At least he has porpoise in life!
Posted on 08/14/2002 2:17:23 PM PDT by NEWwoman
Did you see the posting instructions?
NO profanity, NO personal attacks...
Taking out the profanity and personal attacks, you have made some valid points (as others have-more civilly): (1) Yes, by definition the firearm was concealed (2) Yes, that was an offense (3) yes, he was stupid to resist ...
Siempre Fi
OUCH!
At least he has porpoise in life!
And hobbits live in holes, not caves... there is a big difference.
I think that one thing to come out of "post 9-11" is that a lot of people's eyes are being opened to what is really going on in DC concerning our Rights.
Many Americans aligned themselves with Republicans for economic reasons. Others identified with Republicans because of their stated views on social issues. Both groups have MANY members who really don't believe in individual Rights. They were only aligned with the GOP because they wanted tax write-offs for themselves or their company, or because they wanted to control everyone else's behavior. Because of their association with the GOP, they were called "conservatives"
Likewise, many people aligned themselves with Demoncrats, since they hated big corporations. They also viewed the RATS as being more concerned with individual Rights (I know this is wrong, but it's the perception of many people). Because they voted for Dems, they were called "liberals".
After 9/11, more than a few people are realizing that there really isn't much difference between the parties at the top levels. People are starting to view things in a "Freedom vs. tyranny" viewpoint instead of "conservative vs. liberal".
Hence many "liberals" are taking "conservative" positions and vice versa.
I think Reagan realized this, which is why he spoke about Freedom and Liberty so much (and really meant it). It's also why he won 2 landslide elections.
There's enough pressure to go around - until you start ventilating the pressure body - then you don't have nearly enough pressure. Nothing like an explosive decompression to really make your day.
Too bad a few "stupid" pilots hadn't been carrying loaded handguns on 9/11.
They would have saved many lives, but that would have destroyed the "only the gov't can protect you" mindset.
And we can't have that, can we?
But I may be odd man out on the guns-in-planes deal. I know some folks in aviation (pilots included) that are pro and con on it, and it isn't split Dem vs Rep either.
What is your thoughts on Air Marshalls? (I know this is going a bit off topic...)
True enough statement and I agree with it.
That said when you've been around guns a lot they become like other inanimate things like keys, tools, etc. I've talked to many cops who have experienced this and have lost or misplaced a weapon.
Not that it's right, but it's possible and it does happen.
If he didn't have a California CCP how could he check it at a California airport counter.
When you carry it so much that it becomes like your wallet or your keys.
"Hell" is not a profane word.
Ouch?
Uh yeah....the Marine Corps School of Solicitude hasnt really gotten off the ground.
More goofball chic involvement is required.
.....tedious.
In a world with infinite resources for the government to pay billions for such a program, it makes sense. In the real world, it is ludicrous.
Looking at the big picture, the largest external threats to America are biological and nuclear weapons being smuggled in across the borders. Prudence dictates that preventing this should be the top priority.
Therefore, any new federal programs should be directed to this (i.e., securing our borders from external threats). Furthermore, the federal gov't should divert resources from existing federal programs that enforce stupid laws (such as alcohol, weapons, certain taxes and regulations, etc....) to prevent the use of WMD here in the United States. Should we spend billions on a program that might save hundreds of lives, when those finite resources would be better spent on efforts that could save the lives of millions, by securing our borders? I think not.
The Air Marshall program has been totally ineffective. It has cost the taxpayers millions (if not billions) of dollars, yet there are so few Marshalls that the gov't won't tell us how many flights they are on. A large percentage of these Marshalls come from existing federal agencies that are loosing their expertise. Those agencies are complaining about the loss of talent.
One reason that many support the Air Marshall program is under the false belief that they will restore the public's confidence in the airline industry. This has failed too (no surprise there). The number of people flying is down significantly since last year. Despite a multi-billion dollar bailout package, the airlines are still laying people off and losing money. Some have already gone bankrupt, others are on the edge of doing so.
The Air Marshall program had nothing to do with security, and everything to do with the federal government propagating the lie that only they can protect us.
A better approach could have been implemented on 9/12. The pilots should be able to carry. Police officers should be able to carry. And CCW holders should be able to carry. Those three groups constitute 3 million people, and could easily protect the airlines from a hijacking. It would cost the government absolutely nothing, allow federal agents to devote their time to preventing WMD from infiltrating the borders, and the airlines would be making more money from more of us flying. It's a win-win-win situation, but one that our corrupt and illegitimate government refused to even consider.
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.