[NotSoSimple]

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15 ... etail.html

Pulled from Glocktalk.com Whoops, I bet he gets into some trouble. I didnt know about the program that allows pilots and other crew members to carry, I like the idea.

 

[concealedutah]

I saw that one too. I have to wonder what caused it to discharge. Finger control?

It isn't going to help our cause I'm afraid.

 

[Car Knocker]

It's my understanding that the rules that govern crew-carried firearms require the crewmember to carry the pistol to the plane unloaded and then to load the pistol in the cockpit prior to departure. The reverse to apply when destination is reached and crew to debark. Seems like a lot of unnecessary handling in an unforgiving environment.

 

[aashooter]

Noticed the pistol discharge . . . it must of "just went off". The whole article sounds like the pistol decided it was time to "discharge".

Can we all say "negligence"?

 

[Jeff Johnson]

It's my understanding that the rules that govern crew-carried firearms require the crewmember to carry the pistol to the plane unloaded and then to load the pistol in the cockpit prior to departure. The reverse to apply when destination is reached and crew to debark. Seems like a lot of unnecessary handling in an unforgiving environment.

If that is indeed the requirement, then I agree with your assessment. That would be a ridiculous requirement.

However, notice that the article says that the discharge occurred when flight 1536 was on approach to land at North Carolina, so that explanation wouldn't fit this case.

Sounds like an idiotic ND. I wonder what the investigation will reveal.

 

[Mazellan]

When I worked out at the airport and herd about letting pilots carry guns on the plane, it made me nervous. Most of the pilots I knew shouldn't even be flying a plane let alone carrying loaded guns. Now before I get flamed, notice I said "most" not ALL. Seems to me that this may have been the type of pilot I am referring to. :nilly:

 

[xmirage2kx]

I am sure an investigation will show one of the rules for gun handling was broken. There is no fix for stupid.

 

[whiptrackercracker]

The pilot was most likely playing with the gun!!! On approach you are extremely busy. Its obvious the individual was way too occupied to be dealing with a gun. I like how the TSA keeps throwing out the Accidental Discharge terms. Obviously we all know that those are astronomically rare and that most are all Negligent Discharges. The individual probably broke a rule. For liability they will blame it on the gun I'm sure. Several of us over at usacarry.com sent messages to the paper trying to get them to correct it. Unfortunately media is media. GRRR!!! :ack:

 

[Car Knocker]

Inadequate handgun rules designed by Department of Homeland Security officials are to blame for last weekend's accidental discharge of a pistol by a commercial pilot during landing preparations, a pilots association said yesterday.

"The pilot has to take his gun off and lock it up before he leaves the cockpit, so he was trying to secure the gun in preparation for landing, while he was trying to fly the airplane, too," said David Mackett, president of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance. "In the process of doing that, the padlock that is required to be inserted into the holster pulled the trigger and caused the gun to discharge."

More here:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbc ... 95814/1002

 

[Jeff Johnson]

That policy is part and parcel of the attitude of the TSA brass towards the FFDO program. They don't like the idea which was passed by Congress and signed by the president, so they have promulgated policies and practices designed to make it as hard as possible for pilots to qualify. This policy is just more of the same. :disgusted: