House wants airline pilots to pack guns

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Elizabeth Conley, Jun 15, 2012.

  1. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77449.html

    Maybe Congressmen aren't all mouth-breathing cretins after all.

    It's no surprise the TSA wants to reduce the pilot and aircrew with guns program. The program is too intelligent, effective and cost saving. Further, it give absolutely no power to the TSA whatsoever. To an empire building POS like Pistole it must be maddening to see as much as one thin dime go to something that promises to work so well for so little.
     
  2. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    The TSA hates, hates, hates the FFDO program. They loathe it. They have from its inception.

    They have zero control over it, and they can't stand that.
     
  3. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    It is that very characteristic of authoritarians that is their biggest downfall. Secretly, control is their real goal. EVERYTHING else is secondary. EVERYTHING.

    This is why they fail at practically everything except pissing people off.

    The FFDO program places real power and responsibility in the hands of people who have demonstrated they are capable of handling the burden. It's no surprise that Pistole and his ilk prefer scope and grope, which places false power in the hands of people too ignorant, lazy and dishonorable to flip burgers or sweep floors.
     
  4. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    The best part is that the bill would make up the FFDO funding shortfall out of the smurves' salaries. :) More armed pilots, fewer Gropenfrauen sticking their arms where they don't belong! :D
     
    barbell likes this.
  5. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    The irony is that it was legal for any Pilot-In-Command to be armed in the "sterile" area of the airport.

    That law was removed on 01 September 2001.
     
  6. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    This is only $3 more than the cost of screening one passenger. As Politico points out, the economics are overwhelmingly in favor of keep this and dropping the FAMs. But then again, that would mean fewer jobs for perverts.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.

Share This Page