FFDO criticism
12-05-2005, 09:28 PM
#11
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Originally Posted by Gman
Write to your State's Senator.
Get the word out- S.2268 has been stuck in some subcomitee hearing since May.
Get the word out- S.2268 has been stuck in some subcomitee hearing since May.
You sure about that Bill number? I couldn't find anything on it:
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/bills_res.html
12-06-2005, 06:46 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: C-172A, A320
Posts: 218
H.r.1817
Sorry about that, don't know how I got these bill numbers in there...
The bill for the house was the DeFazio/Mica amendment to H.R.1817 - there are four versions of that bill (?), sec.310A talks about the FFDO part.
I do not know what the corresponding Senate bill number is. Last thing I heard was that is is stuck in some subcomitee.
Does anybody know the correct bill number and status of it?
The bill for the house was the DeFazio/Mica amendment to H.R.1817 - there are four versions of that bill (?), sec.310A talks about the FFDO part.
I do not know what the corresponding Senate bill number is. Last thing I heard was that is is stuck in some subcomitee.
Does anybody know the correct bill number and status of it?
12-06-2005, 11:02 AM
#14
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Originally Posted by Gman
The bill for the house was the DeFazio/Mica amendment to H.R.1817
Ahh, found it:
(Sec. 310A) Requires the Secretary to study the feasibility of conducting Federal flight deck officer initial training through the United States, enhance pilot access to such training, and establish qualification standards for training facilities. Authorizes the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (TSA) to revoke the deputization of a Federal flight deck officer. Sets forth hearing and appeal requirements in the event of revocation. Directs the Secretary to implement a pilot program allowing participants in the Federal flight deck officer program to transport firearms on their persons. Encourages the President to aggressively pursue agreements with foreign governments to allow maximum deployment of Federal flight deck officers on international flights.
http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/109search.html
12-06-2005, 03:23 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,485
The last I heard the bill was out of committee and was to be scheduled to be voted on some time in the next session.
That article is substantially incorrect. There are steps needed to improve the program but this was a totally new concept for the bureaucrats to swallow - a volunteer program of Federal Law Enforcement Officers. FFDOs are now the largest armed law enforcement group in the country. Changes are not going to be made rapidly, it is not in the nature of the government to allow hasty rules changes, even if they are justified.
I am all for full time carry but more training needs to be mandated to cover in cabin contingencies. FFDOs need more FAM-like training scenarios and tactical skills to deal with the out of cockpit threats. We still have pilots who do stupid things, every group has their 10%ers, but the FFDO program cannot afford any stumbles until the program has the same training and stature of any other LEO group. So strict screening and training are the only tools we have to prevent cowboys and ego trippers from screwing up this program.
That article is substantially incorrect. There are steps needed to improve the program but this was a totally new concept for the bureaucrats to swallow - a volunteer program of Federal Law Enforcement Officers. FFDOs are now the largest armed law enforcement group in the country. Changes are not going to be made rapidly, it is not in the nature of the government to allow hasty rules changes, even if they are justified.
I am all for full time carry but more training needs to be mandated to cover in cabin contingencies. FFDOs need more FAM-like training scenarios and tactical skills to deal with the out of cockpit threats. We still have pilots who do stupid things, every group has their 10%ers, but the FFDO program cannot afford any stumbles until the program has the same training and stature of any other LEO group. So strict screening and training are the only tools we have to prevent cowboys and ego trippers from screwing up this program.
12-07-2005, 11:22 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
info?
hey cactus... good post i completely agree with you. would you mind linking where you got the info on the FFDO officers being the largest group? i absolutely believe that pilots should be allowed to carry guns in the cockpit even if it is just as a deterent. The pilots job is to fly the plane and there are few instances where a gun in the cockpit would really help but it is still sending a very strong message to terrorists and wackos... "this is our plane and your not getting it". other people have to have thoughts on this...
12-07-2005, 05:19 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: C-172A, A320
Posts: 218
www.secure-skies.org
Brothers in arms,
I tried to get an update of the bill through the secure-skies website.
Such as why there is no status or update posted on that website?
Received the following email back from David Mackett, APSA President:
"The short answer is because we have been reluctant to spend any of our members' money until we see hope for change on the horizon. This year has been occupied with hurricanes and the Supreme Court, and it was obvious Congress wasn't going to revisit FFDO and Chertoff was still getting his feet wet. We have done a lot behind the scenes, but it costs about $500 a quarter to keep the site updated/backed up and to do member updates. We DO see the momentum increasing for 2006, so we are right now in the process of building a completely new website and starting expansion again.
It's a tough call, sometimes, but we really do operate on a shoestring and at the pleasure of our members, and we try to be very careful to make sure the funds provide value added for them.
In answer to your question about the bill, the one we had proffered failed. There is an amendment to the appropriations bill sponsored by Senator McCain, which has bipartisan support, but it is also easily sabotaged by TSA. We'll be doing an analysis of it on the new website".
Looks like this is going to die a slow, natural death unless we put some firepower behind it.
Gman
I tried to get an update of the bill through the secure-skies website.
Such as why there is no status or update posted on that website?
Received the following email back from David Mackett, APSA President:
"The short answer is because we have been reluctant to spend any of our members' money until we see hope for change on the horizon. This year has been occupied with hurricanes and the Supreme Court, and it was obvious Congress wasn't going to revisit FFDO and Chertoff was still getting his feet wet. We have done a lot behind the scenes, but it costs about $500 a quarter to keep the site updated/backed up and to do member updates. We DO see the momentum increasing for 2006, so we are right now in the process of building a completely new website and starting expansion again.
It's a tough call, sometimes, but we really do operate on a shoestring and at the pleasure of our members, and we try to be very careful to make sure the funds provide value added for them.
In answer to your question about the bill, the one we had proffered failed. There is an amendment to the appropriations bill sponsored by Senator McCain, which has bipartisan support, but it is also easily sabotaged by TSA. We'll be doing an analysis of it on the new website".
Looks like this is going to die a slow, natural death unless we put some firepower behind it.
Gman
12-08-2005, 02:50 PM
#19
New boss = Old boss
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: Ca B737
Posts: 2,762
Originally Posted by cactusmike
FFDOs are now the largest armed law enforcement group in the country.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/misc/pdfaq2.html#41
I believe this notion is a misconception. Maybe FFDOs have the potential to be the largest FEDERAL group but not now. The FBI has about 12,000 special agents.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
