Free Market Solves Airline Security Problem
Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies. -- Honore de Balzacand:
Gun bans don't disarm criminals, gun bans attract them. -- Walter Mondale
From Quotes of the Day:
When I meet a man I ask myself, "Is this the man I want my children to spend their weekends with?" -- Rita Rudnerand:
To be stupid, selfish, and have good health are three requirements for happiness, though if stupidity is lacking, all is lost. -- Gustave Flaubert
JPFO's home page now has an "Internet Resources & Tools" section in the left-hand column. Search Tools, BBB, Urban Legends and virus hoaxes, zip codes, telephone area codes and country codes, Library of Congress. I finally added JPFO and GOA to my links page. Weren't there before because I always type their URLs when I need them. [jpfo]
Libertarian Party Press Releases - Repeal gun control laws that leave us defenseless against evil terrorists - More guns = less terrorism.
With sales of guns soaring and support for the Second Amendment peaking after the September 11 terrorist attacks, it's time for politicians to start repealing burdensome gun laws, the Libertarian Party said today.
"More Americans are beginning to realize that the Second Amendment is not some fossilized remnant of a frontier nation, but a practical solution to the 21st century problem of terrorism," said the party's national director, Steve Dasbach.
Angel Shamaya at KeepAndBearArms.com - Why CPSC is Going After BB Guns: The First Steps to Putting Our Collective Foot Down - Mr. Shamaya is mad as hell about the CPSC's lawsuit against Daisy and he's not going to take it any more. Some good ideas on the real reason for it and how to voice your displeasure. [kaba]
So why is CPSC really going after Daisy -- the largest manufacturer of BB guns -- if it's not due to a true defect in the product?
An important question, with a painfully obvious answer:
BB GUNS LEAD TO FIREARMS OWNERSHIP.
BB GUNS LEAD TO HUNTING AND SPORTS SHOOTING.
BB GUNS EVEN LEAD TO CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIOTISM.
Think about it. Did YOU own a BB gun, even a Daisy BB gun? I did. Many gun owners I know did, too. I probably shot 100 POUNDS of BB's as a kid, all by myself. I also turned several kids on to the Daisy, and definitely to the sport and all that goes with it. My Daisy 880 -- one of the models under attack -- was my best friend for at least a year or two. (I wore it out!) Then I went up to a Sheriden .20 caliber pellet gun. Then a .22, shotguns, higher caliber rifles etc. etc. And now I pack heat everywhere I go, can pretty much pick off anything within a hundred yards with open sights on the fly and much farther with my scoped rifles or if I take time to place my shot -- and I am a staunch gun rights activist who stands up for the Second Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights and would rather die than surrender one single flintlock to any government agent, ever.
Get it?
The baseless and fraudulent attack on Daisy is an attack on the American firearms heritage.
The baseless and fraudulent attack on Daisy is an attack on the entryway into hunting, riflery, shotgunning, pistolry and everything else that comprises the exercising of the Second Amendment.
This federal agency and its minions are trying to remove the first most natural step into the gun culture.
Our response needs to be a very loud, sustained and collective NO!
James Sweet at anti-state.com - It's A Fad And Other Reasons To Take Heart - Mr. Sweet is optimistic about liberty in America. I hope he's right. [anti-state]
I hate the IRS a lot more than I hate the Taliban, and I know I'm not alone. The IRS is more relevant to me personally, and it functions as the digestive system for the biggest war machine on earth.
Garry Reed, The Loose Cannon - One Size Gives All Fits - a free market solves the airplane security problem better than any single solution. Even mine.
In fact, there's nothing at all wrong with Grandmotherly Secretary's vision of security as long as it's done between consenting adults, i.e., passengers and airlines. In a free society an airline must operate like any other business -- cater to their customers or lose them to competitors. When taxpayer funded bailouts don't exist, when CEOs get fired for failure (unlike the aforementioned bureaucrats who get rewarded with bigger budgets when they demonstrate their incompetence) and when insurance carriers are subject to massive life and property loss payouts or simply refuse to indemnify against terrorist takeovers, a whole lot of people suddenly become very creative in the problem-solving arena.
...
If airlines are held responsible for all death and destruction, including targets on the ground, they'll quickly put extreme measures in place (unlike the vaunted Office of Homeland Defense who'll spend months protecting us with reams of environmentally correct recycled paper and little else.) And, like any other form of insurance, the less risk you assume the more you'll pony up for tickets. Want to be watched over by a squad of armed Steven Segals? (Or Katey Sagals if you insist on gender correctness.) Fine. But their salaries will be passed on to you. That may make flying too expensive for the average Grandmotherly Secretary, but then nobody ever said fares should be so low that a wide body gets turned into a Third World bus.
But opt for a flight that allows passengers to pack heat and you get a discount. You're not only assuming your own protection but you're helping to safeguard the airline's assets as well. They might even compete for your business, offering reduced fares to people with carry permits, NRA card-holders, or even (consider the irony) members of the Muslim-American Gun Owners Club.
Vin Suprynowicz - So-called 'police' still seizing medical records - part of The Libertarian series. The Kalifornia Sheriff's department is now seizing medical records because they don't think proposition 215 applies to them. We've all heard about Mollie Fry. Vin tells us about Dr. William Eidelman, who's office was raided on October 10.
"Basically they don't like the law and they don't believe in the legitimacy of medical marijuana," Dr. Eidelman told me last Friday. "In spite of the fact the law was passed by the people of the state of California they would like to ignore the law and contravene it."
Vin Suprynowicz - A half-hearted kind of war - part of The Libertarian series. I reviewed this when it appeared in this week's issue of The Libertarian Enterprise.
Vin Suprynowicz - Common sense prevails - part of The Libertarian series. Vin applauds the Nevada Regents for not including the phrase "zero tolerance" in their recently adopted non-discrimination policy. He gives a few examples of what zero tolerance has wrought elsewhere.
"Zero tolerance" rules have recently led to high school girls being expelled for "drug dealing" when they share a Midol with a suffering friend in the girls' bathroom, or for "bringing a forbidden firearm to school" in the form of a tiny bracelet charm shaped like their father's Colt .45.
"Zero tolerance" has famously led to 8-year-old boys being sent home and threatened with psychological reconstruction based on charges of sexual harassment after innocently bussing a female schoolmate on the cheek during recess. In Mesa, Arizona, a state law which makes it a crime for teachers and guidance counselors to not report underage students being involved in sexual relationships has led to a spate of police reports that 17-year-old girls are believed to be having sexual relations ... with their 17-year-old boyfriends.
Vin Suprynowicz - A fresh look at jury sevice - part of The Libertarian series. A good lesson on the problems with "voir dire" in the light of a next Thursday's Nevada Supreme Court hearing evaluating possible changes to their jury service system. He also gives a little lesson in the jury's right and duty to nullify bad laws and warns against secret or anonymous juries.
Are Nevada juries being instructed by our judges to swear to "enforce the law as I give it to you"? Then why, in the 1969 case U.S. vs. Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006, did the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Maryland rule: "We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or ... for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision."
Vin Suprynowicz - Thoughts on the occasion of the October moon - part of The Libertarian series. A reprint of Vin's classic 1992 column.
A healthy skepticism about many of our modern-day "witches" and some of their New Age mumbo jumbo may be in order ... though surely it's not up to us to choose which of their exotic notions it's "acceptable" to explore.
But shall we extend our inherited intolerance to the many serious researchers now trying to rediscover the healing properties of plants, to overcome centuries of medical libel designed to convince us that mild-mannered natural remedies which can take weeks to rebuild our immunities are not worth our time, that the only valuable medicines are purified (and thus patentable) toxins that kill "bad" cells in a test tube, no matter how much damage they cause the "host organism" in the process?
timothy at Slashdot - Ask Cryptome's John Young Whatever You'd Like - Slashdot will be posting Mr. Young's answers to our questions. Ask away. [/.]
