Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

AN ANTI-BILL OF RIGHTS EXTREMIST RADICALS ARE PUTTING AMERICANS AT RISK
EtherZone ^ | 5-25-02 | John Bender

Posted on 05/26/2002 9:07:52 AM PDT by SUSSA

John Magaw, director of the Transportation Security Administration, announced that he would not authorize commercial airline pilots to carry firearms to protect the plane and the public from another terrorist attack. The excuse he gave the Senate is " We don’t want them shooting firearms with the potential of bringing down the plane."Magaw is either a liar or totally uninformed.

The new standard operating procedure for handling a hijacking of a commercial airplane is for the Air Force to shoot the plane down if it leaves its flight plan. I would be willing to bet Magaw that the U.S. Air Force has much more "potential of bringing that plane down" than a stray bullet fired from a handgun does.

Now, the question is, does Magaw not know that this is now S.O.P.? Is he that unaware? Or, does he know and lied in his testimony to conceal his real reason for refusing to take this common sense safety measure?

The latter may be the disgusting truth. Magaw may be placing his personal, radical political agenda ahead of the safety and security of the American people.

Magaw is an anti-Second Amendment radical. Bill Clinton chose Magaw to head the BATF after the agency raided the church in Waco, killing Pastor Koresh and most of his congregation. Magaw saw to it that none of the thugs responsible for that massacre were ever brought to justice. He also protected the assassin, Lon Horiuchi, from prosecution for the murder of Vicky Weaver.

As head of the BATF Magaw made it the bureau’s position that the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act made it a crime to possess a gun within 1000 feet of a home school. He held the position that this included the parents of the home-schooled child. Magaw formally asserted this ridicules position in a letter to Rep. Dan Coats.

Magaw made no secret of his extremist views. Asked about handguns in an interview with ABC’s Day One correspondent John McKenzie, Magaw said; "The truth is, they (handguns) are used to assassinate people, to kill people, because they are very easily concealed, you can drop them in any pocket."

Magaw never mentioned the 2.5 million times a year guns are used to defend against crime or the fact that a woman is seven times more likely to escape a rape attempt unharmed if she defends herself with a gun. He simply pushed the anti-civil rights disinformation spread by radical anti-civil rights groups like Handgun Control Inc. (or what ever name they are hiding behind this week).

There is no question that Magaw is an anti-Bill of Rights extremist. It seems strange that the Bush Administration would put this Clintonista in charge of the Transportation Security Administration. But it is no surprise to anyone who knows who recommended him for the job and who is now his boss.

Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta is Magaw’s boss and the man who recommended him for the job as head of the TSA. Mineta is another Clintonista. Bush reappointed him to the cabinet to the horror of civil rights groups such as the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, and Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership, as well as to the dismay of Bush’s other conservative supporters.

Mineta’s record in Congress was almost as radical as Chucky Schumer’s. Mineta never saw an infringement of the Second Amendment that he didn’t support. No attack on the Second Amendment was radical enough to keep Mineta from wholeheartedly supporting it.

After his infamous stint in Congress, Clinton put Mineta in his cabinet. Bush inexplicably kept Mineta as a member of his cabinet. Now that bad decision is putting everyone who flies or works in a high-rise building at risk.

Thankfully, there are reasonable people in Congress who are ready to force these extremists to take the common sense safety precaution of arming pilots. Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia introduced the Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act (H.R. 435). This law will force these anti-Bill of Rights extremists to put the safety of the American people ahead of their personal agenda. It will keep Mineta and Magaw from blocking the will of Congress and the American people, and make airplanes safe again by arming the pilots.

Hopefully, before this bill becomes law, President Bush will step in and force Mineta and Magaw to do the sensible thing. One phone call from Bush could force these two Clintonistas to put our safety ahead of their own political agenda. He needs to make that call today.

But, even if Bush steps in to fix this mess, this law will still be needed. There will always be terrorists and we could someday have another anti-Bill of Rights president. In that case, the law would be harder to change than a presidential directive. The Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act will be our insurance that air travel will be as safe as possible no matter who is in the White House.

Every American who flies, works in a tall building, or has a loved one who does either, needs to call and write President Bush and demand that he overrule Mineta and Magaw. They also need to call and write their Representative and Senators telling them to pass H.R.4635 immediately. We cannot afford to let two extremists put thousands of lives at risk.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: armingpilots; banglist; civilrights; secondamendment; terror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 05/26/2002 9:07:52 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
We don’t want them shooting firearms with the potential of bringing down the plane.

Three words: Glaser Safety Slugs.

2 posted on 05/26/2002 9:14:36 AM PDT by gundog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bang_list
Bang
3 posted on 05/26/2002 9:16:32 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
"Magaw is either a liar or totally uninformed."

He's BOTH!

4 posted on 05/26/2002 9:18:03 AM PDT by Artie_Kay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gundog
Even without Glaser Safety Slugs there isn't a handgun made that will bring down a plane. But a heat-seeking missel will bring one down every time. Magaw is either unaware of this or putting his agenda ahead of the safety of the American people. Either way he should be sent packing.
5 posted on 05/26/2002 9:21:07 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
Responsibility for the executive branch ultimately lies with the President. Apparently President Bush finds this policy decision by his subordinates at least acceptable.
6 posted on 05/26/2002 9:23:17 AM PDT by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artie_Kay
I agree!
7 posted on 05/26/2002 9:23:54 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Grut
I can't wait for Bush to take office an get rid of these Clinton appointees.
8 posted on 05/26/2002 9:25:16 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
"I can't wait for Bush to take office an get rid of these Clinton appointees."

Ouch, that hurt ;')

9 posted on 05/26/2002 10:12:45 AM PDT by bloggerjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sirgawain; SLB; GEC, gundog; harpseal; DWSUWF; Wild Game; Fiddlstix; Mercuria; basil; TexanaRED...
fyi
10 posted on 05/26/2002 10:21:02 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Grut
This is a Bush appointment, plain and simple. Bush's position on the 2nd Amendment is that, since he was better than Gore, it got him elected. If he decides the wind's shifted and he'll somehow get more votes by instituting something the gun control crowd supports even though it violates the 2nd Amendment he'll go for it the same as his father did.

It's up to the pro 2nd Amendment community to make sure Bush understands that little lapses like this one aren't going to be forgotten and will erode his already thin electoral base. Like his father, my guess is he'll allow the natural arrogance that runs in his family, combined with his high (and IMHO temporary) approval ratings and core beliefs (more Rockefeller than Reagan), to make the 2004 election night tally a lot more exciting than he'd like it to be.

11 posted on 05/26/2002 10:24:19 AM PDT by caltrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
I blame Bush for this. In the exec branch, the buck stops with the president. Period.
12 posted on 05/26/2002 10:26:46 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
I personally don't see the need of the pilots to carry firearms. The SOP procedure should be that they stay in the cockpit and the cockpit is completely sealed during the flight. In the interim I can see a need for them to carry firearms, but they both need to be trained how to use them effectively and in the long run we need a system in which barring the use of explosives, you cannot get access to the pilots period. Keep the sky marshals, give them a few MP-5s and you're golden IMO.
13 posted on 05/26/2002 10:40:30 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
You are absolutely correct. Bush is as liberal as his father, and has already made more blunders than his father did in 4 years. Bush will not step up to the plate, but will allow the Republicans in Congress to carry his water, and take the heat. Afterall, Bush is too busy courting the hispanic vote to worry about the conservative vote. He figures that we are in the bag regardless of what he does. I'm finished with him, and will not vote for him in '04.
14 posted on 05/26/2002 10:44:42 AM PDT by Scotsman will be Free
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
It will require more than 65,000 sky marshals to put a marshal on every domestic flight. That will be a long time in coming and very expensive. Every flight has a pilot. To seal the pilots in the cockpit will require refitting every plane with a bathroom in the cockpit. That will take years and be real expensive.

Prior to the pathetic Carter Administration, on any plane carrying the U.S. Mail the pilot was required to be armed by federal regulation. Over 90% of commercial flights carry mail yet there was never a problem with a pilot being armed.

Over 70% of the professional pilots think they need to be armed as one last chance before the F- 16's put a heat seeking missel into a plane on its way to crash into a building. Personally, I'd rather take my chances that a pilot is a bad shot than hope I survive our Air Force shooting a missel into a plane I'm in.

There is no down-side to arming pilots and it could save thousands of people in planes and tall buildings. It is a common sense safety measure that needs to be implemented today.

15 posted on 05/26/2002 10:55:12 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
The SOP procedure should be that they stay in the cockpit and the cockpit is completely sealed during the flight.

Yes, piloting flights will be really fun with no restroom or food in the cockpit.

In the interim I can see a need for them to carry firearms, but they both need to be trained how to use them effectively...

From what I understand, about 75% of airline pilots are ex-military. Thus, they are already trained in how to use weapons effectively.

Keep the sky marshals, give them a few MP-5s and you're golden IMO.

Any argument against weapons in planes can be used against sky marshals just as easily. Any argument for sky marshals can be applied to anyone with a CHL carrying on a plane as well. There is no need to limit guns in planes to sky marshals except politics.

16 posted on 05/26/2002 11:59:52 AM PDT by serinde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
"..Norman Mineta is Magaw’s boss and the man who recommended him for the job as head of the TSA. Mineta is another Clintonista. Bush reappointed him..."

Bush-43 is the same empty shirt as his ol' man, Bush-41. They try too hard to be "bipartisan".

GW is to the Democrats, what Neville Chamberlain was to the Nazi's.

17 posted on 05/26/2002 12:03:46 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: serinde

18 posted on 05/26/2002 12:04:59 PM PDT by HowardC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: serinde
"Any argument against weapons in planes can be used against sky marshals just as easily."

I agree, and more so. A hijacking occurs at the cockpit. Pilots defending the cockpit would be shooting back, away from the sensitive cockpit, but into the passenger compartment (sorry folks).

Conversely, air marshals would be firing forward at the cockpit and INTO the instruments and possibly the pilots.

I greatly prefer that pilots be armed as a matter of course.

19 posted on 05/26/2002 12:13:31 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gundog
"Three words: Glaser Safety Slugs"

BANG

20 posted on 05/26/2002 12:23:23 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson