Guns in cockpits
- Thread starter CMichael
- Start date
& really who cares about how somebody else "does things?"
Anybody think that any of the 9/11 crew-folk - even the most blatantly anti - wouldn't have given just about anything to put a stop to that madness?
CMichael?
Think they might have even wished, begged for a gun 20 minutes prior to slamming into the bldgs? ... if they were even still alive.
Back to a previous post of mine.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that any of us should not be allowed to defend our lives - anytime, anywhere unless a certifiable nut-job. None.
Commercial pilots as a group, perhaps not the best shots in the world still have that right - driving or not. I do believe they're run through phyc exams, etc. bi-anually.
What more could you ask for as far as being reliable, etc.?
If you won't allow these to defend their own lives, not to mention 100+ on the A/C & another potential 3 thousand on the ground, pray tell - what IS "good enough" for you?
Anybody think that any of the 9/11 crew-folk - even the most blatantly anti - wouldn't have given just about anything to put a stop to that madness?
CMichael?
Think they might have even wished, begged for a gun 20 minutes prior to slamming into the bldgs? ... if they were even still alive.
Back to a previous post of mine.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that any of us should not be allowed to defend our lives - anytime, anywhere unless a certifiable nut-job. None.
Commercial pilots as a group, perhaps not the best shots in the world still have that right - driving or not. I do believe they're run through phyc exams, etc. bi-anually.
What more could you ask for as far as being reliable, etc.?
If you won't allow these to defend their own lives, not to mention 100+ on the A/C & another potential 3 thousand on the ground, pray tell - what IS "good enough" for you?
I completely agree. I would love it if we could get a pair of air marshalls on every flight. That's not too feasable, as posted elsewhere in this thread, though. Too many flights.
Besides, even if we *did* have enough air marshalls, I would still want the pilot crew (all pilots and copilots) to be armed, and to have to pass a regular (monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly) qualification course with their handgun.
I'll go out on a limb and predict there will never be enough AM to man even 10% of the flights in the US. Why? A number of reasons including the nature of the job: mindnumbing boredom for hours on end, being away from home for more nights than at home, poor management personnel at the top, and not enough pay to make it all worth it. They are already quitting for all those reasons.
I haven't yet seen here or anywhere ONE good reason not to arm the pilots.
I haven't yet seen here or anywhere ONE good reason not to arm the pilots.
CMichael,
I am going to wager that everything you know about flying planes came from watching Airport '77.
You'll note that the two people that have chimed in on this thread who have actual ATP ratings seem pretty confident that guns in the cockpit pose no problems.
If I gave you a dollar for every person flying a heavy in a US airline today that wasn't a USAF/USN/USMC veteran, you'd have a hard time buying a pair of sneakers at Wally World with the cash.
P.S.: I know that you're Jewish and that the IDF have a near-sainted reputation with armchair warriors, but the IAF hasn't had any serious air combat work in 20 years. The various U.S. Air Arms have been in near-constant combat for the last 12.
I am going to wager that everything you know about flying planes came from watching Airport '77.
You'll note that the two people that have chimed in on this thread who have actual ATP ratings seem pretty confident that guns in the cockpit pose no problems.
If I gave you a dollar for every person flying a heavy in a US airline today that wasn't a USAF/USN/USMC veteran, you'd have a hard time buying a pair of sneakers at Wally World with the cash.
P.S.: I know that you're Jewish and that the IDF have a near-sainted reputation with armchair warriors, but the IAF hasn't had any serious air combat work in 20 years. The various U.S. Air Arms have been in near-constant combat for the last 12.
The Plainsman
New member
Michael....
In some respects, I agree with you, but only if we lived in an ideal world, which we don't.
I recently had this same conversation with my younger sister. She was dead set opposed to the idea of pilots being armed. But part of her argument included the fact that in this country, we had F-16's to escort our airliners if they were hijacked. She looked at me in total disbelief when I explained to her that those nice F-16's were there for one purpose and one purpose only - to shoot down the airliner if the hijackers were successful in taking control.
With that in mind, I'd like to think that we would support the idea of giving the flight crew every possible option in their efforts to prevent a hijacking. I'm sure they would rather agonize over when to shoot, than resign themselves to a fiery death from an F-16 pilot doing his job.
In some respects, I agree with you, but only if we lived in an ideal world, which we don't.
I recently had this same conversation with my younger sister. She was dead set opposed to the idea of pilots being armed. But part of her argument included the fact that in this country, we had F-16's to escort our airliners if they were hijacked. She looked at me in total disbelief when I explained to her that those nice F-16's were there for one purpose and one purpose only - to shoot down the airliner if the hijackers were successful in taking control.
With that in mind, I'd like to think that we would support the idea of giving the flight crew every possible option in their efforts to prevent a hijacking. I'm sure they would rather agonize over when to shoot, than resign themselves to a fiery death from an F-16 pilot doing his job.
CMichael,
What type of combat experience do these Israelis have? Air-to-air or hand-to-hand?
In either event, does anyone suppose that hand-to-hand inside a cockpit will be disturbing to the task of "just fly(ing) the plane?"
Does anyone think that hand-to-hand will more disruptive than just shooting the perp?
I agree, FAMs on the plane's a good idea. What happens if he/she/it gets tagged by a terrorist? Oops! free gun. & then?
I'd like to see hardened doors, maybe an airlock system, so the flight crew could get in/get out while flying & still have the cockpit secured. Doubtful that will happen = too expensive.
FAMs on every flight? = logistically undoable, too expensive & frankly, we're not worth that expense.
I absolutely do not understand the obstinence of allowing a trusted individual to fly a multi-million dollar bomb, safely, with 100+ people aboard (not to mention those on the ground) day in & day out & still not trusting them enough to "put a gun in their pocket."
& CM, do attempt a rebuttal to some posted salients rather than bowing to the IDF-folk.
What type of combat experience do these Israelis have? Air-to-air or hand-to-hand?
In either event, does anyone suppose that hand-to-hand inside a cockpit will be disturbing to the task of "just fly(ing) the plane?"
Does anyone think that hand-to-hand will more disruptive than just shooting the perp?
I agree, FAMs on the plane's a good idea. What happens if he/she/it gets tagged by a terrorist? Oops! free gun. & then?
I'd like to see hardened doors, maybe an airlock system, so the flight crew could get in/get out while flying & still have the cockpit secured. Doubtful that will happen = too expensive.
FAMs on every flight? = logistically undoable, too expensive & frankly, we're not worth that expense.
I absolutely do not understand the obstinence of allowing a trusted individual to fly a multi-million dollar bomb, safely, with 100+ people aboard (not to mention those on the ground) day in & day out & still not trusting them enough to "put a gun in their pocket."
& CM, do attempt a rebuttal to some posted salients rather than bowing to the IDF-folk.
CMichael,
I am going to wager that everything you know about flying planes came from watching Airport '77.<<
It's too bad I couldn't take you up on the wager I could use some extra cash before the holidays. I never saw Airport 77. I happen to have a good friend who works for El Al.
>>You'll note that the two people that have chimed in on this thread who have actual ATP ratings seem pretty confident that guns in the cockpit pose no problems.<<
Yeah, so?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And once again that is despite the pilots having extensive combat experience as Israeli Air Force pilots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>If I gave you a dollar for every person flying a heavy in a US airline today that wasn't a USAF/USN/USMC veteran, you'd have a hard time buying a pair of sneakers at Wally World with the cash.
P.S.: I know that you're Jewish and that the IDF have a near-sainted reputation with armchair warriors, but the IAF hasn't had any serious air combat work in 20 years. The various U.S. Air Arms have been in near-constant combat for the last 12.<<
Horsecrap. The extent of the current American air force has been dropping bombs at about 15,000 feet and fighting with much superior equipment than the enemy.
Israel has been in a defacto war since its independence. It has been in an active war in Lebanon for the longest time.
I don't think anyone in any military has more rigorous training then Israel air force pilots. To become a pilot they have to go through extensive training and they must get 10 out of 10 points to pass. If they get 9 out of 10 points they don't pass.
I have a cousin who tried to become an IAF pilot and flunked out. I would imagine that an Israeli air force pilot could probably take out a delta force or a US ranger member. The reason they get such rigorous training is that the pilots need to survive if they are shot down in a hostile country, such as in Lebanon.
The US has not been in an active ground war with an enemy that has a modern military since Korea. In the Persian Gulf war we put other forces in front of the US forces so our people wouldn't get killed. The US military is soft.
I have another cousin who was stationed in Lebanon, who become so scared there all his hair has fallen out.
El Al has an incredible reputation and it has been earned. Despite there being numerous groups that would do anything to hijack an El Al aircraft it has never happened successfully. Israel has a reputation of doing what it needs to do to protect its security. I think that other airlines would be wise to copy their procedures as far as security is concerned.
To say that El Al has a good reputation for security from only airchair generals is absolute nonsense.
If El AL doesn't arm its pilots there is a reason.
I do agree that if there isn't an armed security person on the plane then the pilot should have a gun. If there is an armed security person the pilot shouldn't have a gun.
Michael
I am going to wager that everything you know about flying planes came from watching Airport '77.<<
It's too bad I couldn't take you up on the wager I could use some extra cash before the holidays. I never saw Airport 77. I happen to have a good friend who works for El Al.
>>You'll note that the two people that have chimed in on this thread who have actual ATP ratings seem pretty confident that guns in the cockpit pose no problems.<<
Yeah, so?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And once again that is despite the pilots having extensive combat experience as Israeli Air Force pilots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>If I gave you a dollar for every person flying a heavy in a US airline today that wasn't a USAF/USN/USMC veteran, you'd have a hard time buying a pair of sneakers at Wally World with the cash.
P.S.: I know that you're Jewish and that the IDF have a near-sainted reputation with armchair warriors, but the IAF hasn't had any serious air combat work in 20 years. The various U.S. Air Arms have been in near-constant combat for the last 12.<<
Horsecrap. The extent of the current American air force has been dropping bombs at about 15,000 feet and fighting with much superior equipment than the enemy.
Israel has been in a defacto war since its independence. It has been in an active war in Lebanon for the longest time.
I don't think anyone in any military has more rigorous training then Israel air force pilots. To become a pilot they have to go through extensive training and they must get 10 out of 10 points to pass. If they get 9 out of 10 points they don't pass.
I have a cousin who tried to become an IAF pilot and flunked out. I would imagine that an Israeli air force pilot could probably take out a delta force or a US ranger member. The reason they get such rigorous training is that the pilots need to survive if they are shot down in a hostile country, such as in Lebanon.
The US has not been in an active ground war with an enemy that has a modern military since Korea. In the Persian Gulf war we put other forces in front of the US forces so our people wouldn't get killed. The US military is soft.
I have another cousin who was stationed in Lebanon, who become so scared there all his hair has fallen out.
El Al has an incredible reputation and it has been earned. Despite there being numerous groups that would do anything to hijack an El Al aircraft it has never happened successfully. Israel has a reputation of doing what it needs to do to protect its security. I think that other airlines would be wise to copy their procedures as far as security is concerned.
To say that El Al has a good reputation for security from only airchair generals is absolute nonsense.
If El AL doesn't arm its pilots there is a reason.
I do agree that if there isn't an armed security person on the plane then the pilot should have a gun. If there is an armed security person the pilot shouldn't have a gun.
Michael
I don't know about the Air Force or Navy, but I KNOW that some Army pilots needed to rent guns at the local range (near Ft. Hood) for their annual qual. (That qual consisted of 50 rounds at a bullseye target.) Marine pilots have to qual like grunts.
The point being that just because someone is ex military doesn't mean that they know beans about small arms.
Having said all of the above, once someone is trained, they SHOULD be allowed to defend themselves and the aircraft/passengers.
I have discussed this with a close relative (a retired Army pilot and current pilot with one of the major airlines) and he thinks that pilots should be allowed to carry. The problem is logistics. How do you keep track of the gun. He isn't thrilled by the idea of thousands of armed pilots running around an airport. You see... there have been a bunch of airline uniforms and ID badges stolen by who knows who. He suggests a lockbox with combination in the cockpit.
The point being that just because someone is ex military doesn't mean that they know beans about small arms.
Having said all of the above, once someone is trained, they SHOULD be allowed to defend themselves and the aircraft/passengers.
I have discussed this with a close relative (a retired Army pilot and current pilot with one of the major airlines) and he thinks that pilots should be allowed to carry. The problem is logistics. How do you keep track of the gun. He isn't thrilled by the idea of thousands of armed pilots running around an airport. You see... there have been a bunch of airline uniforms and ID badges stolen by who knows who. He suggests a lockbox with combination in the cockpit.
cmichael, I guess you forgot that little altercation in southeast Asia in the '60's and '70's. I heard a rumor that the NV had pretty up to date weapons at that time. (Not really applicable to the conversation about arming pilots, but I thought someone should bring it up.)
Nor is the supposed supremacy of the Israeli airline pilot. Simply doesn't matter. Shooting someone coming through a 30 inch wide door doesn't take a ninja, and if you think all a terrorist has to do is enter the cockpit and wake up the crew and say "give me your gun" you're delusional. You make the same argument the anti's make against being armed for self defense: "All the bad guy has to do is take your gun and shoot you with it." This argument assumes the individual being relieved of his weapon won't resist.
I guess I'm the third possesor of and ATP (Tamara referred to two already) to comment here. Some facts:
Aircraft don't magically explode when punctured by a bullet.
Pilots are generally fairly agressive when faced with life threatening situations. If they weren't, they wouldn't be very good at their jobs.
I can't think of any part of an aircraft where one bullet (or several, for that matter) would cause an aircraft to suddenly stop flying. Oh! I suddenly realized there is one place a few bullets would have catastrophic effect: in the bodies of the crew.
Airliners don't require total concentration to fly them except during takeoff and landing. This means that in cruise, the crew (the whole crew) could be "distracted" for HOURS and the aircraft would continue on it's way, on course, on altitude, without any human intervention. In other words, the idea that the crew is sitting crouched over the gages, sweating in concentration, is bogus. Taking the time to shoot a terrorist would impact the flight not at all. Not shooting him would.
F16s are the LAST resort. We need all the other options we can get before using the F16.
Something not yet commented on here is the fact that cargo pilots have been singled out and not included in the armed pilot provisions. There are many reasons this is wrong, mistaken, and plain stupid: Most obvious is the fact that a 350+ thousand pound airplane hits with the same massive energy whether it's loaded with boxes or people. The WTC would have fallen the same if a CARGO Boeing had hit it.
Cargo aircraft are parked at airports in areas having much lower levels of security than pax terminals. Many are unattended for hours at remote parking areas.
Cargo loaders are high turnover employees, making it much easier to infiltrate their ranks. They have access to the aircraft and could easily stow away, coming out after takeoff.
Most loaders don't even go through metal detectors, and aren't usually searched.
All this means that by excluding cargo crews, a big target is painted on each cargo flight, since the BGs know that while the chance of an armed resistor on a passenger plane is small, the chance of an armed crewmember on a cargo flight is nil.
I'd guess that if there ever is another successful use of an airliner as a cruise missile, it will be a freighter.
Nor is the supposed supremacy of the Israeli airline pilot. Simply doesn't matter. Shooting someone coming through a 30 inch wide door doesn't take a ninja, and if you think all a terrorist has to do is enter the cockpit and wake up the crew and say "give me your gun" you're delusional. You make the same argument the anti's make against being armed for self defense: "All the bad guy has to do is take your gun and shoot you with it." This argument assumes the individual being relieved of his weapon won't resist.
I guess I'm the third possesor of and ATP (Tamara referred to two already) to comment here. Some facts:
Aircraft don't magically explode when punctured by a bullet.
Pilots are generally fairly agressive when faced with life threatening situations. If they weren't, they wouldn't be very good at their jobs.
I can't think of any part of an aircraft where one bullet (or several, for that matter) would cause an aircraft to suddenly stop flying. Oh! I suddenly realized there is one place a few bullets would have catastrophic effect: in the bodies of the crew.
Airliners don't require total concentration to fly them except during takeoff and landing. This means that in cruise, the crew (the whole crew) could be "distracted" for HOURS and the aircraft would continue on it's way, on course, on altitude, without any human intervention. In other words, the idea that the crew is sitting crouched over the gages, sweating in concentration, is bogus. Taking the time to shoot a terrorist would impact the flight not at all. Not shooting him would.
F16s are the LAST resort. We need all the other options we can get before using the F16.
Something not yet commented on here is the fact that cargo pilots have been singled out and not included in the armed pilot provisions. There are many reasons this is wrong, mistaken, and plain stupid: Most obvious is the fact that a 350+ thousand pound airplane hits with the same massive energy whether it's loaded with boxes or people. The WTC would have fallen the same if a CARGO Boeing had hit it.
Cargo aircraft are parked at airports in areas having much lower levels of security than pax terminals. Many are unattended for hours at remote parking areas.
Cargo loaders are high turnover employees, making it much easier to infiltrate their ranks. They have access to the aircraft and could easily stow away, coming out after takeoff.
Most loaders don't even go through metal detectors, and aren't usually searched.
All this means that by excluding cargo crews, a big target is painted on each cargo flight, since the BGs know that while the chance of an armed resistor on a passenger plane is small, the chance of an armed crewmember on a cargo flight is nil.
I'd guess that if there ever is another successful use of an airliner as a cruise missile, it will be a freighter.
Israeli pilots could take out Delta force!?
Sounds suspiciously like "My Dad could beat up your Dad!"
I mean come on now. I don't care if Izzy pilots are Bruce Lee incarnate. I don't care if they have to score an 11 out of 10 to pass in super duper Krav Maga.
Here is a healthy dose of reality. WE ARE NOT ISRAEL. The country of Israel would fit in some US counties. If the entire population of Israel moved to the US it might cause a small spike in housing prices, but that is about it.
As has been pointed out repeatedly we have over 35,000 flights a day. Figure that means 70,000 Air Marshalls to have 2 per flight. Then double that number for vacation, days off, sick leave, training time, what ever. 140,000. Figure another 10 or 20 thousand support staff. (this is the gubm'nt you know).
If we pulled this off, it would cost billions and billions of dollars. Plus it is going to take years to implement, hire, train, etc.
Or we could just let the pilots who want to be armed be armed. You have 3 professional air line pilots on this thread flat out telling you that they can fly the plane just fine even if they have to stop paying attention for a minute to shoot somebody. It doesn't take a super ninja commando to shoot a guy busting down your door.
The argument that the terrorist will force his way into the cockpit and GASP get a gun is just absurd. If Achmed has forced his way into the cockpit, it ain't to steal a gun!
As I believe Tamara said a long time ago, if somebody is trying to steal you gun, "pull the Felon Repulsion Lever."
This is just plain silly. I have yet to see any real logical reasons pointed out by anybody why pilots who want to carry shouldn't be able.
Sounds suspiciously like "My Dad could beat up your Dad!"
I mean come on now. I don't care if Izzy pilots are Bruce Lee incarnate. I don't care if they have to score an 11 out of 10 to pass in super duper Krav Maga.
Here is a healthy dose of reality. WE ARE NOT ISRAEL. The country of Israel would fit in some US counties. If the entire population of Israel moved to the US it might cause a small spike in housing prices, but that is about it.
As has been pointed out repeatedly we have over 35,000 flights a day. Figure that means 70,000 Air Marshalls to have 2 per flight. Then double that number for vacation, days off, sick leave, training time, what ever. 140,000. Figure another 10 or 20 thousand support staff. (this is the gubm'nt you know).
If we pulled this off, it would cost billions and billions of dollars. Plus it is going to take years to implement, hire, train, etc.
Or we could just let the pilots who want to be armed be armed. You have 3 professional air line pilots on this thread flat out telling you that they can fly the plane just fine even if they have to stop paying attention for a minute to shoot somebody. It doesn't take a super ninja commando to shoot a guy busting down your door.
The argument that the terrorist will force his way into the cockpit and GASP get a gun is just absurd. If Achmed has forced his way into the cockpit, it ain't to steal a gun!
As I believe Tamara said a long time ago, if somebody is trying to steal you gun, "pull the Felon Repulsion Lever."
This is just plain silly. I have yet to see any real logical reasons pointed out by anybody why pilots who want to carry shouldn't be able.
"This is just plain silly. I have yet to see any real logical reasons pointed out by anybody why pilots who want to carry shouldn't be able.
Because there are none, Correia.
Consider this forwarded reasoning:
"How do you keep track of the gun. He isn't thrilled by the idea of thousands of armed pilots running around an airport. You see... there have been a bunch of airline uniforms and ID badges stolen by who knows who. He suggests a lockbox with combination in the cockpit."
The emotional aspect (I can almost see the hand-wringing). Are there ever thousands of pilots ever in any given airport and are they really running around?
The fear. Cripes! What if there a bunch of police badges stolen? or several of our CCW licenses? Yup. Could cause a problem. But, anyone think that an unknown - badge or not - tried to sit down at the controls that the rest of the flight crew wouldn't know that!? It'd be like a burglar sitting down to your dinner table.
The solution[/I]. A lock box. Presumably, the pilot will be able to "strap it on" once the cockpit is secured.
Comes back to the same ol' damn thing: they trust their fellow man, but only so much. You see, they're a bit afraid of too much freedom. Something might go wrong.
Riddle me this, you nay-sayers. What's "bad" about that pilot having a CCW for a walk around town? Anything? & if not, why can't he wear in onto the airplane?
Because there are none, Correia.
Consider this forwarded reasoning:
"How do you keep track of the gun. He isn't thrilled by the idea of thousands of armed pilots running around an airport. You see... there have been a bunch of airline uniforms and ID badges stolen by who knows who. He suggests a lockbox with combination in the cockpit."
The emotional aspect (I can almost see the hand-wringing). Are there ever thousands of pilots ever in any given airport and are they really running around?
The fear. Cripes! What if there a bunch of police badges stolen? or several of our CCW licenses? Yup. Could cause a problem. But, anyone think that an unknown - badge or not - tried to sit down at the controls that the rest of the flight crew wouldn't know that!? It'd be like a burglar sitting down to your dinner table.
The solution[/I]. A lock box. Presumably, the pilot will be able to "strap it on" once the cockpit is secured.
Comes back to the same ol' damn thing: they trust their fellow man, but only so much. You see, they're a bit afraid of too much freedom. Something might go wrong.
Riddle me this, you nay-sayers. What's "bad" about that pilot having a CCW for a walk around town? Anything? & if not, why can't he wear in onto the airplane?
Patriot328
New member
As the captain of an airliner...
my job is not to "fly the plane."
My job is to ensure the safety of the aircraft.
my job is not to "fly the plane."
My job is to ensure the safety of the aircraft.
Correia >>Israeli pilots could take out Delta force!?
Sounds suspiciously like "My Dad could beat up your Dad!"
You ar right. I was responding to Tamara's contention of how Israeli air force pilots have little serious training and how their pilots haven't been used for a long time in actual war. That is patently false.
But you are right the my dad can beat up your dead is kind of silly. I apologize for that.
As I stated if there isn't a air marshal on the plane then pilots should carry guns. If there is an air marshal they shouldn't. My point is that it's the security personnel who are specifically trained to deal with terrorists. They should sit next to the cockpit in business class. Pilots have enough to deal with flying the planes.
I think another option if for pilots to have the ability to release some sort of gas to knock out the passengers.
Michael
Sounds suspiciously like "My Dad could beat up your Dad!"
You ar right. I was responding to Tamara's contention of how Israeli air force pilots have little serious training and how their pilots haven't been used for a long time in actual war. That is patently false.
But you are right the my dad can beat up your dead is kind of silly. I apologize for that.
As I stated if there isn't a air marshal on the plane then pilots should carry guns. If there is an air marshal they shouldn't. My point is that it's the security personnel who are specifically trained to deal with terrorists. They should sit next to the cockpit in business class. Pilots have enough to deal with flying the planes.
I think another option if for pilots to have the ability to release some sort of gas to knock out the passengers.
Michael
BTW I am sorry that I am not responding to everyone directly. I am trying to respond to the major points.
>>my job is not to "fly the plane."
My job is to ensure the safety of the aircraft.<<
Well, if a fight breaks out in the middle of the plane I don't think it's up to the pilot to break it up since he is rather occupied at the moment. Security personnel are in a better position to deal with this disturbance.
Micahel
>>my job is not to "fly the plane."
My job is to ensure the safety of the aircraft.<<
Well, if a fight breaks out in the middle of the plane I don't think it's up to the pilot to break it up since he is rather occupied at the moment. Security personnel are in a better position to deal with this disturbance.
Micahel
Fred Hansen
New member
This is absurd.
Should a terrorist gain the cockpit, the end result will be the death of EVERYONE ON BOARD!!!! If I were a passenger on board said plane, I wouldn't complain if the pilot swerved in to the %*&#ing break down lane a couple of times while busting a few caps into Muhammad's a$$.
Should a terrorist gain the cockpit, the end result will be the death of EVERYONE ON BOARD!!!! If I were a passenger on board said plane, I wouldn't complain if the pilot swerved in to the %*&#ing break down lane a couple of times while busting a few caps into Muhammad's a$$.