Skip to comments.
U.S. Citizens Must Be Protected, Controlled, Regulated and Intimidated For Their Own Good
Too Good Reports ^
| Dec. 8, 2003
| Fred Reed
Posted on 12/08/2003 8:28:43 AM PST by Middle Man
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
To: MEGoody
Not at all. I would rather we have some
real security by allowing law-abiding passengers to carry knives and handguns like we used to be able to do only a few years ago.
Let the terrorists try something then.
Strip searching little old ladies in wheelchairs and confiscating nail clippers does not enhance security. Neither does having some bull-dyke pat down women with underwire bras like they do now.
61
posted on
12/09/2003 8:59:58 AM PST
by
snopercod
(The federal government will spend $21,000 per household in 2003, up from $16,000 in 1999.)
To: snopercod
"Not at all. I would rather we have some real security by allowing law-abiding passengers to carry knives and handguns like we used to be able to do only a few years ago."
A few years ago? When was this? I've been flying for many years, and I was never aware that anyone and everyone was allowed to carry weapons onto a plane.
How would the airline determine that the guy carrying the gun or knife is a law-abiding citizen? How would they determine that those who don't qualify as 'law-abiding citizens' (e.g. ex-cons or whatever your definition might be) aren't carrying weapons they are not supposed to have?
62
posted on
12/09/2003 9:11:31 AM PST
by
MEGoody
To: tacticalogic
We have further to go in understanding and fighting viruses than we do in what the surface of Mars looks like. We still can't cure 'em, notwithstanding loud claims of a silver bullet vaccine just over the horizon.
To: Middle Man
Fred Reed for President. He makes more sense than the whole bunch that have been "elected" to serve our best interest.
64
posted on
12/09/2003 9:34:14 AM PST
by
sandydipper
(Never quit - never surrender!)
To: MEGoody
I spent a summer in Mexico many lunas ago. The food at the youth hostel -- prepared out of sight and away from the guests -- made many of us mortally sick for a few days. After that we started hitting the street food vendors where at least we could see the stuff being prepared in front of us. There's something to be said for that. I know I've eaten some great meals in cities like New Orleans where I'm better off not knowing how it was prepared.
To: sandydipper
"Fred Reed for President" And P.J. O'Rourke for VP!
To: tacticalogic
"I think that part of the problem is that we've gone overboard on making everything "sanitary" - we're crippling our immune systems from disuse."
A few years ago, on Nova???, there was a blurb about a bunch of folks living in a commune... Virginia I think. Once a week, as part of their Wednesday supper, they'd eat a salad of stuff they grew.. a salad with a teaspoonful of garden dirt on it. Results?? Major illnesses were unheard of, and colds, flus, etc were extremely, extremely rare. Their white blood cells probably look like one of the critters in "Aliens"!
67
posted on
12/09/2003 9:38:24 AM PST
by
djf
To: djf
Kinda makes you think about why toddlers instinctively want to pick things up off the ground and put them in their mouths, and wheather we're doing them any big favor by stopping them.
68
posted on
12/09/2003 10:38:51 AM PST
by
tacticalogic
(Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
To: MEGoody
When was this? Until the passage of the Aviaition and Transportation Security Act of 2001, you could carry knives onboard aircrft as long as the blade was less than 6". I carried a folding-blade knife every time I flew commercial. It was for my convenience, security, and also for use in case of a survivable crash.
Until the 1950s sometime, anyone could carry a handgun onboard a commercial aircraft. There was no screening so how would anybody know one way or the other? In fact, some passengers were required to carry them; Those carrying U.S. mail for instance. The requirement started at the beginning of commercial aviation to insure that pilots could defend the mail if their plane were to ever crash.
There were no training or screening requirements. Indeed, pilots were still allowed to carry guns until as recently as 1987. There are no records that any of these pilots (either military or commercial) carrying guns have ever caused any significant problems. Source: P.C. Air Security - When will our pilots be armed? By John R. Lott Jr.
Law enforcement officers were allowed - actually encouraged - to carry guns onboard aircraft until the 70's, I think. FBI and Air Marshalls still carry today.
I believe that it would be easy to "credential" passengers meeting certain requirements and wishing to carry onboard a commercial aircraft with something similar to this proposal: "Airline Safety and Anti-terrorism Act of 2001"
69
posted on
12/09/2003 11:15:06 AM PST
by
snopercod
(The federal government will spend $21,000 per household in 2003, up from $16,000 in 1999.)
To: Wolfie; vin-one; WindMinstrel; philman_36; Beach_Babe; jenny65; AUgrad; Xenalyte; Bill D. Berger; ..
WOD Ping
70
posted on
12/09/2003 12:00:16 PM PST
by
jmc813
(Help save a life - www.marrow.org)
To: sandydipper
Fred Reed for President. Ron Paul, but Fred would be fine for the VP slot.
To: snopercod
And the Bag Balm??
72
posted on
12/09/2003 1:53:54 PM PST
by
tracer
To: tracer
Bag Balm - YES!
How did you know about that stuff? I have a tin right here.
73
posted on
12/09/2003 2:16:08 PM PST
by
snopercod
(The federal government will spend $21,000 per household in 2003, up from $16,000 in 1999.)
To: Middle Man
How dare you ask for more freedom! Are you some kinda drug-using libertarian? Are you one of those militia nuts who support the Bill of Rights?
There's a terrorist war on. If you need any rights, they'll be issued to you!
74
posted on
12/09/2003 4:41:51 PM PST
by
xdem
To: xdem
Did you read on
NewsMax where Gen. Tommy Franks says if the U.S. is ever hit with a nuclear attack that the Constitution will "probably" have to be discarded in favor of a "military-style" form of government? How long do you think it will be before a dirty bomb is detonated somewhere so these totalitarian eager-beavers can get their wish?
To: Middle Man
Constitution will "probably" have to be discarded... What's your point?
76
posted on
12/10/2003 1:59:52 PM PST
by
xdem
To: xdem
"What's your point?" It should have been self-evident. The statement was made by Franks, not me. Later
To: Middle Man
Great article!
I remember freedom.
78
posted on
12/11/2003 8:41:09 AM PST
by
headsonpikes
(Spirit of '76 bttt!)
To: Middle Man
By “What’s your point?”, I meant that the handwriting’s been on the wall that the constitution is something some in power feel is “in the way.”
We agreed, tho it may not have been obivous at the initial exchange. Sarcasm doesn’t always work on the Internet.
79
posted on
11/17/2008 10:49:23 AM PST
by
xdem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson