GUN CONTROL; ADVANTAGE TERRORISTS

GUN CONTROL; ADVANTAGE TERRORISTS As a nation, we have a fatal flaw. This flaw is a result of intellectual laziness and a desire to be always safe. We have instituted zero-tolerance weapons policies in both schools and airlines in the interest of "safety" because we are too lazy to deal with the real problems in a logical manner. It is so much easier to blame an object for an action rather than a person or group. The object can't object. Just as it is no surprise that concealed carry laws have reduced crime, it is no surprise that "gun free" zones have created not crime free zones, but rather free crime zones. They only serve to give the advantage to the criminal or terrorist. In schools, were teachers encouraged to carry concealed weapons: school shootings would not happen. By banning all weapons, the criminal knows that only he or she will be armed. This empowers the criminal. This is what hapened on the morning of 9/11/01; a day that will live in infamy. A day that will hopefully show the idiocy of zero tolerance weapons policies, and the idiocy of knee jerk reactions. I fear however, that it will only bring on more of the same. Had we made sure the right people were armed, the pilot, co-pilot, and navigator, a few thugs armed with box cutters would not have had the opportunity to take over 4 jet liners and use them as a kamikaze pilot would. Having a zero tolerance policy on flights serves only to give the advantage to the criminal. Gun control can now be attributed to how many deaths? We don't know, we still haven't found all the bodies! MARK A SITY www.logic101.net

Three or four armed passengers could easily have overpowered the terrorists. There were not three or four armed passengers on any of the airplanes because the government has made it illegal to be armed on an airplane--implicitly promising, "Put your security in our hands and we'll take good care of it."

Now I am hearing all sorts of stuff about tightening airport security: replacing minimum-wage security workers with much more highly-paid folks, taking airport security away from the airlines altogether and making it the responsibility of the FBI, the BATF, and the US Marshals' Service, even having large detachments of soldiers at each major airport as a routine thing.

What is not made clear is how these people think any of this might have stopped the events of yesterday. No halfway-competent terrorist would count on being able to slip weapons past the metal detector. If the terrorists depended on weapons that might not have been allowed past security, they would have bribed maintenance crews to get them on the plane. Shall we make it illegal to bribe maintenance crews?

All those people died yesterday because the government forced them to make themselves defenseless in return for a promise to ensure their safety. We see now that the government couldn't keep that promise. So what should our response be? Shall we give up even more of our liberty to the likes of the FBI and BATF of Waco and Ruby Ridge fame, because we have confidence that they can protect us? Or shall we fire the government and demand the right to look after our own security?

Liberty works, where it is tried: but it's been a long time since anyone tried liberty in the airline business.

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.