Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Phoenix Airport Gun Scare
How about that action for taking resources away from where they might be needed? TS feels that we couldn't require psychological screening for gun owners because it wound take the psychological services away from people who really need them. But, I suppose open carry stunts like this one are OK.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
But its the cops too: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/11/06/2902591/police-shooting-unarmed-man/
ReplyDeleteThanks. I posted it.
DeleteSo the two knew the law, they were correct that it was completely legal. Case closed.
ReplyDeleteYou're OK with the waste of police resources caused by a stunt of this kind? Open carry guys know this and often do it for this reason.
DeleteI’m sorry, what does this story have to do with my stance on mental health screening?
ReplyDeleteOh, is it because cops showed up? Cops who were stationed at the airport? That is not redirecting resources. But if you want to talk about people who freak out over the sight of open carrying on the street and dial 911 just so the cops can “check them out”, yes that is a waste of resources. “Sir, I see you are open carrying, and you seem to be aware that’s it’s perfectly legal. Um… well…. Carry on.”
DeleteOh, and for the record, cops inspecting 300 million guns a year as part of your annual re-registration scheme is also a complete waste of resources. Resources that are used to save lives. That means it will cost lives.
When a dozen airport cops surround these two idiots and wait for them to get good and ready to leave and then escort them out, that's not redirecting resources from other parts of the airport where a police presence might be needed? This is a yes or no question.
DeleteSo long as they are airport resources, then no. I highly doubt there will be a terrorist attack during the 15min they are occupied, and even if there is, they are still at the airport. We dedicate a police presence to airports with the understanding that 99.9% of the time they are just standing around (or telling cars to move along). And the rest of the time they are checking out something "suspicious". Most will never have to take serious action, like at LAX.
DeleteBut if that's your big concern, stop calling the cops on people who aren't doing anything illegal.
It's not MY big concern, it's yours. Have you forgotten already you're the one who thinks we couldn't require any kind of psychological screening on new gun owners because it would divert resources. That's your big concern, yet what happened in Phoenix is OK. That's inconsistent.
DeleteMikeb, there's a huge difference between a few cops watching two men briefly and hauling in 100,000,000 or more gun owners to testing.
DeleteWhat Greg said. And you are not listening to me me when I twice mentioned that these were airport cops. They diverted them from bugging cars for stopping for too long at the curb to bugging open carriers. Big whoop.
DeleteSo when someone calls the cops on another person who is going something perfectly legal, you blame the person who wasn't breaking the law for diverting resources, not the person who called the cops when no law was being broke.
DeleteGreg, my suggestion for psychological screening never referred to existing gun owners. You know this because you read my blog daily and have a good memory. That means what you said was a blatant lie. You are a liar, my friend. I suppose you know you cannot argue from the position of weakness your position is without continually twisting, spinning and lying.
DeleteTS, open carry idiots are responsible for diverting resources from other places where they might be needed. Your refusal to admit this makes you sound more like Greg than yourself.
DeleteWould you open carry in an airport the day after the LAX shooting? Would you?
Mikeb, what you mean to say is that since you've recognized the insanity of your proposal, you're now backing off what you believed to be necessary.
DeleteI wouldn't do that. That was a political stunt. I don't do political stunts.
DeleteYou keep focusing on this airport incident. As I said, I don't find this to be a diversion of resources, because we have dedicated airport resources. I don't have a problem with the way this went down- standing by, no arrests. What I am talking about is police stops of open carriers on the street. That's a waste, and it's the fault of the callers, the dispatchers, and the police who respond to it. Not the fault of the person legally exercising their right to bear arms. But you blame only the person open carrying, right?
Yes, I blame the open carriers. But they're not alone. I blame the rest of you in the gun-rights movement who are responsible for the asinine laws that allow such nonsense. California has it right, again.
DeleteSo you are fine with diverting resources to harrass open carriers because it's our fault that it is legal?
DeleteTo be clear, if hardcore pro-life activists repeatedly call 911 to report a murder at the address of an abortion clinic, and the cops respond by storming the clinic to check it out only to conclude that it is perfectly legal- your position is that this waste of resources is the fault of liberal pro-choice people?
DeleteIn Mikeb's view, it's only rights that the Left approves of that deserve protection.
DeleteIf pro-life fanatics do such a thing, you're damn right they're responsible for the waste of resources. But, that's where your bizarre comparison breaks down. You have to admit it was a bit of a stretch.
DeleteWhy? Your position I open carry is that if something is perfectly legal, but you don't like the law, it's ok to call the cops on people engaging in the lawful activity, and the waste of resources is solely the fault of those who made it legal. What's the difference?
DeleteMy position on open carry is it should not be legal. CA has the right idea.
DeleteSending this to Laci and Mike, we are covering this on our radio show tomorrow--
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/06/renisha-mcbride-detroit_n_4227760.html
Thanks - posted that one too.
DeleteAlthough it is still, (read for the next six weeks,) legal to carry a loaded gun into an airport in this ass-backwards state, please don't bring any marijuana.
ReplyDeleteWhen I took a vacation in Arizona, the summer of 2005, it reminded me of travelling through Mexico eighteen years ago. There were security checkpoints every fifty or so miles randomly across the major highways. This was in response to September 11th and homeland security, not to mention illegal border crossings. I was carrying marijuana and smoked it on my vacation. I think there was one drug-sniffing puppie out of all the checkpoints that we passed through.
Since then, the security checkpoints have without exception included drug-sniffing dogs specifically to target California tourists carrying small quantities of marijuana. The CA residents are allowed to return home with a citation. Then comes the courtesy notice from a court in Phoenix. If the CA resident does not wish to return to republican paradise to answer the charges, they pay a stiff fine in excess of $500. That's how much Arizona dickhead sheriffs and state police really care about homeland security, yet they allow dickheads to carry a loaded gun into an airport.
Ass-backwards state. You got it.
DeleteTell you what, Flying Junior: How about you get to carry your pot wherever I get to carry my gun--deal?
Delete"Although it is still, (read for the next six weeks,) legal to carry a loaded gun into an airport in this ass-backwards state, please don't bring any marijuana."
DeleteAirports have two areas, the secure side where ticketed passengers are screened by security which is a gun free zone. Before you get to the secure area, you out in what is called public, as in whatever local laws apply, you follow those.
In public, local carry laws apply, and of course, if possession of pot is illegal, then you can get in trouble for that. Just as with gun laws, where you are is important. If you have pot, Colorado and Washington are safe zones.
And if you carry a gun, being in DC likely isn't a wise move.
Thanks Sarge!
DeleteWhat a great idea. I never even thought of that. Ride the Amtrak from Solana Beach to Seattle! That sounds pretty fun, indeed!
Seriously Friends,
I don't really have a problem with people that feel they need to be armed. It does vary from state to state and even from city to city. That's part of being an American. But personally, I believe that airports need to be strictly off limits to weapons of any kind. The unfortunate incident at LAX testifies to that truth. I note with some irony that the threat is coming from within our own population.
I will never forget looking out over the canyon to La Jolla on September 12, 2001. There hadn't been a single plane in the sky all day. Somebody in a helicopter had not got the word. I never figured out if it was police, military or private. I think it's safe to say it wasn't a news helicopter. Whoever it was, I don't see how they could possibly have been authorized to be out on patrol on that day. There were no other aircraft the entire day. On an ordinary day, there would be anywhere from one to two hundred planes and a dozen helicopters on a flight path over Interstate 5.
My point is that as good Americans, we don't play games with airport security. We smile and do the right thing. With patience and good cheer. Apparently two levels of security is the norm for all airports. Here at Lindbergh Field, even the outside perimeter is a controlled area. I see things changing in the near future, and not for the better as far as freedom of movement. Certainly in California and probably across our fair land. It's a damn shame.
Flying Junior, this is why I drive myself whenever possible.
DeleteFlying Junior: "I believe that airports need to be strictly off limits to weapons of any kind. "
DeletePeople travel with checked weapons, including guns. You don't think they should be able to?
We have a secure area of the airport. Are you suggesting moving the metal detectors out- like passed the ticketing counter?
I am okay with people flying with checked weapons. I guess it would be only hunting knives, brass knuckles, box cutters, ninja stars, maces and the like that have no place whatsoever in an airport.
DeleteI'm not really the one to say what exactly to do about the non-secure areas in an airport. There are already many precautions in place. No leaving a car unattended at the curb. Be wary of unattended luggage. Anything at all that could in the slightest way be suspicious. But there will without any doubt be a response to the male who killed a TSA officer at LAX. I know that if an assembled gun and possibly a handful of bullets makes it inside the terminal at all, obviously it will make it that much easier to slip a weapon to an airport worker to smuggle onto an airplane. We don't want another hijacking. Incredibly, every day someone attempts to sneak a loaded weapon with their carry-on baggage.
FJ, What does this mean?
Delete"Although it is still, (read for the next six weeks,) legal to carry a loaded gun into an airport in this ass-backwards state."
Simply, maybe it's time to reconsider the legality of carrying a loaded weapon into an airport. Even in Arizona. I could hardly believe it when I read your post. A gun in an airport? After 9/11/2001? Completely insane. Ridiculous in a dark way. I believe there will be a significant response to the LAX incident. Perhaps increased federal legislation or regulation. This fellow in Phoenix was kind enough to point out a big problem with the law in Arizona. It's a hole. It needs to be filled.
DeleteSo far, the response from LAPD that has been communicated to the press right now centers around arming TSA agents. It's certainly an attention-grabbing headline. But I don't accuse the Los Angeles Times of being sensational. If you read the entire article, the response is yet to be determined. It also mentions how experts have already talked about the lack of security in the outer perimeter of American airports. I think it might be time to tighten it up much as has Israel, the first nation to be victimized by terrorists.
Deletehttp://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lax-shooting-sparks-debate-on-security-arming-tsa-agents-20131103,0,3036626.story#axzz2kCZcbLYA
Mikeb, here's an area where we could compromise. I'll accept a requirement to carry concealed within city limits if you'll accept the elimination of most gun-free zones.
ReplyDeleteI don't negotiate with terrorists.
DeleteSince you hang out with gun control freaks, you must not do much talking.
Delete