/departments just the act of POINTING a firearm at someone requires a report to be filed even if its not used and was only pointed at someone for 1 second.
vincentharris is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 7:55 am
  #8  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: RDU
Programs: DL DM, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Platinum, etc etc etc
Posts: 2,341
Anyways to jump back to the original point of this post I just wanted to point out the fact that lots of people think these folks were security guards when in fact they are fully certified police officers.
vincentharris is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 8:00 am
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 17,255
From the video I've seen - and based on the amount of time I've spent in fuselages - the thought that armed officers in altercations on fully boarded aircraft is a good idea is a peculiarly American form of insanity.
rickg523 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 8:30 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,767
Originally Posted by vincentharris
In any other airport/city the officers boarding the flights are carrying firearms.

...
There are plenty of CPD officers based at O'Hare, all carrying firearms if needed. What I haven't seen explained yet is how the Aviation "Police" became involved, who called them or were they just passing by?
worldtrav is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 8:33 am
  #11  
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat/2MM [23-yr. 1K, now emeritus] clawing way back to WN-A List; MR LT Titanium; HY Whateverist.
Posts: 12,390
As this thread is not specific to United Airlines, but is a topic of aviation security, it is being "re-accommodated" to the appropriate Travel Safety and Security forum. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.
Ocn Vw 1K is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 9:32 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 4,085
Originally Posted by BearX220
Shooting a hole in the fuselage, or in a person, will likely result in the delay or cancellation of your flight.
Um, shooting a hole in a person might be worse.
InTheAirGuy is online now  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 9:56 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,723
Originally Posted by vincentharris
With all the stories of officers boarding flights for whatever reason (remove someone, trouble on board, etc.) I dont recall (which means I can be wrong and there could be stories i never read) that nobody has pulled their firearm out on board. 99.999999999999999% of officers will only pull a firearm as an absolute LAST resort.
Air Marshals pointed guns at passenger cabin in flight for about half an hour after subduing an unruly passenger:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/...ent/index.html

It seemed for a while that the SOP of Air Marshals was to hold the cabin at gunpoint for the remainder of the flight if their cover was exposed. The reports stopped, so hopefully policy changed.
studentff is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 10:44 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 4,085
Originally Posted by studentff
Air Marshals pointed guns at passenger cabin in flight for about half an hour after subduing an unruly passenger:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/...ent/index.html

It seemed for a while that the SOP of Air Marshals was to hold the cabin at gunpoint for the remainder of the flight if their cover was exposed. The reports stopped, so hopefully policy changed.
Reading the article, the dude got an upgrade to first class!

"But Lineberger, a Pennsylvania court judge, said he watched as the two air marshals emerged from the first-class section, grabbed the passenger, and walked him back to the first-class area."
InTheAirGuy is online now  
Old Apr 13, 2017, 10:58 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the path to perdition
Programs: Delta, United
Posts: 4,777
So what does being POST certified really mean in this case? It means the officers have gone through and have been certified. However that may not mean they have any particular authority. Such as for arrest, etc. So the real question is what authority has been given to the Chicago Department of Aviation. So for all intents and purposes they could be considered to be nothing more than "security" officers which is exactly how they are classified:

https://chicago.taleo.net/careersect....ftl?job=99860

That said, I find this bit interesting: Arrests and detains individuals found violating or suspected of violating city, state and federal laws, restraining individuals using handcuffs or other restraining devices

Which if that is the case, in the UA incident I would think discussing the IDB issue under terms of arrest for trespassing might have persuaded the PAX to be bit more cooperative. (Not saying that was the best course of action but that was the path UA took).

Last edited by FlyingUnderTheRadar; Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 am
FlyingUnderTheRadar is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.