Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:04:53 -0400 To: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> From: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> Subject: Re: A Swiss View: Where to go from here? Cc: smith2004-discuss@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"[Note from Matthew Gaylor: Frank Jacoby is an engineer in Columbus, OH]
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:03:47 -0400 (EDT) From: bjacoby <bjacoby@NetWalk.com> X-Sender: <bjacoby@user> To: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> cc: <metzele@attglobal.net>, <lneal@EZlink.com>, <bjacoby@netwalk.net> Subject: Re: A Swiss View: Where to go from here?
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Matthew Gaylor wrote: > From: "Stefan Metzeler" <metzele@attglobal.net>
> Subject: Where to go from here?
> Now lets forward to the promotion of safety at home. As most
>Libertarians, I'm
> revolted at the thought that a few barbarians with knives could take over
> entire planes with 60+ passengers and crew. The sheep mentality is just
> incredible. Why didn't people grab anything - luggage, trays, umbrellas,
> Notebooks PCs - and collectively assault those thugs??? This is one of the
> disasters of thinking that "government" will take care of everything and of
> disarming citizens.
Exactly! It's that "gun control" mentality that is promoted ceaselessly in the media, in our schools and in government. Everyone (except us older folks who still remember how it used to be in America) has been brainwashed into believing that some how "self-defense" is just more "violence". SHAME on all those "gun control" people who have taught Americans that the violent death of a handful of evil hijackers is exactly the same "violence" as a plane loaded with fuel and passengers crashing into an office building loaded with workers. Just how "sensible" are "gun-free-zones" now? SHAME!
> Yet for various reasons, carrying guns on planes is hardly an
>option. Think of
> air rage and drunks on planes, which have become a major problem for airlines
> already now. An enclosed space, such as a plane, combined with
>phobias getting
> the better of some otherwise rational people might create serious problems.
> Someone who looses control doesn't consider the consequences of his acts
> anymore and might pull a gun even if he risks being shot by other armed
> passengers - which could cause further disasters. Not everyone will have
> frangible ammo.
L. Neil Smith may have gone just slightly overboard, but I wonder what kind of libertarians the party has when the Ohio Libertarian Party Director claims that the rules governing weapons on aircraft are due to "private companies" and therefore OK. HELLO! Anyone among the "Ls" ever hear of the FAA?
It was the FAA that turned airliners into "gun-free-zones". They even took guns from pilots to insure a successful WTC attack! It may not be a good idea to allow every person on a plane to pack heat, but why disarm cops, sheriffs, military personnel and other trained persons. Whats wrong with a locker to check passenger guns while in the air? Require special ammo if you must to carry on a plane, but why make rules for terrorist "job safety" and then call them "sensible"?
Personally I have ALWAYS flown armed and ready for terrorism! No, not with a gun (though I considered it! You think that can't be done? Think again bunkie!) But I always carried my Boy Scout Swiss army knife (in my pocket) PLUS a really nasty pair of scissors in my briefcase sewing kit. But now those days are over. I will never fly a commercial jet again! (It is interesting that I was NEVER questioned about the Swiss Army knife and only questioned once about the scisors...I said "My *SEWING* kit?" to the guard and he let me pass! But my steel-toed safety shoes always created a hassle at the metal detector!)
Those days are gone. Not only are Swiss army knives now banned (They were the ONLY knives previously specifically mentioned by name as allowed in the law) but my sewing kit, my nail clippers and I presume any shapened stick or object too. ZERO TOLERANCE HITS THE SKYS! But I'm not some schoolkid whose life can be ruined by an insane school adminstrator. To hell with them! Terrorists 1 ; Americans 0!
> So even if in some specific places guns are not allowed, the entire
>mind set of
> people who are used to guns and self defense is totally different. I am
> thinking of one school shooting, where the shooter was wrestled down by other
> kids who were used to guns. They were able to spot the opening and were not
> afraid to jump the bad guy. With passengers like these, knife wielding thugs
> wouldn't stand a chance.
>
> In addition, pilots could (and should) be armed, along with other
>personnel. If
> it is acceptable to give up your means of self defense in certain
>circumstances
> (especially on a contractual base), those who take your guns become
>responsible
> for your safety. This is the part that government neglects. It
>tries to disarm
> all citizens even outside of controlled facilities and obviously can't
> guarantee their safety.
The problem we all face is that some in government always stand ready to make citizens more and more helpless because in their view it makes their rulership that much more secure. The fact that this policy tends to kill lots of innocent citizens doesn't bother them in the least! The end justifies the means! Even if this view were true (It's not! Such oppression only ends with revolution, not a happy golden age of dictatorship! It's the whole theory behind terroist acts, dig?), we citizens generally do not find helpless victimhood a desirable state.
There is no doubt, that the Gun Control people like Sarah Brady, Howard Metzenbaum, John Glenn and even John McCain who have all bought into and tirelessly promoted this "gun free zone" thing are the people who REALLY have blood on their hands for the attack! ONE .38 revolver tucked in a pilots or engineers' map case could have ended each take-over right now! One .45 handgun in a teacher's or principle's possession, would have stopped Columbine in it's tracks! Violence is sometimes perpetrated with guns but it is almost always stopped by persons with guns! (Police etc.)
And what really bothers me is that the Libertarian Party seems to be jumping on that "gun control" bandwagon. Herded like sheep by the mere panic of a hideous attack. President Bush was right on the money when he called the attack "an attack on Freedom". That's how terrorism works! BUT GET THIS: The real assault on freedom isn't done by THEM, it's done by scared lawmakers and so-called "leaders" who are stampeded into passing police- state measures in the name of "security". It's done by stupid citizens who think that trading freedom for the *PROMISE* of security is a good deal!
One does not destroy Liberty to "protect" it! LNS was right on the money and I'm a bit ashamed of the L's being stampeded into abandoning Libertarian principles to attack him!
Frank Jacoby --
Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/