Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co.  
The San Francisco Chronicle
DECEMBER 2, 2001, SUNDAY, FINAL EDITION
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A15

LENGTH: 788 words

HEADLINE: Most airlines say they don't want to arm pilots;

Union backs law that puts guns in cockpit

SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer

BYLINE: Marshall Wilson

BODY:
Airlines have embraced most of the nation's new aviation security legislation but are less than enthusiastic about a mostly overlooked provision: giving pilots guns.

The legislation signed by President Bush permits pilots to carry a firearm along on flights only if the Transportation Department and the pilot's airline approve. So far, no airline has jumped at the chance to be the first to announce it wants guns in the cockpit.

"We just don't like the idea of guns in an airplane," said Diana Cronan, spokeswoman for the Air Transport Association, the trade and lobbying group for the nation's largest airlines.

"There is always the possibility that it would get into the wrong hands and be used against the pilots," she said.

But the nation's largest pilots union, along with some passengers, thinks arming pilots is a good idea.

The Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 67,000 pilots at 47 U.S. and Canadian airlines, lobbied Congress hard for the right to carry guns, arguing that a pilot and co-pilot trained in the use of firearms would be a deterrent to hijack-minded passengers.

"We need some kind of defense system in the cockpit," said Herb Hunter, a veteran United Airlines Boeing 777 captain. "Arming pilots is a step in the right direction."

For retired Delta Boeing 767 pilot G.R. Flug, having a gun handy would be a backup to other aviation security measures, such as screening baggage and ensuring that passengers are who they say they are. He compared the layers of security to the redundant hydraulic and electronic systems built into jetliners to ensure safety if something breaks.

"I think that's what would get people back flying -- if there was confidence that hijackers knew that even if they breached the (cockpit) door they would be facing two armed individuals," Flug said. "It's just too frightening to even contemplate allowing these guys to take an aircraft over again."

PASSENGERS SUPPORT IDEA

At SFO recently, passenger Tom England said he has no problem with pilots being armed.

"They already have your life in their hands," said England, who was on his way home to Chicago after a business trip in the Bay Area. "I don't see why, if they're properly trained, you couldn't trust them with guns."

Maybe so, but airlines aren't warm to the idea of stopping hijackers with bullets.

United, the largest carrier at San Francisco International Airport, is awaiting federal approval for its plan to arm pilots with nonlethal stun guns.

"The view of United Airlines is that the (stun gun) is the most effective solution to the problem," said spokesman Joe Hopkins. "The (stun gun) is totally debilitating and we think it is the best solution to the problem of terrorists or hijackers coming into the cockpit."

Pilots aren't so confident.

"The (stun gun) is a one-shot deal and if you have a lot of clothes on, it's not going to work. If you have five or six guys, it's not going to work," Flug said.

The issue will confront whomever is named sometime in the next few months as the new undersecretary of transportation for security, a position created in the recent aviation security bill.

Steve Hansen, spokesman for the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said the idea was "to leave it to the security professionals to reach a decision."

SOME ISRAELI PILOTS GIVE UP GUNS

Hansen said there are persuasive arguments on both sides of the issue. He noted that El Al, the Israeli carrier widely viewed as the most security-conscious in the world, has pulled firearms out of some cockpits.

"In a time of stress, they wanted the air marshals to do the fighting and the pilots do the flying," said Hansen. El Al has air marshals on most flights.

It's not just the airlines that are lukewarm to the idea.

Several flight attendants at SFO said recently they think too much emphasis has been placed on strengthening cockpit doors and arming pilots -- and not enough on providing the cabin crews with the means to fight back.

"We're the ones who are first going to have to fight anyone who tries to hijack a plane," said one flight attendant, who declined to give her name because her employer has ordered employees not to talk to the press. "We should have some kind of weapon. I'm not saying a gun, but something."

United, for one, has promised to give additional security training to its flight crews. The airline hasn't spelled out the details.

Flug said pilots are glad for all the newly added security, but will continue to push for the option to be armed.

"I'm thrilled to see the National Guard at the airport," he said, "but they are not on the airplane."

E-mail Marshall Wilson at marshallwilson@sfchronicle.com.

LOAD-DATE: December 2, 2001