PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 18, 2015
Arm All Pilots Act of 2015
This bill revises requirements for the federal flight deck officer program.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shall designate additional training facilities for:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
firearms training and recurrent training for federal flight deck officers, and
initial firearm training and certification of pilots seeking to be deputized as federal flight deck officers.
DHS (formerly, the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security of the Department of Transportation) shall:
require officers, but no less than once every six months, to requalify to carry firearms on domestic flights; and
permit officers to requalify at certified private or government-owned gun ranges.
DHS may require certain limitations on initial and recurrent training for such officers.
The bill revises the authority of federal flight deck officers to carry firearms on domestic and foreign flights.
DHS may not establish medical or physical standards for a pilot to become a federal flight deck officer inconsistent with or more stringent than Federal Aviation Administration requirements for issuance of a first- or second-class airman medical certificate.
A pilot deputized as a federal flight deck officer may move from inactive to active status after completing one recurrent training program.
DHS shall allow officers to be screened through the Transportation Security Administration's Known Crew Member program when entering an airport sterile area.
Each air carrier certifying to DHS that it has a pilot deputized as a federal flight deck officer on all its flights shall receive a refund of up to 10% of security service fees collected from passengers on flights operated by that air carrier.
DHS shall revise certain federal regulations to classify information about deputized pilots as sensitive security information.
People & committees
Rep. Brat, Dave [R-VA-7] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4300 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4300 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4300 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4300 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.