Should TSA agents be armed?
Nov 4, 2013, 10:39 am
#92
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,090
Not entirely true. A responsible person entrusted with a firearm will want to be trained in how to use that firearm.
However, the converse is not true; training someone in how to use a firearm does not make them a responsible person.
Agreed. However, this wouldn't be the first TSA over-reaction to an incredibly unlikely threat.
However, the converse is not true; training someone in how to use a firearm does not make them a responsible person.
Agreed. However, this wouldn't be the first TSA over-reaction to an incredibly unlikely threat.
Nov 4, 2013, 10:43 am
#93
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: TPA
Programs: AAdvantage 2 million, Marriott Gold
Posts: 960
STOP over reacting!! Bad things happen everywhere. TSA is to secure the flights, and they do that in an unfriendly manor as it is. Adding guns won't improve the process of getting through the airport. If all passengers had been armed, someone might have shot the guy sooner, or open fire on more TSA seeing the way we are treated. Don't want bad stuff to happen to you? Don't go outside or anywhere near the planet
Nov 4, 2013, 11:36 am
#96
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 959
Nov 4, 2013, 12:59 pm
#98
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Central Texas
Programs: Many, slipping beneath the horizon
Posts: 9,859
The focus on the AR-15 I think is just a distraction. The guy could have been just as dangerous and deadly, or more so, with a Remington 870. A gun in the hands of a person intent on doing harm is a bad situation no matter what type of weapon used.
The issue that has to be addressed is what steps can be taken to prevent a recurrence of this type of event. I suggest that this type of act is almost impossible to prevent. What can be done is to take steps to minimize the amount of damage done.
It is a bad deal all the way around but going overboard on prevention is just as bad.
The issue that has to be addressed is what steps can be taken to prevent a recurrence of this type of event. I suggest that this type of act is almost impossible to prevent. What can be done is to take steps to minimize the amount of damage done.
It is a bad deal all the way around but going overboard on prevention is just as bad.
Nov 4, 2013, 1:59 pm
#99
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,745
In a word, the answer is no! There are a lot of reasons why.
1. Anyone over age 40 wont be allowed.
2. There are TSA officers that have never handled a firearm.
3. There are too many people in a close space in checkpoint screening.
4. The expense of training and arming them is too high.
5. The liability is too high.
6. There are TSA officers that dont want to be armed.
7. There are TSA officers that would quit if it came down to that.
8. The qualification process would be to hard to implement.
etc
1. Anyone over age 40 wont be allowed.
2. There are TSA officers that have never handled a firearm.
3. There are too many people in a close space in checkpoint screening.
4. The expense of training and arming them is too high.
5. The liability is too high.
6. There are TSA officers that dont want to be armed.
7. There are TSA officers that would quit if it came down to that.
8. The qualification process would be to hard to implement.
etc
Nov 4, 2013, 2:27 pm
#100
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,090
In a word, the answer is no! There are a lot of reasons why.
1. Anyone over age 40 wont be allowed.
2. There are TSA officers that have never handled a firearm.
3. There are too many people in a close space in checkpoint screening.
4. The expense of training and arming them is too high.
5. The liability is too high.
6. There are TSA officers that dont want to be armed.
7. There are TSA officers that would quit if it came down to that.
8. The qualification process would be to hard to implement.
etc
1. Anyone over age 40 wont be allowed.
2. There are TSA officers that have never handled a firearm.
3. There are too many people in a close space in checkpoint screening.
4. The expense of training and arming them is too high.
5. The liability is too high.
6. There are TSA officers that dont want to be armed.
7. There are TSA officers that would quit if it came down to that.
8. The qualification process would be to hard to implement.
etc
Nov 4, 2013, 4:54 pm
#103
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,952
Hmmm.... felons are usually barred from possessing firearms. Sexual assault is usually deemed/prosecuted as a felony...
Nov 4, 2013, 5:08 pm
#104
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
For some career intelligence positions, much the same is true for entry age maximums -- although the intel agencies have been able to basically get around that for special "skills" needs far more than federal law enforcement employers for ordinary civilian LE purposes.
Nov 4, 2013, 5:12 pm
#105
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: LAS
Posts: 1,279
The first NEW call for armed TSA...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1
Apparently they have a new mandate, to protect the screening area.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1
Apparently they have a new mandate, to protect the screening area.
"We want to make sure we are doing everything possible to secure screening areas"
-David Cox (national president of the American Federation of Government Employees)
-David Cox (national president of the American Federation of Government Employees)