Originally Posted by Japhydog

But the debate here isn't about just how FAMs should act on a plane. It's about whether they should be there at all. "LE experience" will not necessarily give one a hand up in that debate (note that I wrote "not necessarily").

Furthermore, most of the posters making the "LE experience only" don't differentiate between people with experience 'guarding' airplanes and beat cops. To take your analogy, it would be like a sprinting specialist telling a marathoner how to run.

And yes, people who are Olympic athletes do get training, advice, and coaching from non-specialists, and plenty of it (nutritionists, doctors, fitness experts, scientists).

Getting more information from experts in different fields is a good thing that can only help make the flying public safer.

Originally Posted by GUWonder

Income taxes are not the only taxes. ;)

Originally Posted by TSAMGR

Nope, just part of the DHS along with 21 other departments.

FAMs are part of BTS, no BICE, no ICE.

At least the TSA doesn't change it's name every three months. :D

Originally Posted by FmrBPNowFAM

We are now part of ICE. One of 6 directorates: FAMS, Office of Intelligence, Office of Investigations, Office of Air and Marine Interdiction, Office of Detention and Removal, Office of Federal Protective Service.

Our chain of command is Quinn, Dir. FAMS; Michael Garcia, Assistant Secretary (DOHS) for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Asa Hutchinson, BTS/Undersecretary DOHS, Tom Ridge, Sec DOHS.

Originally Posted by Just Passing Thru

. . . maybe one of our FAMs knows the answer. Does the DHS pay for the seats that you occupy, or are they paid for in some other way? Or do airlines just accept the loss of a revenue seat as part of the post 9/11 security cost? Or worse, are y'all getting all the award seats that seem to be missing lately? :D

Originally Posted by GradGirl

Can I ask a newbie question? What in the world does the FAM program have to do with Immigration and Customs Enforcement? FAMs cover lots and lots of intra-U.S. flights that have nothing do with international borders.

Originally Posted by law dawg

Only one outright disagreement but don't have time right now....will discuss upon return.

But thank you for the intelligent response.

Originally Posted by Dovster

Are you certain about that? It sounds very strange to me that there are no FAMs on international flights of American-flagged airlines.

In fact, it seems to me that a short while ago the U.S. was putting pressure on other countries to have their own air marshalls on flights into and out of the U.S.

Originally Posted by Dovster

Thank you for the compliment, but I am still waiting to hear which part you disagree with.

(I can't imagine anyone ever disagreeing with something I say. :) )

Originally Posted by law dawg

I disagree with your positioning of the FAMs. There can be FAMs at the back of the plane if there are many of them on the plane. If there are only a few they need to be positioned close to one another and fairly close to the flight deck.

Originally Posted by law dawg

Also, local LEOs cannot carry at will unless the plane is staying inside the state. There are different rules between states and some LEOs cannot carry outside their state w/o another state's permission.

Originally Posted by law dawg

Also, military soldiers have no authority to carry in an LEO status - posse commitatus.

Originally Posted by Dovster

I can understand the advantage that such a location would give them but feel that it is more than offset by two factors:

1. The inability to observe most of the plane.
2. The easier identification of FAMs.

But what good is it to observe from the back if they cannot 1) communicate and 2) engage?

Agreed, but I was specifically referring to "a great number of highly trained people on the federal payroll."

:)

Posse commitatus only refers to the military working in their official capacity. I was not urging that the military (or the federal LEOs) be assigned to guard planes. I was suggesting that those who already have heavy anti-terrorist skills be given additional training in airplane security and then required to carry weapons while travelling. They would not be travelling for that purpose (as FAMs do) but either in connection with their other official duties (such as being transferred) or privately.

A Marine (or Army, Navy, or Air Force) officer or EM who has a legal gun permit and happens to walk into a felony situation has the same right as any other citizen to use his gun either in self defense or to protect the lives of others. Posse commitatus would not be a hindrance.

The only differences under my suggestion would be:

1. They would receive specialized training for aviation.
2. They would be required to carry weapons while flying.

Originally Posted by LGA_UAL

Just curious, but how did FPS end up as part of ICE? While a switch to DHS from GSA makes sense (to an extent), how did it end up in ICE? Is there no domestic law enforcement branch of DHS? Seems like FPS and FAMs could have been put there, no?

Originally Posted by law dawg