firing a high-powered combat rifle in an airport could do more harm than good

[Tim May]

On Friday, October 5, 2001, at 03:07 PM, Optimizzin Al-gorithm wrote:

> [Formatted for legibility, line wrapping.  Please take the few moments
> necessary to ensure posted material is readable.  KMSelf]
>
> Notice how its not an evil "assault rifle" but a "combat rifle" now...
>
> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000079569oct05.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dcalifornia
>
>

When the objects are in the hands of the proles, the sheeple, they are 
Evil, Black, Baby-Killing Assault Weapons. When they are in the hands of 
the staatspolizei, they are "M-16s."


In any case, having such rifles in crowded airline terminals is just 
theater: the intent is to make the sheeple feel safe, so that the 
sheeple will return to flying and spend money.

Better approaches to airline security are obvious. In terms of the arms, 
note that Israel doesn't use M-16s in airports (though they use them in 
their army, having mostly retired the Galil). The Uzi is a popular 
choice in Israel. The H&K MP5 in all of its variations is also popular.

More importantly, having several highly-trained marksmen is more useful 
that having a bunch of BDU-clad weekend warriors standing around with 
M-16s slung over their shoulders. Duh!

And, of course, Rounds Two and Three will not resemble Round One, so 
most of the current hysteria over airports will shift to something else.


>
--Tim May, Citizen-unit of of the once free United States
" The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood 
of patriots & tyrants. "--Thomas Jefferson, 1787