Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Recreational Boats Considered a Homeland Security Threat
firstcoastnews.com ^ | 05/28/07 | jackelyn barnard

Posted on 05/29/2007 6:47:28 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-149 next last
To: billbears
So you see a lot of Arleigh Burke class destroyers in your local lake do you?

What part of the concept of ASYMMETRIC warfare don't you understand?

101 posted on 05/29/2007 1:52:16 PM PDT by null and void ("Wherever liberty has sprouted around the world, we find American blood at its roots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Blowing up a dam is a very difficult proposition becasue they are very large tough structures - this was tried during WWII and it took very special bombs and delivery systems to damage a dam.

It took a special delivery system because the other side was shooting back!

BTW, the big secret was set the bomb off close to the base of the dam. This is a piece of cake when you can simply motor up to the face of the damn dam and scuttle your boat.

Heck, since you don't have to get the charge into a light enough package to airlift, you can "use enough dynamite, there Butch"...

102 posted on 05/29/2007 1:57:39 PM PDT by null and void ("Wherever liberty has sprouted around the world, we find American blood at its roots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: null and void
What part of the concept of ASYMMETRIC warfare don't you understand?

What part of needlessly scaring the pants off the flock of sheep that see the government as a parent do you not understand? Contrary to Faux News and 24, Muslim fundamentalists are not out to steal boats and ram them into other boats. If they are, treat it like any other crime. However since they aren't I wouldn't put too much faith into it. Sheesh reading the 'news' lately is starting to read like World Nut Daily

BTW, I live 4 miles from a nuclear power plant. Situated on a large man made lake. And no I'm not concerned in the least

103 posted on 05/29/2007 1:58:24 PM PDT by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

true but a small boat next to a large tanker at a fuel loading dock could be worse.


104 posted on 05/29/2007 1:59:50 PM PDT by bikerman (_ _ . /_ _ _ /_ . . / / . . . . / . / . _ . . / . _ _ . / / . . _ / . . . //)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
It’s funny how the solution to supposed national security threats always involves licensing or monitoring law abiding citizens, and never seems to involve inconviencing illegal aliens or international commerce.

Yeah. Hilarious.

105 posted on 05/29/2007 2:02:02 PM PDT by null and void ("Wherever liberty has sprouted around the world, we find American blood at its roots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis

There is absolutely no way to protect yourself from the Islamic monsters except to catch them “personally” before they can get that far. You can build a wall around the whole of the USA. What’s the sense if they’re already here???


106 posted on 05/29/2007 2:05:51 PM PDT by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Transponders would work, but it’s simple to just turn it off. That wouldn’t work too well, unless they use solar power for it.”

Since the drug runners do alot of their movement of product in the middle of the night, solar power would be just wonderful.

This is just another bad idea cloaked inside the idea of “keeping you safe”.
Use your own brain and watch out for yourself. We don’t need another layer of bureacracy, IMO. Then they will have to hire lots of people to “patrol” and check for licenses.


107 posted on 05/29/2007 2:06:32 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: billbears
I am not talking about lakes, Florida is surrounded by ocean and gulf their are large tankers loaded with fuel unloading at fuel docks a small boat could very easily cause a real problem.
108 posted on 05/29/2007 2:06:40 PM PDT by bikerman (_ _ . /_ _ _ /_ . . / / . . . . / . / . _ . . / . _ _ . / / . . _ / . . . //)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

But the greater threat is for a boat to be used as a means to transport a group of terrorists.”

Get a grip, people. I could transport about 20 people inside my 4 horse trailer!!! What’s next? Cameras there also???


109 posted on 05/29/2007 2:07:56 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Quick Shot

New great idea.... How about a ‘luxury’ tax???? Great idea, proven to stop boating.”

When was the luxury tax on yachts and boats over a certain size?

It ground the entire industry to a complete halt.


110 posted on 05/29/2007 2:08:58 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Counter terrorism is not an exercise in stopping things, darn near anything can be used to create mayhem.

Yes, I always thought the easiest way to destroy in this country would be fire. The US is covered with forest. Many areas have a heavy population surrounded by trees and brush. A couple guys could create a huge firestorm in populated areas with a couple lighters and a car on a dry, windy day.

111 posted on 05/29/2007 2:09:07 PM PDT by toast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis

We’re losing a lot of freedom through proposals like this and yet I don’t think they add to security significantly, if at all. I find it appalling that this kind of thing is even being proposed.””

All this kind of stuff being “proposed”.

What about building the fence on the southern border???
Quit messing around and get the job done....


112 posted on 05/29/2007 2:10:59 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
No can do! That would actually put us in danger of fixing a problem. A thought that sends icy beads of sweat trickling down any bureaucrat’s spine..
113 posted on 05/29/2007 2:38:48 PM PDT by null and void ("Wherever liberty has sprouted around the world, we find American blood at its roots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: bikerman
I am not talking about lakes, Florida is surrounded by ocean and gulf their are large tankers loaded with fuel unloading at fuel docks a small boat could very easily cause a real problem.

And North Carolina has shipping in Wilmington. The Intercoastal Waterway runs all the way down my coast. And still the problem exists. 'Conservatives' would further limit freedoms to obtain a false sense of security. Or do you actually believe terrorists would go through the proper channels to obtain a boat? What next? Cars? Just let us know what you'll accept so we can fight it all off in one fell swoop

114 posted on 05/29/2007 3:22:42 PM PDT by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Poincare

Actually, after all these years of running muddy water into it, Lake Mead is mostly mud. The sudden surge of what water is impounded would cause havoc downstream for awhile but the newly exposed soil would support quite a few farms until the dam could be repaired.


115 posted on 05/29/2007 3:46:17 PM PDT by oldfart (The most dangerous man is the one who has nothing left to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau; ridesthemiles

Sac, the “islamic monsters” are here and there are more of them coming, legally. They don’t need to sneak in across the border and in fact I suspect most don’t have the toughness or competence needed to do so.

As you point out, the only way to defeat terrorism is to put resources into, well, defeating terrorism. Border fences and restricting recreational boating and all that sort of things may or may not be desirable according to some people, but they’re not going to fight terrorism. In fact, I would expect them to divert resources from the kind of unglamourous law enforcement and intelligence work that’s been successful in combatting terrorists.

Most of the people involved in the Fort Dix plot were legal residents. Two of the illegals had been arrested numerous times. This indicates that, instead of building a fence, we should simply change our policy so that we do check the immigration status of people who are arrested and throw them out. That might have foiled this plot then and there. The fence wouldn’t have done a thing.

Unfortunately there are plenty of legal residents of our nation who have decided their Islamic identity is more important than their identity as Americans. Consider John Walker Lindt; he was not an illegal alien but he fought against us in the Afghan war. He surely could have participated in attacks within the US. The border fence does nothing to people like him.

So again, I’m all for more law enforcement resources being placed against terrorism. I’m all for more intelligence resources being placed against terrorism. I am against measures such as the border fence and this attack on recreational boating because I think they nibble at - literally - the periphery of the issue, while we need people to stab straight to the heart of it.

Rides The Miles, it’s interesting that you point this out. As you would know if you read my other posts, I am one of the very few Freepers who thinks illegal aliens are largely benign. I think the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens are harmless and just want to work. As a result, the border fence strikes me as a huge waste of time and resources.

I did think when I was writing my response to this question that my opposition to such measures pretty much followed from it. In this recreational boating proposal, we are talking about huge reductions in freedom for potential gains that are in my view entirely illusory. In the fence proposal, we are talking about spending billions of dollars on a measure that will only reduce terrorism in the most indirect possible way.

I know this response was against what many of you believe, but I hope it made you think, and was of interest because of that.

D


116 posted on 05/29/2007 6:09:08 PM PDT by daviddennis (If you like my stuff, please visit amazing.com, my new social networking site!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: TornadoAlley3
General aviation aircraft will be banned by our big brother next, followed shortly by private automobiles.

The terrorists have won.

117 posted on 05/29/2007 6:16:52 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles

And your 4 horse trailer could be packed with a couple of tons of explosives and driven right next to a building. Where as a boat, well, they don’t “go” on land very well. And most buildings are on land.

The overall point is well taken though. We can cripple ourselves and live in our bunker houses and not go out and live like with all of it’s risks .... or .... we can put a portion of our economy via the intelligence and police forces to go after the terrorists.

Play defense or play offense. I prefer to play offense.


118 posted on 05/30/2007 12:01:07 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
God save us from the "if it's not specifically mentioned by name in triplicate in the Constitution, it's not a right, it's a privilege" clowns.

Were you sleeping during the classroom or driving portion of drivers education or maybe both? Every state controls who can and can't drive. I took drivers ed. in Michigan during 1973, and the first sentence out of the instructor's mouth was about driving being a privilege not a right. Since then I have been licensed to drive in Indiana, Virgina and North Carolina, all of which stress the same point. Even Paris Hilton has learned the difference between rights and privileges recently. The original point I was making was that the authorities can stop any vehicle, board any boat or knock any plane from the air if they need to do it. We don't need any new laws giving them the authority to do the same.

BTW Willard, don't throw the term "clown" around until you take a good look at yourself.

119 posted on 05/30/2007 4:10:16 AM PDT by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: null and void
It took a special delivery system because the other side was shooting back!

Wrong. It took a special delivery system because of the minimum size of the bomb necessary to cause damage.

This is a piece of cake when you can simply motor up to the face of the damn dam and scuttle your boat.

Not that easy - I was at Hover dam last year and noticed that there were armed patrol craft making sure that no boats got too close.

120 posted on 05/30/2007 4:15:32 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-149 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson