L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 141, October 1, 2001
HOPE? OR GLASS?
Arm Passengers for Safe Skies
by Carl Bussjaeger
Special to TLE
Some years ago, in a town in which I once lived, someone tried to rob a donut shop.
Just from that, and a reasonable awareness of police stereotypes, you can probably guess where this is going. But not quite; it's worse. Much worse. This particular donut shop was across the street from police headquarters. And there was even a patrol car in the shop parking lot.
Do I really need to tell you that the robbery attempt failed miserably?
In fact, it's a monument to criminal stupidity that it occurred at all. Only the minor detail that the wanna-be robber's IQ was exceeded by his shoe size accounts for the fact that he wasn't deterred by the presence of lots of heavily armed men. Perhaps he thought they wouldn't be able to grab their sidearms with their hands full of donuts and coffee.
Sometimes there's just no accounting for the criminal mind. So you've got to be ready to deal with idiots.
Take a look at another sort of establishment rarely victimized by freelance criminals: Gun shops. When it is attempted, the success rate for the goblin is generally hovering just below 0%. Must be something about all those well-armed store owners, clerks, and customers. The last semi-successful instance I recall offhand was more of a 'burglary'; Our underworld heroes crashed a car through the wall of a closed gun store in the middle of the night, rather than face day-time opposition in the form of aforementioned owner, clerks, and customers.
So why am I wasting your time with this stuff when every other writer is scribbling about the New York and DC terrorist attacks this week?
Guess what- I am writing about that.
Here's a basic fact for you, as illustrated above: The presence of armed people deters crime, regardless what lies Chump Schumer, Die-anne Feinstein, or Sarah "Killer" Brady tell you. You know it. You don't even need to read Lott's More Guns, Less Crime, or follow the lack of crime stats in Kennesaw, Georgia where gun ownership is mandated. All you have to do is notice what businesses never seem to get robbed. Not just donut shops; go down to MacDonalds and ask them about their policy of free coffee for uniformed peace officers. They want an armed presence; it discourages freelance redistributionists.
Now, let's look at the opposite situation. What happens when we disarm all the honest folks?
Perhaps you've noticed the rash of school shootings so well publicized in the mainstream media. Perhaps you were stupid enough to believe the media lies that such shootings of disarmed sheep proved that more sheep need to be disarmed (but if you're reading this at my website, you probably aren't that stupid). Not that more victim disarmament laws are going to do much to disarm criminals. Think Columbine, Colorado. All those dead kids, because they and their teachers had been disarmed by criminal-loving socialists.
Here's another basic fact; two even: Criminals are called criminals because they break laws, especially laws that might make it tougher to conduct their business. And as an ex-cop, I've had many a felon tell me that he loves gun control, because it makes it more likely that his victims will be helpless. And because he knew he could always get a gun.
Okay, let's look at another instance of everyone being disarmed: September 11, 2001. Three airliners full of innocent people were hijacked by psychos with nothing more than small pocket knives and box cutters. Said airliners were then crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We may never know how many people died, but it's in thousands.
Thousands murdered because our government prefers helpless sheep to armed citizens capable of their own defense. I think every politician and bureaucrat who's pursued a policy of gun control (read as 'victim disarmament') should be tried as accomplices to mass murder.
And then turned over to their victims - and victims' families - who should be armed with pocket knives and box cutters.
But I digress; mass murder upsets me.
No doubt, some sheep-like socialoid drone is outraged by my suggestion. Don't forget that there was a fourth flight hijacked that morning. The results aren't in yet (it seems there's a possibility that the airliner was shot down by the Air Force; take a look at the uncharacteristic scattering of wreckage over 8 miles), but the current reports claim that at least three passengers on that plane weren't sheep, and were equipped with adequate cojones to take on pocket knives and box cutters. Without being positive of the hijackers' target, we can only assume that those passengers saved thousands more lives.
Here's a new scenario: Passengers boarding a plane are not subjected to magnetic, radar, and chemical scans, nor anally probed. Unannoyed by intrusion, and undelayed by pointless "security", they board their flight on time. The plane takes off. And a couple of hijackers stand up and announce their intent to divert the craft for the greater glory of Zool or some other nitwit idea.
Said announcement is immediately followed by approximately 100 firearms safeties being clicked off, as all the other passengers and flight crew object to the interruption of their own plans, out-gunned by a ratio of 50 to 1, the hijackers choose between surrender or being mopped off the bulkheads after being hit with several hundred rounds of frangible (ie- fairly harmless to the aircraft) ammunition.
Assuming the FAA gets out of the business of making aircraft easy targets, the cockpit door should locked and well-lined with bullet-resistant kevlar. The worst case scenario would then allow the hijackers to kill or injure only as many passengers as they have rounds in their magazines. And they'd still be dead, and their suicidal mission failed.
Yep, you've got it folks. I want honest folks to be able to board aircraft armed for their own defense, just as once the case in the United States until the '60s and '70s. Arming the pilots is a good idea, but they're up front flying the plane. Air Marshals aren't bad, but why should they have to do the job alone? Arm everyone and hijackings will fade away.
With every passenger armed, the next cry of "I have a gun and this aircraft is now going to Cuba/Libya/NY/etc!" will be met by "Fuck you! I have a date in Chicago that I'm not missing!" Boom! Probably lots of booms, as other passengers consider the threatened inconvenience of a hijacking.
Happily, I'm not alone in this belief that self-defense can only be provided by our selves. Some fine folks have started Project Safe Skies (www.ProjectSafeSkies.org). Their intent, like mine, is to see everyone armed and capable of defense. Check them out. Join them. Save a few thousand lives yourself.