FFDO criticism
 

Not sure about the date on the linked article - but it's well worth the read.

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/second_amendment/0409/

Nice try Ossama.

The article is full of factual errors that undermine it's arguments. I can say with some authority that you should take it's message with a grain of salt.

Brillaint dialog :rolleyes:

I won't ask what authority that is, although I find it interesting that the TSA has changed it's policy to allow small, sharp pointy objects on airliners. The same implements used to murder 8 pilots just over 4 years ago on 9/11. Monday, the former 9//1 commission will release a progress report and the Charmain has this to say about aviation security: "...It's not a priority for the government right now,..."

True, there are now additional layers of security, but there is also strong evidence of bureaucratic bungling (to be polite) at it's finest within our government. Put that ineptitude against the backdrop of an Administration that doesn't support real security IMO (only the illusion of security), and I don't get a warm fuzzy when I go to work.

Isn't it strange how "passenger rights" lobbyist have pushed the "trusted passenger" program that will allow frequent flyer's the convenience of bypassing long security checkpoint line based on past travel habits and a brief background check. Contrast that to average pilot who has had exhaustive background checks, years of work history, and it seems like everything but a TSA mandated rectal exam...and you can't even take a Leatherman tool to work! IF a pilot were a threat, wouldn't a few hundred tons of high speed aluminum be more of a threat? (it's a rhetorical question, don't answer that). My point is current TSA policy defies logic.

I think the FFDO program has enormous deterrent and protective potential, although I don't support the FFDO program in it's current form. The policies are simply to regressive IMO to provide any real benefit to the national aviation infrastructure.

Finally, I didn't start this thread to discuss specifics, as the butt you save by not talking about them could be mine. Although I refuse to ignore the bureaucratic bungling of a program that has enormous potential to actually provide in flight security. Until EVERY flight has an armed cockpit, I'd say the program is a failure.

<puts flame proof suit on> OK, let's hear it.

good article. thanks for the link.

i agree, we need to get tsa out of the ffdo business.

bolt

We need to get TSA out of the Aviation business.

Do you know what TSA stands for?



Thousands
Standing
Around

I thought it was Thoroughly Stupid Agency.

I flew out of Baltimore BWI in May 2002, just after the TSA started- it may have been the first day. At the airport I saw all the same security staff in their new TSA uniforms- it made me proud! Not. At least the shirts were clean, but that's probably because they were new.

In any case, my security process went as such. I offloaded all my metal belongings, keys, change, Altoids box in my rolling computer attache and put it onto the conveyer. As I walked through the people scanner I beeped. OK. I was told I needed to be hand searched-"Fine, no problem", I said. As I moved ahead, nobody was watching me- there was no "handoff" to another security person. I thought about going but that would be wrong and I was also afraid I might become known as the "guy who closed BWI on 5/23" . So I said, "Excuse me, I need to be hand searched." Which I was-thoroughly- no problems with that. But in the midst of this I was asked if my bag had been screened- I said yes. But since I was not secure prior to collecting my bag it had to go back through. I don't have a problem with that per se- but now I've lost "control" of my own bag, I can see it for a minute or two- remember the two security questions? I finally picked up the bag and walked up to the supervisor and told him the story.

Let me close by saying there were plenty of people milling about; being shorthanded was not an issue.

I was completely unimpressed.

Welcome to our world! Good to see you posting again.

S.2268/h.r. 4126
 

Write to your State's Senator.
Get the word out- S.2268 has been stuck in some subcomitee hearing since May. What are our leaders waiting for? If we had another 9/11 today a FFDO riding with his lockbox in the cabin is PROHIBITED to open the box and take care of business...

05/19/05 - Due to strong support, the DeFazio/Mica Amendment was unanimously accepted yesterday on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. This bipartisan legislation calling for needed improvements to the Federal Flight Deck Officer Program is included as an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2006 Department of Homeland Security Authorization Bill. Later in the day, the entire authorization bill was voted on by the House of Representatives and passed by a vote of 424-4. CAPA is now working with members of the U.S. Senate to offer similar language.

You sure about that Bill number? I couldn't find anything on it:

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/bills_res.html

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?

I thought the bill was dead. Is it still out there?

Ahh, found it:
For full text, click the link below, search by Bill number, and enter H.R.1817

http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/109search.html

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.

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...

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

Todays incident might add some fuel to the FFDO fire. It shows that some of the aviation safety related programs actually do work and are beneficial to the flying public.

That is nonsense of course. The NYPD has over 39,000.

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.

You are correct. The FFDO program is CURRENTLY the second largest Federal Law Enforcement group.