Sir,


[This message has been edited by k9dude (edited 06-09-2003).]

Sir,
The only reason I registered with this site is so that I may address the stupidity of your post. I will not go into a diatribe as to the lack of validity of your statements, however I would simply remind you as to which event resurrected the Federal Air Marshal program. My guess is you are a frequent flier that on more than one occasion were unable to upgrade to first class and thereby were knocked off your high horse when you were forced to sit with “the common folk” in coach. Of course the Air Marshals who are there to prevent another horrific event such as 9/11 from reoccurring are the source of your problems, so let’s do as you say and leave them at the gate. Since you have problems upgrading, why don’t you invest fifty cents and BUY a newspaper. That way you can read what’s happening to the airline industry. People are STILL afraid to fly. Airlines such as Southwest and ATA are the only ones profiting. One day that unarmed person sitting in the back of the plane may very well be you as there may be nowhere to upgrade. DEAL WITH IT!!

No! I will not just "deal" with this, because I am not a mindless drone who follows somebody else's idiotic directives on how to make the aircraft safe by bringing more guns on board!
I am opposing US Air Marshals sitting in First Class because they absolutely do not provide any more security to the flight by occupying the high revenue seat, that either a paying customer (paid First) or a loyal customer (upgrade) may take.
To add to this, in the way the Air Marshal program is in right now, I am opposing it as a whole, as AMs in the States do not seem to receive proper training (except for making up stories who they may be), and will not provide any true defense to the pax and the crew should the necessety arise.
I do not want to be a witness to this stupidity, when AMs with guns are placed on flights to make the little old granmas FEEL safe, I have more common sense than this. I will protest this in any way I can, by expressing my opinion in writing to me Congressman, Senator and the airline representatives whenever I can.


[This message has been edited by asnovici (edited 06-09-2003).]

Sir, take your feel good security and stick it ... well, where it might feel good because that is the best chance anyone has from benefiting from it. If you had any idea what you were talking about, you would know what a failure the air marshall program has proven to be since it was enhanced after 9-11.

Personally, I would feel much safer if these muscle-headed idiots were not on a flight with me. They have been known to leave their 'weapons' in airplane lavs and on occasion, have even discharged those weapons in the lavs or left them behind for other passengers to f..ind. Clearly they are not capable of handling this type of 'equipment'.


------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

I ask this as someone who's pretty ignorant about the AM thing:

Would y'all who object to the current AM program be in favor of one that trained its operatives like El Al does? Additionally, are El Al's changes in cabin structure a necessary component to this? (I assume other airlines are somewhere between US and Israel, but dunno.)

I recognize that there's also a different El Al approach to terminal security, but thought that the AM issue might be separate.

Blah, Blah, Blah.

Same old song.

Don't like my attitude? Too bad. Deal with it.

Don't let the door hit you . . .

The most effective Air Marshal programs are the ones that the public doesn't know for sure exists at all.

A public program that states "we will put an FAM in First Class on every flight" serves no purpose other than to assure the execution of every First Class passenger by a dedicated hijacker.

I don't think we need any operatives onboard, untrained like the FAMs or trained like El Al's.

All we need to do is keep people out of the cockpit. If hijackers can't get in, we don't need a wild west shootout with air marshals and pilots spraying the cabin with bullets, killing more civilians than terrorists.

September 11th was able to happen - not because we didn't have a lot of guns onboard that could fall into hijacker's hands - but because we had a "comply with hijackers" policy. On four of the five flights that were hijacked, that's what happened; just like the book told the crew to do. On the fifth flight, pax took action. Unfortunately, they didn't find out about the other hijackings early enough, or they wouldn't have given up control of the plane in the first place, and they'd likely still be alive.

d

You would probably be surprised to hear that pretty much every airline out there still has this policy in place.

I've worked extensively both directly and indirectly with developing and reviewing airline security procedures and I assure you that in virtually all situations (with some like 9/11 being conspicuous exceptions), the best way to handle them is compliance with demands.

Hijackers and terrorists are liars, people with no honor who drag innocent people into their violence.

I support the policy of the US govenrment to not negotiate with terrorists.



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

Compliance with the demands of a hijacker is not negotiating with terrorists. It is simply a means towards an acceptable end for all parties concerned.

It is far more dangerous to have some gung-ho passenger decide to attack a hijacker than to simply comply with his request to get a plane on the ground at a chosen destination safely.

Historically, over 99% of hijackings have NOT resulted in an aircraft being flown into a building. To abandon a model that has worked succesfully for the most part due to a single anomaly as well as poor execution of existing procedures by the crew of the 9/11 flights is illogical and a kneejerk reaction that will cause more casualties in both the short and long term.

It is apparent that most of you only have guesses on how FAMS operate. Do you really think that the Federal Government is going to put highly untrained personnel on an airplane with a gun? Do you know any FAMS? Probably not by reading your post. In fact I would say a lot of you probably are anti gun anywhere so the discussion is one of futility. As a FA I happen to deal with many FAMS on a daily basis. I have found 99% of them to be extremely professional with extensive backgrounds in Military and Police work. Where do the complainers get their information on FAM training.... the newspaper? All the stories I read talk about how most FAMS came in with extensive training and continue to train diligently.

As for the high revenue seat issue... how many of you actually pay full price for that first class seat? Frequent flyer miles are great aren't they? Well for your information the government for those seats compensates the airline by tax credit. This tax credit is a deduction of a FULL FAIR - HIGHEST PRICE FOR THE TICKET tax deduction.

As for FAMS leaving guns on planes.... please post links to the news story so we can all be enlightened.... there has only been one incident that I have heard of which was an augmented FAM from the DEA (a female) who removed her weapon while using the LAV and failed to return it to her holster. She returned to her seat, the weapon was found by a PAX, FA told the agent about her weapon.... the Agent was then removed from the FAM program. There has never been an accidental discharge of a firearm by a FAM in a LAV. Again if there has... post the link. Hearsay doesn't make a rumor a fact.


http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ga_han...air_marshalls/

Wow, a tax credit. That shouldn't permit an air marshal to take my assigned seat.

As for frangible ammo, I still don't want to be in the cabin with it.



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

You are very much mistaken. I could post the links but I really do not feeling like doing the search for you. I suggest you do so yourself by going to the "In the News" section of this forum under FT Miles and doing a search for air marshall. And yes, one did discharge his weapon in the lav of a DCA-LAS flight last year.

------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

Me, me me me me me me me me........ http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttravel_forum/wink.gif

------------------
"Be the inferior of no man, nor be the superior. Remember that every man is a variation of yourself. No man's guilt is not yours, nor is any man's innocence a thing apart." William Saroyan, American Playwright