The flat-out most hilarious story I've read this week. This airborne "cowboy" (behind his reinforced door) feels he has to have his gun out (and loaded, and ready for immediate use) during the flight -- instead of getting it out, or sticking a bullet in it, if a situation arises where it's really needed in flight.

And the AOPA spokesman comes up with a response about as idiotic as anything the NRA has ever come up with (which is saying something).

Teamed with the pilot, these two are sure winners for the Dick Cheney Shotgun Medal of 2008.

Pilots fly the plane. They should not be in gun battles with hijackers. The flight attendants should be trained in the use of fire arms. At least one professional per flight and the others trained in dispatching hijackers and weapons use and safety. The commanding officer of the ship gives the order to fire, but the weapons officer and crew do the shooting.

To "AES" and others who agree that this is "the...most hilarious story" you've read all week:

How 'bout the officers responding to YOUR next "911" call wait to load their guns until they arrive on the scene and indeed find "a situation...where it's really needed?"

I think AES posting on 3-28-08 concerning the "airborne cowboy" was typical of the type of response misinformed people make when not sure of the facts of the incident. See UTUBE video of TSA regulation concerning cockpit guns. The "Dick Cheney Shotgun Medal" as AES says, should go to the TSA for their idiotic regulation concerning gun handling in the cockpit. Another great (great in the context of size, not worth) federal agency gone amuck.

The command post is in the cockpit, and that's the terrorists objective. If overcoming the US Marshal and any others who get in the way, they proceed to the cockpit. The Pilot(s) will need to be ready (armed). If a terrorist was to enter the cabin, the astute pilot will have his/her weapon ready, drawn (locked & loaded) and prepared to kill the enemy, before the enemy kills the pilot(s)!! There's no time for "sticking a bullet in it"!! Waiting, for the ""if" a situation arises where it's really needed in flight"...well, you might as well put squirt guns in the cockpit...no difference, and just as effective - squirt-squirt!

If any blame must go to the pilot then it has to be that he attempted to go by the rules,however bad they are.

When the bureaucrats at TSA came up with their rules, was it by committee? How about someone opposed to handguns? Someone who has never handled a handgun? Or was it just TSA stupidity?

One thing I'm certain they didn't do is talk with some of the premier gun experts in this country. I expect my 12 year old grandson could create a better policy than the one credited to TSA. Secure holster are available TSA!

I thought the cockpits were supposed to be armored and reinforced so that no one could enter the cabin unless allowed to do so. If that is the case, then why are handguns needed INSIDE the cockpit? Instead of being a solution to a problem a handgun in this scenario becomes another problem. Put the flying crew inside an armored, 100% secure cockpit and let them fly without having other distractions such as fooling with guns. I'd feel better with more undercover air marshals on board carrying weapons. When the stuff hits the fan, it will begin in the passenger seating area and that's where the handguns need to be, in the hands of trained professional law enforcement flying undercover.

I loved that video!
Seems to me that if the pilot would have checked the thumb break FIRST he would not have 'accidently' shot the plane.
Checking the thumb break is probably one of those 'stupid TSA rules' though.
Next thing you know pilots will be forgetting to put the landing gear down... Its just another 'stupid FAA rule' I guess.

As long as its not the pilots fault... After all they are the ones flying the plane.

I was reading your article "Faulty rules blamed for gun's firing" By Audrey Hudson dated 28 Mar. 2008 and was shocked by David Mackett's quote; "... the padlock that is required to be inserted into the holster pulled the trigger and caused the gun to discharge."
First, I have served as a law enforcement officer for more than 10 years and I continue to lock up my weapon every night. However, I have never tried to secure my weapon while driving my car as it is an unsafe practice. Similarly, I doubt FFDO's are required to secure their weapons during flight.
Second, I am familiar with the holster the FFDO's are issued, I have one myself. [ For your refrence, images of the holster used in the video are available at: http://www.desantisholster.com/31l.html ] David Mackett is quick to blame faulty rules, yet he ignores the faulty pilot. The design of the holster is inherently safe as the pilot does not have to remove the weapon from the holster to insert the lock. By design, as long as the thumb strap is secured the weapon is fully seated in the holster. The thumb strap physically blocks the weapon's hammer from cocking back to fire. When fully seated in the holster the position of the lock hole is behind the trigger.
So, how did the gun just go off? Ask the pilot, by the holsters design, he had to unfasten the thumb break and unseat the weapon before inserting the lock. Your headline should have been "Pilot plays with issued weapon during flight, Endangers crew and passengers."
I hope this information assists you in future reporting on this topic.

Well, I have been a commercial airline pilot for almost 15 years. There is no question in our industry that terrorists are actively probing us on our flights and in our airports - NONE.

And there is no question they will get onboard our aircraft with weapons because the latest internal tests indicate TSA screeners are MISSING up to 95% of hidden weapons at airport checkpoints. That is not because the screeners are bad, it's because there's no technology that can screen 700 million passengers a year with any kind of reliability.

So, we've got to protect the airplanes. But we can't do it with air marshals because there's 850,000 flights per month and we can't hire enough air marshals to even begin to cover them. Anderson Cooper just reported air marshals cover less than ONE PERCENT of our flights (and that's about what I see).

So, we've got to use armed pilots. They're already on every airplane, they're free, they're professionals, and they're behind the cockpit door so the terrorist can't ostensibly take their guns as they could a flight attendant's in the cabin.

But, in order to get them to volunteer, you've got to give them reasonable operating rules. And asking them to lock and unlock their guns 12 times a day, in contrast to every other law enforcement officer that rides onboard, in a cramped cockpit, sometimes in flight (required), sometimes in the dark, while balancing a gun on their knee, while handling their primary flight duties, is pure stupidity. It's wonder this is the first time this has happened! Eventually, statistics will catch up with them.

The holster can become unsnapped a whole bunch of different ways and the gun can become unseated WITHIN the holster while it is still snapped because the repeated handling loosens the snap.

Sure, you can just blame the pilot because he couldn't see the lock was going in front of the trigger instead of behind it; he didn't get it right THIS TIME as he has the thousands of others. OR...you can ask, "Why are we giving the pilot a system that so easily fails, and that NO ONE ELSE uses?"

If all other law enforcement officers and the citizens of 40 of the 50 states, are safe carrying a firearm concealed on their persons, what kind of sense does it make that a pilot who you need to volunteer to help prevent the next 9/11 is being subjected to this????

By the way, I just saw a report that this pilot was a former reserve police officer. If it can happen to him, my guess is it can happen again and the system needs to be changed.

I have been a Federal Law Enforcement Agent for over a decade and have investigated numerous Accidental Discharges (AD). In all cases the AD has happened on account of the person mishandling the firearm. I simply do not buy the pilot's association or Mr. Huebl's assertions that TSA's policies are to blame for this incident. If the handgun locking procedure policy that TSA has mandated for the pilots is truly that dangerous, and the holster is faulty by design, why has this not happened more? Accidents happen and they are all too often embarrassing...Let's have a little bit of personal accountability here instead of blaming an entire federal agency for one pilot's mistake. As far as Mr. Huebl's video...what a bunch of bologna...even in the rare event that all the circumstances that Mr. Huebl illustrated happened; it still goes back to the pilot not ensuring that his pistol was fully seated in the holster with the thumb strap locked before placing the lock through the hole. One would think that someone tasked with flying a multi million dollar aircraft, and trusted by the U.S. Gov to carry a firearm would pay attention to the small details.

Mr. Alter said, "The methods used by FFDO's to secure, transport and store their duty weapon are fully consistent with long-standing law-enforcement practices widely in use with many law-enforcement organizations."

That is a lie. No other LEO's handle guns like pilots are required to, because it's dangerous. As Tom referenced in locking up a gun while driving a car, at least in a car you can see the potholes. If only turbulence was as easy to see and avoid.

Tom "doubt(s) FFDO's are required to secure their weapons during flight." Tom is wrong. His problem is that having been a LEO for 10 years, he knows what is safe and what is not, and made the assumption that FFDO rules were designed for safety. They were not.

FFDO rules are so stupid and dangerous, that if they were posted here everyone would assume it was a hoax. No rational person could devise and implement the procedures pilots are required to follow, unless they had some ulterior motivation.

Gerard,

Why is everyone trying to make excuses for this pilot?

A firearm is not a toy it is a responsibility. The number of times you have to handle it is irrelevant. It is always the user's responsibility to handle it safely.
Let's not lose sight of that.

Let's also not forget that every law enforcement agency in the country has rules governing how their issued weapon is carried. Why should the FFDO's be exempt from this? Their carry corresponds to their level of training.

Let's look at the numbers:

Dave Mackett's APSA site says there are 28,000 flights a day and that less than 3% have 2 armed pilots aboard (I will call it 2.5% for argument's sake). DV (above) says pilots must handle the weapon 12 times per day.

28,000 X 0.025 = 700 flights per day with two armed pilots aboard.
700 X 2 = 1400 armed pilots are in the air each day.
1400 pilots X 12 weapon handlings per day = 16800 times per day FFDO's handle weapons.
That is 6,132,000 times FFDO's handle the weapon per year.

So there has been one discharge out of all of those weapon handlings. My calculator does not have enough decimal places to calculate a percentage that small.

So, we will just say that a pilot has a ONE in SIX MILLION chance of causing a weapon to discharge while flight with the holster and regulations that are currently in place.

It is more dangerous to walk across the street in some cities... Maybe we can blame our shoes for that. :-)

Now, as I said; unless someone can explain what the pilot was doing with an un-holstered weapon (per Mr, Huebl's video). When it was inappropriate to do so, i.e. no threat present; and when it was unsafe to do so, i.e. thumb break not secure and pilot distracted with his flight duties.
Then we should be turning our attention to the true cause of this discharge, the pilot in question.

But, if you must have more excuses try the top 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndQsNIGMIxs
Enjoy!