Put more guns on planes? Really?

Most of the time, when I hear about some new measure to be taken in the war on terror, I shake my head or roll my eyes because I know it plays into their hands. Taking off our shoes is not going to make us safe, it just wastes time and money. Airport scanners may be effective short-term, but are rife with potential for abuse, are cost-prohibitive, and like all static security measures, will be eventually be evaded by terrorists. Spending billions of dollars occupying two countries is not helping, it just wastes time and money while committing assets that would be better spent hitting terrorist bases and at the same time, allowing our enemies to use the occupations for propaganda purposes. Much of what we are doing amounts to little more than chasing our own tails.

The Mujaheddin defeated a Superpower in the 1980s. The Soviet Union was destroyed financially, not militarily. The men who defeated one of the most powerful nations the world has ever known founded Al Qaeda. They are using the tactics against us that worked against their past enemies while continually developing new ones.

Our current situation in America is as such: We are wasting valuable military assets and BILLIONS of dollars occupying two countries we have defeated militarily, then deposed and replaced their governments, and finally forced to accept laws which favor US and UK business interests. The elephant in the room seems to be that these military occupations are directly contributing to our financial collapse--which is how the Mujaheddin beat the Russians--instead of effectively fighting our real enemies. What we should have done years ago was declare victory (because by any measure, our boys--and girls--won...years ago), aggressively train local police and military forces in each country, and then leave within the next six to ten months. This will free up military, intelligence, and financial assets to more effectively track and neutralize terrorists and terrorists groups worldwide.

The Underpants Bomber, the Shoe Bomber, and others, have shown that we cannot solely rely on intelligence assets and airport screening to prevent attacks. If we want to find terrorists, we should use intelligence assets. If we want to kill terrorists, we should send in military forces. But most importantly, if we want to catch terrorists, however; we must rely on law enforcement. The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) and the National Troopers Coalition (NTC) have an idea that WILL make us safer during domestic flights. Their idea? Put more guns on more planes.

LEOSA, signed into law by President Bush, authorized all active and retired law enforcement officers who are certified by the terms of the statute, to carry their firearms virtually anywhere in the country, at any time. Some terms of the statute include annual requirements for weapons qualifications and medical screenings. This law has led to increased crime prevention and has allowed law enforcement officers to stop criminal activity in many situations over the last six years.

The law, however, did not offer specific language regarding aircraft, and though no administration has interpreted the law to include airspace, they could. Law enforcement officers actively engaged in their duties are allowed to fly with their firearms, but off-duty and retired officers--including off-duty Federal Air Marshals--are not allowed to do so. If the officers are on the plane, and they they can make a difference, we should let them carry the tools to do so.

FLEOA and NTC want to give LEOSA qualified law enforcement officers the ability to carry concealed weapons on domestic flights. This is reasonable, provided they have specific training in "flying armed" policies and procedures. Executive Orders in place of or in defiance of statute are unconstitutional regardless of which administration commits the abuse. That being said, Executive Orders used to instruct Federal agencies on how to apply statute are obviously necessary, at times. This is one of those times. President Obama should immediately issue an order to the FAA, TSA, DHS, DOT, and other concerned agencies to allow for this and provide for access by TSA screeners to a database of LEOSA qualified officers. The President should also clarify that LEOSA covers domestic air travel.

The advantages to this plan are obvious and many-fold:

1. Qualified law enforcement officers would become an additional, and effective, deterrent and defense against crimes, including terrorism, on domestic flights.

2. Allowing LEOSA qualified officers who are already on the plane to carry firearms will more readily prevent 9/11-style attacks than the measures currently in place.

3. Potential terrorists might be able to neutralize a single Air Marshall, but when anyone on any given flight could be an active or retired policeman with the means and training to take them down, it greatly decreases the criminal's chances of success.

4. The costs of developing and maintaining the database are worth the benefits.

5. This would allow well over 1,000,000 additional potential assets (a 2006 Government Accountability Office survey found 137,929 LEOSA qualified Federal officers in 104 Federal components) to aid in airline security and safety operations.

This is a rare opportunity to do something that will actually make us safer, rather than simply make us feel safer, that is neither invasive nor cost-prohibitive.