Guns in the Cockpit

Last fall Congress authorized the Transportation Department to consider arming pilots with guns. But while support among pilots and the public for the idea has only grown in recent months, the Bush Administration has yet to act. So yesterday Representatives John Mica (R., Florida) and Don Young (R., Alaska) introduced a bill that would take the decision out of Transportation's hands. Trained pilots would be given the right to carry guns along with the same liability protection as undercover federal air marshals.

The objections expressed by the Administration are weak. "I don't feel we should have lethal weapons in the cockpit," says Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who also insists that grandmothers be screened at airports with the same intensity as suspicious-looking young men. Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge adds, "Where do you stop? If pilots carry guns [then] railroad engineers and bus drivers could ask to do the same."

The response seems obvious: Control of a cockpit can turn an airliner into a lethal weapon. Hijacked trains and buses can't be flown into the Pentagon or a nuclear plant.

The new legislation is a response to a campaign by the nation's pilots, who overwhelmingly want the right to carry guns and have refused to let the issue go away. In recent weeks they've collected more than 41,000 signatures on a petition(http://www.petitiononline.com/apsa) telling Washington that "common sense and logic dictate that the men and women we trust each day with our lives when we board an airliner can and should be trusted with firearms in order to provide the critical last line of defense."

Surveys show that about three-quarters of commercial pilots and a similar percentage of the public favor arming pilots. Some 70% of pilots have served in the military and are already familiar with the use of firearms.

None of this means turning airplanes into the OK Corral. Representatives of the major pilots unions suggest a voluntary program in which pilots wishing to carry guns will be screened and trained by a federal agency, perhaps the FBI. Experts would approve special guns and ammunition (probably frangible bullets, which break apart on impact and won't penetrate the fuselage) to minimize risk to passengers and aircraft. And only when the cockpit door is being breached would pilots be authorized to use their weapons.

Arming pilots is an important security measure. Federal air marshals will never be able to protect more than a small fraction of flights. Reinforced cockpit doors, while an improvement, aren't impregnable and will still need to be opened periodically during flight. Stun guns, favored by Mr. Mineta, can be rendered ineffective by thick clothing, and they immobilize attackers for mere seconds.
In short, the same Transportation Secretary who's letting the phony issue of racial profiling stand in the way of effective airport screening is now refusing to authorize the best defense should terrorists get on board an airplane again. Maybe it's time for the White House to exert some policy supervision over Mr. Mineta and his bureaucracy. Failing that, we're all for Congress taking the law back into its own hands. It shouldn't take another disaster before we get serious about keeping hijackers out of the cockpit.