… who’s behind this, despite what they say.
Author: Sebastian
Security Theater Quote of the Day
From Joe Huffman, on the TSA’s new attention on powders aboard aircraft:
I wonder if my post contributed to that. I know it got some attention by “government employees”.
If it was my fault I’m not going to say I am sorry. One of the ways you get people to rethink their security systems is to overload them with false positives. If I could only demonstrate that it were relatively easy to bring down a plane by grinding up you hair into a fine powder and making an improvised explosive device out of it using a couple coins as tools…
What Joe is getting at is there’s really no way to adequately protect against the level of threat TSA is trying to protect against. It’s quite impossible to successfully screen for these kinds of items without a body cavity search. It was pointed out by science fiction writer David Brin not too long after 9/11:
Despite the yammerings on TV, a lack of security measures did not cause this tragedy. No, the failure on 9/11 was almost entirely one of DOCTRINE — a policy on how to deal with hijackers that was taught to pilots, flight attendants and the public for forty years.
He goes on to suggest what did work that day — individual initiative — that it was the passengers abroad flight 93 that changed the doctrine within an hour of the WTC attacks after they heard of it on their cell phones.
The doctrinal transformation – or change in the rules of engagement – took place swiftly and decisively, without deliberation by sober government agencies or sage committees. Three average men changed it upon hearing news via their own ‘intelligence network’. They acted as soldiers, heroes, without waiting for permission. It’s called initiative, a civic virtue, part of our national character that doesn’t get enough attention. Not from leaders and certainly not from our enemies.
You can’t defend against the level of threat Joe speaks of, and it’s probably not even worth it to try. Â TSA should concentrate on the obvious threats, that can be easily screened for, and not worry so much about the threats you can’t screen for. Air travel is already miserable enough with all the security theater. The last thing we need is more of it.
Out of the Closet
GruntDoc is a blog by an emergency room physician in Texas. He e-mailed me a few days ago, indicating apprehension that his regular audience might not enjoy his blogging about his hobby. Â Judging from the comments, I would say he’s got not much to worry about. Look at this comment:
Outstanding. I’m a .308 guy myself, but there’s nothing wrong with the 300 mag.  Shooting as a sport is as American as mom and apple pie. Anybody who’s going to be sickened and horrified that you own a bullet-launching device needs their head examined.[…]
Shooters are everywhere, and in places you’d never expect. It’s one of the few sports where you can be on the line with a carpenter on one side of you, and a college professor on the other side. In fact, you can find that at my club any given Thursday. Â I decided 7 years ago not to keep my hobby a secret, and I’ve never found anyone particularly offended by the idea.
I think it’s important for shooters to be open with people about their hobby, because knowing someone who shoots is going to be a big factor in putting things into perspective for the non-gun owning public, and you’ll probably be surprised just how many people actually share your hobby.
Interesting Twist in Air Gun Laws
Dave Markowitz pointed out this section of the United States Code I had never seen before. It deals with federal regulations concerning toy, look alike, or imitation firearms, and requires the orange barrel that anyone who has ever bought an Airsoft gun in this country is familiar with. But it contains this provision at the very end:
(g) The provisions of this section shall supersede any provision of State or local laws or ordinances which provide for markings or identification inconsistent with provisions of this section provided that no State shall—
(i) prohibit the sale or manufacture of any look-alike, nonfiring, collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898, or
(ii) prohibit the sale (other than prohibiting the sale to minors) of traditional B–B, paint ball, or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure.
This is worded in a confusing manner, but my read of it is that the preemption is limited to marking requirements, meaning if New York City were to require that all imitation guns be painted bright pink, federal law would preempt that, provided that New York State does not outright prohibit the sale of look-alike arms. By the same token, Philadelphia would be unable to stipulate markings for an imitation firearm because Pennsylvania does not fall under the exception.
I could be reading this wrong though. Because the way it’s worded, it seems to be that you could read it that if any state passes a law along the lines of (i) or (ii) the entire preemption would be nullified.
Izhmash Facing Bankruptcy?
Looks like the Great Obama Gun Rush isn’t enough to help Izhmash. Makes sense, really. Izhmash doesn’t sell much to the civilian market in the US. Most foreign manufacturers set up local shop in the US, or sell to a domestic partner like Century, to sell to the US market to get around our ridiculous importation laws. Remember kids, a domestic made AK-47 clone is just peachy, but you’ll use it to mow down a school if you import one.
Gunation
New polls results are out, and they don’t look good for the gun control groups. Â 75% believe the constitution guarantees a right to own a gun. Â Even on gun control, we’re roughly split:
What Outdoor Life left out was that Americans appear to be evenly divided regarding the much hotter issue of gun control:Â 44% of respondents said stricter laws are needed, while 44% said they’re not. The other 12% were unsure.
It’s the 12% of unsure people we need to reach. Â Also, much of that 44% have no idea what the current gun laws are. Â In my experience, people are more accepting of the status quo if they understand it. A lot of people honestly think machine guns are completely legal, and think those ought to be restricted. That’s more of the 44% than you might imagine.
Fun With Dead Batteries
Had to call Bitter tonight to come jump my car at work. Â Our parking lot is at a slight incline, so I tried to get the car moving and pop the clutch, but it didn’t work. Â Pushed the car back up, and tried a stronger running start this time, and I couldn’t quite get the clutch back out fast enough to let the engine turn. Â No good. Â Got the car jumped and driven home, turned the car off, tried to start it, and it was still dead. Took the battery out, then went to Wal-Mart to buy a new battery and turn in the old one. The process of having to turn in the old battery in order to buy a new one was confusing to the Wal-Martians, who first thought I meant to return a battery I had bought. It was too late for the automotive department to handle it. Installed it, and everything is fine after I tracked down the code for my car radio. The battery has been on its last leg for a while, and I knew it, so I can’t complain. It’s the original battery, and I’m at 105,000 miles on my ’04 Honda Element. It’s more than served its purpose.
There will eventually be a day …
… when materials science renders conventional small arms largely obsolete, or at least makes it so you have to aim better. Â That’s almost the case now, except that body armor capable of stopping a rifle bullet, and even some more energetic pistol bullets, is heavy and expensive. Â Not something your average cop, criminal or citizen is going to wear around casually. Â But what if you could make conventional soft body armor stop a rifle bullet? Â That would have serious military implications. Â I suppose that’s when we move to particle beam weapons. Â But remember, particle beam weapons don’t kill people, high energy neutrons do!
Bloomberg the Political Radical
Mike Bloomberg is coming out swinging against the checked firearms rule on Amtrak, a rule that not even the Brady Campaign opposes. It would appear that Mayor Bloomberg is setting himself up to be the most extreme anti-gun leader in the gun control movement.
For those who live in cities represented by a Mayor Against Guns, this is a great argument to use in order to convince them to leave Bloomberg’s group. Even if the mayor does support some gun control, there’s a very good chance that they would not want to run to the left of the major gun control advocacy group. Between Bloomberg’s radical positions and his refusal to seek permission before signing mayors up for MAIG or putting their names on letters to Congress and in advertisements, there exists a huge political liability.
Air Gun Rights
This weekend we invited a friend who lives in Philadelphia to our air silhouette match, but unfortunately he doesn’t have an air gun. Actually, he can’t have an air gun because of Section 10-180, subsection 3 of the Philadelphia Code:
No person shall sell, offer for sale at retail, or use, or possess with intent to use, any air gun, spring gun, or any implement not a firearm which forcefully impels a pellet of any kind.
Worthwhile to note that statewide preemption does not apply to air guns, meaning if you take an air gun through Philadelphia, you’re liable for a 300 dollar fine and up to 90 days in jail, including the confiscation of the air gun. Â In fact, the Uniform Firearms Act specifically allows local communities to regulate air guns, and many do. Pittsburgh doesn’t outright prohibit air guns, but does make it unlawful to discharge one at a home range if you had one set up in your basement.
But I think there’s a good argument to be made that the right to keep and bear arms necessarily has to include the right to practice with them, and for those living in more dense urban and suburban areas, an air gun might be the only viable means of regular practice. This is something Dave Kopel has alluded to previously. Once we get incorporation, Philadelphia’s law might be a good one to challenge, especially since the absurdity of being able to legally possess a fully-automatic M16 within the city limits, but being unable to buy or possess an air gun version of the same.