Aviation Safety
In the post-September 11th era, the need for increased security at our nation?s airports and on our domestic flights has taken on a new, rejuvenated sense of urgency. In the aftermath of such a tragedy it is natural to want to immediately react with new tougher standards and regulations. This reaction, while considered understandable by most and even absolutely necessary by others is often not the correct action. It is so the case with bill HR 15 which is ?A bill to require? Federal Air Marshals on every scheduled passenger flight in air transportation.? This action at a first glance seems plausible and possibly desirable to avert another such tragedy as occurred September 11th. However, we must overcome our anger and our prejudice towards airport security and look at not only what this bill would accomplish, but more importantly, what problems it would create. I, Congressman C.W. Bill Young would vote against HR 15 due primarily to the amount of money that it would cost and because of other less major issues. This bills origin is clearly legitimate. On September 11th, 2001 terrorists essentially raided 4 airplanes with multiple box cutters. They gained access to the cockpits by slitting flight attendants throats un
This clearly indicates a problem. Yet, even with this clear problem, HR 15 fails to even mention security at the airport. It only mentions security on flights. In conclusion, I believe this bill is ultimately a valiant attempt to solve a complicated problem, but it falls short. What is needed is a bill, which integrates a realistic air marshal program with improved security checkpoint criteria. In doing so we will not only insure there will be no weapons on board aircraft, but we also decrease the likelihood of any terrorist attempts. We must take the stance that we will not let weapons on planes, not the stance that we won?t let you use weapons on planes. I feel opposing this bill is doing justice to the aviation world and the American People. El Al Airlines of Israel is considered the safest airline in the world having avoided a hijacking for over forty years despite the war torn environments they service. The reason is believed to be their stringent view of security. They have some armed marshals, like the US currently does, but they also have armed pilots and have reinforced cockpit doors. Not to mention Israel itself has armed guards in their nation?s terminals to deal with problems. This proved to be a deterrent when a TWA flight 487 terrorist admitted they considered hijacking an El Al 747 but decided against it due to ?too much security? (Aviation Week, Issue 328). The central problem with this bill, in my opinion, is that it attacks the tail of the problem, not the head. Supporters say with HR 15, September 11th wouldn?t have happened. I say without box cutters getting through security, September 11th wouldn?t have happened. What is needed is increased security at the root of the problem, the security checkpoints. If we completely stop the flow of weapons through such checkpoints we completely stop the threat of a hijacking. An unarmed man is no match for a hundred angry passengers. Eliminating the possibility of a terrorist having a weapon on board eliminates the need for having an armed marshal on board. This point is further proved by aviation security expert John Atkins, ?The best way to p
Some common words found in the essay are:
Air Marshals, Week Issue, Supporters HR, CW Bill, Airlines Israel, Red Team, Air Marshal, Bill HR, Aviation Regulation, John Atkins, air marshals, hr 15, federal air, marshal program, air marshal, scheduled passenger, september 11th, bill hr 15, air marshal program, bill hr, federal air marshals, bill require, passenger flights, air marshals scheduled, checkpoints completely stop,
Approximate Word count = 1432
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
