The pax intervened and were a hindrance BEFORE the FAMs drew their weapons. And it was SOP - this says nothing about "carte blanche". The FAMs had been involved in a high risk, violent event. Any LEO can pull their weapon to protect themselves or others. The second FAM drew his to enforce compliance by the cabin when they would not obey his commands which put him and his partner in jeapordy. That is LE 101.

And as for the mistakes, yes it was a mistake and yes this person should be sanctioned. But to impart a "character flaw" to a mistake like this? And to say they were lazy? That is a stretch.

Wiat just one minute. You are trying to have it both ways.

Either the pax intervened or they did not. You have posted both ways. If the pax did in fact intervene, then there was no need for the FAM's.

Also, as I stated earlier, I don't buy that SOP line of crap for one minute.

As for the idiot who "lost" his weapon. How in the hell could it not be laziness????????????????? Isn't laziness a character flaw??????????????????

You need to step back from the kool-aid trough and see that the FAM program is a joke that only endangers pax.

I agree that a tone change is necessary. And do you notice that the tone has definitely changed since those guys came and "defended their honor"? At first there was a lot of verbiage bandied about here and the TOS was right out the window.

Everyone can agree that rational discourse is possible and, indeed, preferable. But there had to be the intial bloodbath to establish that no, it wasn't all right to call LEOs and FAMs certain names.

They "intervened" by getting in the way and "rubbernecking". They did nothing effective, just wanted to see what was happening.

Don't care if you buy it or not, that is just the way it is.

He didn't "lose" his weapon. He forgot it in the lav. Forgetfulness is laziness is a character flaw? What school of rational thought did you attend? Yes it was serious because of WHAT he forgot, not because he forgot it. Never forgotten your wallet? Your keys? To forget something, no matter how serious, is bad (maybe even catastrophic) but not indicitive of character. Never saw forgetfulness on the list of character in Aristotle's or Plato's discourse.

And the FAM program is no joke. Do some training with those guys and, once you pick yourself up off the floor, re-evaluate your stance. The pax may or may not be able to take care of themselves (although the data to date is not encouraging) but an additional layer of defense is recommended.

Professions are fair targets apparently. Politicians, lawyers, doctors, FAMs, TSA, bureaucrats, janitors, hotel employees, airline employees are all fair game, right? :D

Found an interesting statement about the financial impact on the airlines of FAMs stealing first class seats.

From Statement of James C. May, President and CEO, Air Transport Association, Inc. before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Senate Commerce Committee :


Let me provide you with just a few examples of the kind of expenses I am referring to:
[snip]
The booking of Federal Air Marshals into first class seats (often displacing passengers at the last minute), particularly at a time when every additional revenue dollar is so important to the industry, is producing opportunity costs running again over $100 million annually by some estimates.

So there you go. Fact checked: airlines are losing money because they have to give first class seats to FAMs. And they are upset enough about it to complain to Congress.

They took the bailout money and one of the conditions was the seating of FAMs and the extra security measures...they knew the deal from the beginning but NOW they want to back out. If the airlines were allowed to run the FAMs like they run the FAA and TSA then I for one would refuse to fly ever again.
Personally given the choice..most days I would gladly sit in coach since the majority of the people that annoy me most are there. When you have 16 in First and 8 in Coach for a 45 minute flight it is just not worth the tiny extra bit of room.

Cheers,
FAMIAM

Or the airlines could just have their way they want now and have no FAMs on their flights. With the nosy people out there who want to supersleuth info to the media - it'd take the bad guys no time at all to find another flight to take over. Then we'd see how much money the airlines in question would lose. And we'd see how many people think the FAM program should go away. ;)

They should put the air marshalls inside the cockpit. That way they are:

a) safe, as i'm sure they would be the primary target if something were to happen
b) they would be able to protect the pilots if something were to happen
c) they could chat with someone for once :cool:

Of course, then if something did happen on the plane - they'd be among the last to know - and they'd have to open the cockpit door to get to the bad guys - hence blowing the whole purpose of securing the cockpit.

I don't recall seeing that condition in the bailout money package. Could you cite a source please?

There's absolutely no logic to your statement. I don't want FAMs on my flights and I seriously doubt the "bad guys" would take one of them over.

Even if there is another "incident", I still would rather see the money currently being spent on the FAM program be spent on something else. The ROI is just not there.

Let's just do away with police presence everywhere! I'm sure that everyone would step up to the plate to keep society a safer place.

Yes, the money
 

could be spent on installing explosives and remote detonators so that a hijacked plane can be dealt with like an out of control rocket. That could even take care of checkpoint/baggage screening. Problem solved except for the clean up.

You think you're joking, but that isn't a bad idea.