With all the civil liability exposure; I think you'd be surprised at the level of sophistication of most front line cops nowadays. In my home state almost all have BS degrees and a very high percentage have masters. It gives them up to a 20% higher pay to have the higher education. As a result, over the past generation they have become some of the best educated workforce.

Old stereotypes due hard.

True, but in reality millions of kids around the world have been taught to handle weapons well, it doesn't take a great deal of mental capacity to do so-certainly much less than driving well.

A weapon in this instance is nothing more or less than another piece of safety equipment. I have never had to use a fire extinguisher, crash axe, life raft , engine fire bottle or walk around O2 bottle, but that doesn't mean I think it is wise to eliminate them from our aircraft.

58 November,

I see you are back on your rant against Law enforcement/TSA etc in general as you were in other threads. Carrying around that proverbial axe to grind and having such short-sighted vision isn’t going to gain you much in your quest to slay your proverbial beasts.

I am dismayed by the large number of participants here who resort to emotional arguments or to attacking the character of another participant or group of professionals. Sure, given the danger that is presented by an actual terrorist (as opposed to a little old lady with an artificial knee, which often prompts TSOs to go ballistic and prove their unlimited powers) there will be disagreement about how best to minimize the risk. That's no reason to be inflammatory.

The point I wish to make is that once a real terrorist gets on board an airliner, everything the TSA has done (or failed to do) is no longer relevant. The question of arming FFDOs boils down to this: In case of real terrorists on board, is it better for a flight crewmember to have a gun and not need it than it would be for a flight crewmember to not have a gun but need one?

Tens or hundreds of thousands of flights have been conducted by armed FFDOs without incident. There have been a whopping two (2) incidents, one of which was not even on a plane. I don't care who has "had more training" or who "knows more about law enforcement". I'm quite comfortable flying behind an FFDO who is armed. If I can't trust them to be responsible with firearms, then I sure as heck cannot trust them with handling the airliner!

I'm not disagreeing with you that many law enforcement officers hold degrees but I think the past 40 years in this country's **** poor higher education standards have proven that anymore, a certain level of "education" (ie: degree) doesn't always correlate with a certain level of intelligence.

There are many farm boys and truck drivers I'd trust with my life. There are many MBA's I wouldn't trust with my cats life. Just my .02

-M

What could possibly go wrong?

Just ask this FFDO pilot, pulling a driver over in Florida and holding him at gun point while claiming "Federal agent" and "I'm with the Department of Homeland Security."


Airline worker claiming to be federal agent pulls driver over... | www.wftv.com

That went well.......................

Congratulations, you found one bad apple out of thousands. If this type of thing happened all the time you would have a point, but it doesn't. If you hate FFDOs so much, refuse to fly with the next one and see what happens.

Guilt by association huh?
So with the number of airline pilots that have gotten into trouble for having alcohol/drugs in thier system I should assume that you are unfit to fly yourself?
You're on a roll lately Shy.