Zorak

Stated that way, I am sure most people would agree. Although gaffes like this occur, they're pretty rare and on average you're no doubt better off with the FAM on board than not (unless you're the person who got booted out of 2B/C )

Of course, given the choice, I'd prefer to have an armed FAM accompany me everywhere. That's not exactly cost-effective though.

readywhenyouare

I refuse to live my life scared. The flight deck doors are secure, no one can get in them and the second anyone tries they'll be quickly taken down. There will no longer be any hijackers making demands. If anyone tries there's a real possibility they'll be taken out in a body bag after the passengers have their way.

Worcester

Do US Air Marshals fly to foreign countries with their guns? How does that work?

N830MH

Whoops! He forgot to retrieve a gun from lavatory. He can't leave his gun behind. That's a problem. Don't do it again

pvn

So you admit there's no evidence that the FAM program has any benefits, but you're sure we should keep dumping money into the program? Because ... reasons.

Do you even know how much the program costs? Is there a dollar amount that would be "too much" in your opinion for a program that had (by your own admission) zero verifiable effects? Do you understand that every dollar spent on this program is a dollar that can't be spent conducting intelligence operations that actually do stop terrorists?

jdrtravel

That' the first solid point you've made in all of your chatter about this. I could see that being a potentially useful and ethical shift of public resources.

What I'm not aware of is what evidence is used to justify the program. Is it really only optics as some would suggest? Is all of TSA just a theater? I know that claim is thrown around on here, and that examples of people (including undercover TSA staff doing tests) getting weapons through are not exactly rare. Still, I'd like to see real academic research conducted by neutral party.

pvn

Every post I've made in this thread has been about the cost, you just ignored that.

Zeeb

Yeah, my opinion is that reinforced cockpit doors and the existence of non compliant passengers are doing a hell of a lot more for security than the air marshalls are. If the exact same scenario of the 9/11 hijacking were to happen today it wouldn't succeed because the cockpit door would be locked and reinforced and half the plane would be tackling the handful of people involved.

northwest_buckeye

There is not one shred of factual evidence that the FAM program saves lives. Correlation does not equal causation. It's one of the "warm and fuzzy" government initiatives, like 99% of them, that is based on intentions and not results.

And this marshall should be fired, at minimum.

javabytes

The point is the probability of terrorism is so far into the tail end that the fear and resources focused on it borders on the absurd. What are the chances that 1) a FAM leaves their firearm somewhere, and 2) the next person who stumbles across it just happens to be a "terrorist" who didn't otherwise have any resources or plans to do anything bad on that flight, but now makes an impulsive decision to use that firearm to achieve some totally unplanned objective?

They're not getting though the cockpit door. The passengers will beat the hell out of them, before or after the 12 .357 SIG rounds in a P229 are discharged. At the end of the day, what's the result? Perhaps a few people killed, assuming the person can even figure out how to operate an unfamiliar firearm? That pales in comparison to what that same person probably could have done if they had just bought a gun and walked into a crowded place if that was their intention.

We can all let our imaginations run wild to the worst that could have happened, but that twists the reality of the world we live in.

TerryK

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2017/...-carry-on-bag/

TSA did, however, confiscated my toothpaste.

hiima

This reminds me of a couple months ago I had a TPAC flight on CX F. I went to use the lav and found the co pilot ID lanyard next to the sink. For a cool 5 min i was a licensed pilot for the aircraft . When i handed out to the senior, the senior purser was freaking out, i thought the whole ordeal was hilarious. If i find a gun in the lab, I would've cleared itand handed it to the ISM.

rickg523

My point wasn't about probabilities. My point was in response to bunch of shrugged shoulders over a person supposedly trained well enough to understand the problems with discharging a weapon in a fuselage full of people at 39000 feet losing track of their firearm on the plane.
Okay, terrorist unlikely. Half of a couple going through a nasty divorce. Child. Despondent, suicidal person. All individually unlikely. But at some point, a bunch of individually unlikelies tip the scale and some unfortunate incident becomes likely.
But I guess to some folks a loose gun on an airplane is no cause for alarm. Seat poachers..or no PDB...now THOSE are problems. Loose gun? Meh.
A question of priorities I guess. Sorry I'm not aligned.

pvn

FWIW, I don't think this is "no big deal," that's just putting words in people's mouths. It's a big deal. But the people who are hiding under their beds with the "what if the next person to use the bathroom were a terrorist" are being ridiculous.

And, fwiw, I regularly make fun of the people who act like they've been literally tortured by FAs when they don't get their PDBs.

hiima

It really is a big deal. The only person who is supposed to be armed is no longer armed and the possibility of another random person being armed just happened.