Obama secretly ends program that let pilots carry guns

[StopTheGrays]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/17/guns-on-a-plane-obama-secretly-ends-program-that-l/

After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

The Obama administration this past week diverted some $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots...

The link has the rest of it.


Can anyone come up with a reason why Obama thinks this is a good idea? Except for "guns=evil" I cannot think of one.

[MechAg94]

Throwing a bone to his gun control supporters?

[Perd Hapley]

Secretly?  Quietly is not secretly.

I don't think the motivation is that hard to find.  Guns, especially guns in airplanes, scare numbskulls like our President, and the sorts of numbskulls that voted for him.  They apparently don't watch Mythbusters.  'Nuff said. 

[Standing Wolf]

Can anyone come up with a reason why Obama thinks this is a good idea?

That's just what socialist parasites do. They've been pursuing that and far worse idiocy a long, long time.

[Nitrogen]

The program WAS crap, and should have been modified/fixed, and not ended.

Hopefully something better will come in its place.  I thought I could find the link, but I cannot find it.  The laws/rules require pilots to carry weapons in an unsafe manner (through a holster that locks through the trigger guard, and ahs caused at least one ND)

[RaspberrySurprise]

But is 2 Million the whole budget? Or the rest of the remaining budget? I smell something fishy here.

[Matthew Carberry]

Per the comments below the article from someone purporting to be a FFDO, the budget is $25mil. 

Again, from his comments this shifting of funds started under the Bush Admin and may not be as simple as "taking money away from training to increase supervision". 

One newspaper article does not a collection of facts necessarily make.

[stevelyn]

The Transportation Sturmabteilung has been throwing up obstacles to thwart the FFDO program since its inception. It probably didn't take much for them to go along with ending it.

[AJ Dual]

The Transportation Sturmabteilung has been throwing up obstacles to thwart the FFDO program since its inception. It probably didn't take much for them to go along with ending it.

This...

The constant sabotage and over-regulation of the FFDO program probably just made it look "wasteful". I'm beginning to think the Obama Admin. is so rife with incompetence, both individually, and as an emergent quality of the whole, that I doubt this is even an anti-gun/PC based decision.

Just look at the recent announcment of how they intended to try and get private insurance to cover vetrans service-related injuries? Even if you're so anti-military/anti-serviceman to do this, who is actually dumb enough to spend the enormous political capital to say so, especially to save a few hundred million dollars, when you've just blown a Trillion?

The FFDO program getting the axe is just incompetence, not malice.

[Matthew Carberry]

Again, how does a probable transfer, within the budget, of less than 10% of that budget, without any real details, constitute "ending the program"?

We as a community REALLY need to not just swallow blog and editorial nonsense as "true" just because it corresponds with what we want to believe.

We all know the media gets stuff we agree with wrong, I'm not sure why we are willing to consider that same media pap gospel just because it feeds into our prejudices.

And, we all know the BUSH admin was against the FFDO program from day one and TSA has been using that mindset since.  To try and pin the program's issues on the "Obama administration" is absolute BS and shows a disconnect from reality.

For G-d's sake people, don't let your disdain for the man prevent you from using critical thinking skills and reason.

Don't feed into our opponents' slanders of us as mindless morons who just parrot the NRA and right-wing blogs and such.

Call a freaking spade a spade, insist "our side" keeps to the ethical AND intellectual high road and stop posting this crap like it was holy writ without looking into it more.

[Matthew Carberry]

Breaking news, gun wielding sheep run off cliff again!!!!!


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/federal-officials-deny-report-pilot-gun-program-end/

Federal Officials Deny Report That Obama Seeks to End Pilot Gun Program

Federal officials are denying a report that the Obama administration is attempting to end a program that allows trained airline pilots to carry guns.
 
By Joshua Rhett Miller

FOXNews.com

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Federal officials are denying a report that the Obama administration is seeking to end a program that allows trained airline pilots to carry guns.

In an editorial published Tuesday in The Washington Times, the newspaper wrote that "President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology."

Sterling Payne, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, denied the report and said the program that oversees a reported 12,000 federal flight deck officers (FFDO) is actually expanding.

"It's inaccurate, this program continues to grow," Payne told FOXNews.com of the editorial. "TSA continues to recruit and put new FFDOs on planes, and we continue to train them and do recurring training."

Payne said TSA officials have recently opened a training center for FFDOs in Atlantic City, N.J., with others planned to open in Texas and other states. She declined, citing security concerns, to say how many federal flight deck officers are authorized by the agency, citing security concerns.

"We have thousands of FFDOs right now and we add thousands each year," Payne said.
Representatives from The Washington Times did not return a request for comment. A White House spokesman declined to speak on the matter, saying it was being handled by TSA officials

In a statement issued Tuesday, the Airlines Pilots Association International -- the world's largest airline pilot union, representing nearly 52,250 pilots in the U.S. and Canada -- said the Times editorial "couldn't be further from the truth."

"ALPA representatives met with TSA executives this afternoon and were told in no uncertain terms that TSA embraces the FFDO program, that there are no plans to reduce or restrict its growth, and that in fact the agency fully intends to grow and expand the program," the statement read. "Government representatives acknowledged that the program needs additional funding to achieve these goals, and that they are actively seeking same."

TSA officials are currently training up to 1,500 pilots annually for the program, which was instituted after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to ALPA's statement.

"The size of the FFDO cadre has grown so large that additional resources are needed to provide greater structure and oversight to this important program, which TSA referred to [Tuesday] as 'an important layer of defense.'"

According to TSA's Web site, the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks "demonstrated the need for a multi-layered approach to securing commercial airlines -- and in particular the cockpit -- from terrorist and criminal assault."

[209]

I guess I'm somewhat paranoid (not in the clinical sense  ).  I believe the initial report was leaked to as a barometer that they could use to judge the weather.  It seems bills and policies that restrict guns in any manner are still causing heat.  So they backed away from it.  But IMO it appears to be another test. 

First Holder talked about Mexico being a reason to have another AWB.  The ensuing complaints made Pelosi come forth and say it wasn't on the table.

Engaging in critical thinking leads me to believe that the anti-gun politician do the same- they are not stupid.  I think they are just as devious as I am paranoid.

They will keep coming up with possible changes in laws and policies that adversely affect guns.    They plan to continue nibbling away at gun-related things.  And I think they are perfectly happy to take small bites if they think there will be no backlash.  If too much heat is generated, they are saying, "Oh no.  That's not what we're planning."  Next week, another test will be published on another gun topic.  If it doesn't generate any heat, it'll become law.  "Baby steps" is their new plan.

[Matthew Carberry]

You may well be right, however I prefer to follow a sage piece of advice when it comes to government:

"Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence."

From the info we have, this event was generated by a pro-gun editorialist complaining about a minor budget shift without giving any context, not any sort of float by anonymous admin personnel.  Most likely he thought he had found a "secret" and wanted to put out a Drudge-style inflammatory headline but without doing any fact checking first.

I'm hoping that editorialist will come forward and explain exactly where they got the information, why they deliberately chose to present it so disingenuously and if they intend to print a retraction.

[209]

You may well be right, however I prefer to follow a sage piece of advice when it comes to government:

"Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence."

I like that.    And I see a lot of incompetence.  However I can't see past the malicious intent of some of our elected representatives who i believe would rather be our masters.  I'm becoming more narrow minded as I age.  I like to say it's because of lessons learned. 

The old "Fool me once- shame on you.  Fool me twice- shame on me" adage comes to mind. 

Everything is suspect! 

Man, I better invest in some more tinfoil. 

[Uncle Bubba]

You may well be right, however I prefer to follow a sage piece of advice when it comes to government:

"Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence."

From the info we have, this event was generated by a pro-gun editorialist complaining about a minor budget shift without giving any context, not any sort of float by anonymous admin personnel.  Most likely he thought he had found a "secret" and wanted to put out a Drudge-style inflammatory headline but without doing any fact checking first.

I'm hoping that editorialist will come forward and explain exactly where they got the information, why they deliberately chose to present it so disingenuously and if they intend to print a retraction.

Sage indeed. It applies to the complete spectrum of human affairs, not just government.

I agree with the rest of your post, too. Don't hold your breath while you're hoping, though. 

[Fly320s]

The program is safe. Nothing is changing.

[Matthew Carberry]

The program is safe. Nothing is changing.

Your personal experience and inside knowledge grants you no credibility!

 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Your personal experience and inside knowledge grants you no credibility!

 

who we gonna believe?  the guy on the plane or alex jones

[Fly320s]

Whoever has a better TV persona and makes you feel better, of course.

I'm out of bread and can't find my circus.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

jones personality would get him booted from some psych wards