billvon 3,059 #26 June 5, 2008 >Anyone proposing that we give up one right, or take it away from many of >us, are certainly willing to also take away any other right they disagree >with. That is absolutely true. >You may also notice that those who do not waiver on their support for >the second also do not waiver on the rest of our rights. That is certainly not true here. Often, the very same people who advocate for gun rights are also those who claim that constitutional protections should not apply to people like Jose Padilla, or that wiretaps without court orders are OK (just to take two examples.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 June 5, 2008 Quote>Anyone proposing that we give up one right, or take it away from many of >us, are certainly willing to also take away any other right they disagree >with. That is absolutely true. >You may also notice that those who do not waiver on their support for >the second also do not waiver on the rest of our rights. That is certainly not true here. Often, the very same people who advocate for gun rights are also those who claim that constitutional protections should not apply to people like Jose Padilla, or that wiretaps without court orders are OK (just to take two examples.) The examples you provide (and decry) have laws supporting the decision. The same can be said for current laws supporting bans against the second amendment. All have been challenged to higher courts, but only the support of the second amendment seems to be 'endangering our rights'.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,059 #28 June 6, 2008 >All have been challenged to higher courts, but only the support of the >second amendment seems to be 'endangering our rights'. What are you talking about? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #29 June 6, 2008 QuoteThe examples you provide (and decry) have laws supporting the decision. The same can be said for current laws supporting bans against the second amendment. All have been challenged to higher courts, but only the support of the second amendment seems to be 'endangering our rights'. There are laws such as the SF handgun ban too. Doesn't make them right. Even when the courts uphold offences like McCain-Feingold, they are still improper erosion of rights. Many 2nd proponents here believe in all 10 Amendmends. A significant chunk do not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #30 June 6, 2008 QuoteFair point, but I'd imagine that no-one batted an eyelid at a few harmless-looking boxcutters a few years back, and these days when it comes to airport security a little bit of irritating/comical paranoia is probably preferable to the alternative. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can understand that a box-cutter with a razor blade can be used to do serious harm. That same amount of common sense can realize that there is absolutely no way that a one-inch silver gun charm can be used to hurt anyone. Yet somehow, these security guards failed to possess that common sense. All the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #31 June 6, 2008 QuoteQuoteFair point, but I'd imagine that no-one batted an eyelid at a few harmless-looking boxcutters a few years back, and these days when it comes to airport security a little bit of irritating/comical paranoia is probably preferable to the alternative. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can understand that a box-cutter with a razor blade can be used to do serious harm. That same amount of common sense can realize that there is absolutely no way that a one-inch silver gun charm can be used to hurt anyone. Yet somehow, these security guards failed to possess that common sense. All the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. The Dems? The TSA was introduced by Bush (a republican if you forgot). Get your facts straight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,059 #32 June 6, 2008 >That same amount of common sense can realize that there is absolutely >no way that a one-inch silver gun charm can be used to hurt anyone. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-526655/Introducing-worlds-smallest-gun-fires-deadly-300mph-bullets--just-TWO-inches-long.html "The SwissMiniGun is the size of a key fob but fires tiny 270mph bullets powerful enough to kill at close range." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #33 June 6, 2008 Quote>That same amount of common sense can realize that there is absolutely >no way that a one-inch silver gun charm can be used to hurt anyone. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-526655/Introducing-worlds-smallest-gun-fires-deadly-300mph-bullets--just-TWO-inches-long.html "The SwissMiniGun is the size of a key fob but fires tiny 270mph bullets powerful enough to kill at close range." "The stainless steel gun costs £3,000 although the manufacturers also produce extravagant, made-to-order versions made out of 18-carat gold with customised diamond studs which sell for up to £30,000." It looks like it would be quite easy to pass one of those customized versions off as a "harmless charm that can't be used to hurt anyone". Looks like the TSA people are doing well for once by erring on the side of caution. Ciao, Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #34 June 6, 2008 QuoteLooks like the TSA people are doing well for once by erring on the side of caution. One more time, not the TSA, not the USA; Kelowna airport security staff in CANADA.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,558 #35 June 6, 2008 QuoteAll the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. How is airport security a liberal issue? How is airport security an anti-gun nut issue?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #36 June 6, 2008 Quote All the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. Non-sequitor ? In Canada, where the incident took place, the government is led by the Conservative Party … unless you’re asserting all Canadians, even the Conservative ones, are liberal? As we all know TSA is a federal agency. All rules, implementation, & execution have been under the current administration. If the flight was arriving in the US, TSA rules would be relevant. Are you going to assert they should "admit that they screwed up" ? I wasn’t allowed to bring dinner-ware spoons on an international flight, is that partisan? I was annoyed but just checked the bag. I've had TSA agents at DCA & IAD tilt my clear plastic baggie of The underlying question, which is more interesting (im-ever-ho ) is regarding the impact that fear -- fear terrorists therefore no gun charms, etc -- is having on policy and thereby on the way we live. It's security theatre. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #37 June 6, 2008 Quote >That same amount of common sense can realize that there is absolutely >no way that a one-inch silver gun charm can be used to hurt anyone. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-526655/Introducing-worlds-smallest-gun-fires-deadly-300mph-bullets--just-TWO-inches-long.html "The SwissMiniGun is the size of a key fob but fires tiny 270mph bullets powerful enough to kill at close range." hahahahahaThat is a weapon that is only better than a rubber chicken in lethality. Actually I could use the rubber chicken to greater effect in that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #38 June 6, 2008 QuoteQuoteAll the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. How is airport security a liberal issue? The "they" that I was referring to were the security guards. It's the liberals that keep defending their (the security guard's) decision, instead of condemning it. QuoteHow is airport security an anti-gun nut issue? Um, gosh, I'll take wild guess on that question: Because of the irrational reaction to a harmless tiny charm in the shape of a gun? It's not airport security in general that I'm criticizing, just their response in this one incident. Try to stick to the specific subject instead of expanding and generalizing. That's two strikes for you in one message. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #39 June 6, 2008 Quote"The SwissMiniGun is the size of a key fob but fires tiny 270mph bullets powerful enough to kill at close range." And you don't think that the average airport security guard can distinguish between a harmless silver necklace charm, and a working miniature gun? I've attached a side-by-side comparison for you, to help you out. Notice the difference in size, the difference in composition, the difference in moving parts, the cleavage... It's pathetic how the liberals here make excuses for such poor decision-making on the part of these security guards, and then at the same time whine about all the security imposed by the current Republican administration. Which is it? You don't like having to take off your shoes, but it's okay to ban harmless silver charm necklaces? Do you want competent security or not? Make up your minds! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,059 #40 June 6, 2008 >And you don't think that the average airport security guard can distinguish >between a harmless silver necklace charm, and a working miniature gun? Tell a working two inch silver gun from a non-working two inch silver gun from ten feet? No, I don't think they can. Don't forget, these are the people who think a flashing light on someone's shirt is a bomb. > and then at the same time whine about all the security imposed by > the current Republican administration. Hoist by your own petard. Welcome to the world you asked for. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,105 #41 June 6, 2008 John, Spin as much as you like, but most of the absurd, feel-good airport security rules were put in place by conservative governments.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #42 June 7, 2008 Quote One more time, not the TSA, not the USA; Kelowna airport security staff in CANADA. Hey, I'm from Europe, so how can you expect me to actually know the difference? Ciao, Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #43 June 7, 2008 Quote And you don't think that the average airport security guard can distinguish between a harmless silver necklace charm, and a working miniature gun? I've attached a side-by-side comparison for you, to help you out. Notice the difference in size, the difference in composition, the difference in moving parts, the cleavage... It's pathetic how the liberals here make excuses for such poor decision-making on the part of these security guards, and then at the same time whine about all the security imposed by the current Republican administration. Which is it? You don't like having to take off your shoes, but it's okay to ban harmless silver charm necklaces? Do you want competent security or not? Make up your minds! John, which approach do you think would provide the highest level of security? - Trust every security guard (TSA or whatever ) to make the right call every time they're presented with a gun lookalike - Ban everything that even remotely looks like a gun from all planes After all, it's not like people are being prevented from taking their asthma inhalers on board, I'm sure the lady survived the trip even without her lucky charm. BTW, I too agree that calling the security guard an "Anti-Gun nut" for doing his job is just plain silly, to say the least. I mean, for all we know the guy might have an arsenal of Waco proportions stashed away somewhere and might spend all of his free time at the local range talking about "groupings" and "muzzle velocities" with his shooting buddies. For once he does his job as as instructed to do and that makes him an "Anti-Gun nut"TM? Come on John, pull the other one will you? Ciao, Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #44 June 7, 2008 You are correct becuase it happened after 9-11, but it was just to satisfy the liberals.Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #45 June 7, 2008 All the liberals ought to quit making excuses for such poor decision making, and just admit that they screwed up. The Department of Homeland Security wasn't created by a bunch of liberals.-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
