Flying at 37,000 feet above the earth is no place for thrills. Shoot-outs may have been common in the old West, but they do not belong in a crowded airplane. Giving guns to airline pilots reminds me of Gunsmoke and High Noon, but doesn't make me feel safer in the air. Even though the Department of Transportation has nixed the idea, some members of Congress want to resurrect it.

I've spent my share of time in long security lines at Denver International Airport. I've had my bags searched and my shoes x-rayed and haven't grumped too much. That's because, when it comes to air safety, our first line of defense is security on the ground. Once aloft, I'm happy to have armed air marshals aboard. They are trained in law enforcement, including marksmanship and gun safety. I'm even OK with pilots having stun guns, provided we know an innocent passenger who is mistakenly zapped will fully and quickly recover. But loaded handguns don't belong in pilots' hands.

There are several reasons for my caution. First, this isn't Main Street in Dodge City, with the air absolutely still and only the crook and the sheriff in view. An airplane is a tightly confined space, packed with passengers and often bouncing in turbulence. There's just too great a chance of killing an innocent passenger or piercing a vital part of the aircraft.

To be armed, pilots would not only need to have extensive training in marksmanship, but they would need to update their skills often. I'm a lot happier if their training time is spent on flying airplanes safely rather than learning to shoot. Now that most aircraft have only two pilots in the cockpit, that's where both should be, particularly in a crisis when the safety of everyone aboard depends on their judgment and skill.

The announcement we hear every time we fly, that flight attendants are there primarily for our safety, means just that. When it comes to conflict in the air, flight attendants are the first crew members to respond. They need adequate training in self-defense, in handling unruly passengers and in defusing a threatening situation. They need communications equipment immediately at hand to alert the pilots and passengers to a potential danger.

Commanders on the battlefield would never arm just themselves, leaving their front line troops unarmed and untrained. They would never agree to expose their troops to danger with no means of communicating with them. Airline captains are the commanders of their aircraft, now isolated behind secure doors from the rest of their crew. It is more important than ever for them to know their crews are well prepared for any crisis and to be able to communicate immediately if a problem arises.

Training flight attendants as well as pilots to manage the new threats we face in today's skies will, no doubt, be expensive. Not nearly as expensive, though, as losing an airplane and everyone aboard because the crew isn't prepared for an emergency.

Passengers, too, are feeling a new sense of responsibility for the safety of airplanes. We are often asked today to be willing to help the crew if a threat arises in flight. I, for one, would be happy to listen to more safety instruction if it included protecting ourselves from a violent passenger.

There are no surefire ways to protect ourselves completely from violence in an airplane. When DIA and other airports have fully implemented the new security procedures, including x-raying all bags, providing full and continuing training to security personnel and deploying better screening equipment and techniques, we will still need trained crews and alert passengers to make flying safe.

Rather than adding another level of risk to a plane in the air or distracting pilots when they need to be heading for the nearest airport, we should put our money and energy into excellent ground security, sky marshals and extra training for flight crews. Today's pilots shouldn't be turned into Wild West cowboys. They have a more important job to do-flying their aircraft safely in all circumstances.