The ideal situation would be to have 100% participation in the FFDO program, as that would make it much more practical than the FAM program (you won't have a FAM on every flight, but you'll certainly have a pilot).
An armed pilot provides for no security for those in the back of the plane. Moreover, it's impossible to maintain adequate training to both handle an armed standoff within an aircraft and to pilot one.
If you are going to have armed people on the plane, FAMs are the much, much better choice.
Originally Posted by
billinaz
Not really, its a matter of the poor conditions these pilots have to endure as a result of the US Governmment requirements.
The pilots must manipulate the firearm to move it from a lockbox to their holster instead of just having them wear it in the holster the entire time.
This was caused more by ridiculous requirements than the pilot having an AD (accidental discharge).
The FFDO program is to protect the flightdeck. Nothing more. Pilots are not qualified to be handling an armed standoff in the rear of the aircraft, nor are they qualified to handle problems in the terminal.
This was a
negligent discharge. Not
accidental. Holstering a weapon if done as proscribed in proper training (and I've no doubt that the FLETC folks or whomever is handling the FFDO training these days cover this) should never result in a discharge if it's done correctly.
There is no such thing as an "accidental" discharge. There was a finger and/or object inside the trigger guard and on the trigger when there should not have been.
Originally Posted by
billinaz
I say BRAVO to the FFDO program finally getting up and running. Now they need to expand it and make the recertifications much easier.
Negative. This is a perfect example of
why the barriers to entry should be much higher.
Originally Posted by
billinaz
They should also let any active or retired police officer who has taken the flying armed class onboard armed as well.
Negative, certainly on retired police officers and mostly on local PDs as well--their training requirements simply do not come close to approaching the necessary level of proficiency to handle anything that might arise. While we might hate the FAMS for taking up seats, their training is somewhat rigorous and tailored to the rather unique situation at hand. Joe Pondunk PD is not.
Originally Posted by
billinaz
I dont hear people screaming to pull their flying status because of this.... so why because of an ACCIDENT?
Because there is no such thing as an "accidental" discharge. They are
"negligent" discharges, and characterized as such for a reason.