Et tu, Pilots?

I received an email from Tracy Price of the Passenger-Cargo Security Group ("An Airline Security Trade Association"). It included an attached press release. Captain Price has been sending me Airline Pilot Security Alliance stuff for years. He knows I've been an early and vocal supporter of arming pilots. That's why I was surprised and disappointed by the PCSG release, which protested pending TSA relaxation of rules regarding what passengers are allowed to carry on planes-- we've all shaken our heads at the stories of confiscated nail clippers and other ridiculous examples of heavy-handed bureaucratic overkill. But PCSG is demanding such prohibitions remain in place. Here's the release in total:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact PCSG President Marcus W. Flagg, at 817-800-0866 for more information PCSG has serious concerns about the Transportation Security Administration'’s (TSA) intent to modify the existing list of airport security screening prohibited items. Until the TSA has adequate procedures in place that effectively screen for hostile intent, nothing that can be used as a potential weapon should be allowed in any passenger'’s carry-on baggage. The September 11th hijackers effectively utilized the equivalent of 4-inch blade knives, which were at the time allowed aboard aircraft. A 1992 FAA Special Analysis Security Memorandum covering 9 years, 29 U.S. hijackings and 6 aircraft commandeering incidents states, "Small knives (blade length of 4 inches or less) were the most frequently employed weapon to hijack aircraft." Strengthening of cockpit doors and the presence of Federal Flight Deck Officers (FFDO'’s -– armed pilots) provide deterrence against September 11th style aircraft hijackings. However, allowing passengers to carry potential weapons on board in the cabin, without an effective means of screening for hostile intent, could lead to a new and unforeseen type of airborne terrorism. "“Terrorists are a persistent enemy"”, said First Officer Marcus Flagg, Co-Founder and President of the Passenger-Cargo Security Group (PCSG). "We have provided a level of deterrence against 9/11 style terrorist hijackings with our FFDO program and our hardened cockpit doors. So now the enemy will consider other methods of attacking our country and destroying our airline industry and our nation'’s economy by conducting multiple coordinated terrorist attacks on airline cabins in flight. Federal Air Marshals (FAMS) are on very few flights and allowing those with hostile intent to have small knives and other potential weapons such as scissors and screwdrivers could negate any deterrent value of the FAMS. Thus the TSA's intent to relax restrictions on formerly prohibited items makes no sense." "“The TSA's failure rate for detecting weapons, and other prohibited items, has increased dramatically"”, said First Officer Flagg. "“It may be that the TSA now wants to cynically relax its screening standards possibly to improve their apparent detection performance." PCSG is opposed to any relaxation of screening standards until the TSA can demonstrate conclusively that an effective method of screening individuals for hostile intent has been implemented.

http://www.pcsg.us/

I wrote back:

Tracy, So you don’t trust me with even the basics with which to defend myself? If someone DOES manage to slip by our wonderfully competent TSA, you’re going to come out from behind your locked, reinforced cockpit door with your authorized gun to save me and my family from getting slashed, right? No?

He would not respond on the record, even though he said he "would like to," but insisted anything he told me would need to be kept private. My reply:

No. Sorry, no dice. Your press release saying you don’t trust people like me to have the means to defend ourselves is a matter of public record, and you are publicly asking supporters to pass along announcements that serve your purposes. I’ve had it with elitism, and the “we’ve got ours, now screw the rest of you” mentality, which is what your public message states, regardless of what you say you mean. I’m a lot simpler and less subtle than that—I just do people the honor of saying what I mean the first time. You know as well as I do the government will NEVER develop the ability to read “intent.” That criterion is absurd on its face. That means—-if your words have meaning—-you’ll NEVER change your position. I’ve publicly supported the pilots time after time after time, with: It's Time to Show the Servants Who's in Charge, A Different Kind of War, Inform the Pilots, The Armed Pilot The bulk of the Second Amendment community supported you when all the government was giving you was lip service. Now that your goal is in sight, the appearance is that we are expendable—in more ways than one. You have joined the government in not being satisfied until the people who ultimately pay your salaries are reduced to this. I’m going public with my rebuttal to your latest release. If you want to say something for the record, feel free. Your private, confidential responses do nothing to sway public policy. Your press releases do plenty. No games, Capt. Price. No stealth agendas and no weasel words. No politics, no “art of compromise.” I have neither time nor patience for guile. I’ve tried to befriend the pilots, but it’s a two-way street. My friends don’t want me helpless. You guys have really miscalculated this one. Good people who have supported you in the past are going to be pissed.

I guess it's a typical case of they're getting theirs. I'm very disappointed but too jaded by experience to really be surprised.