Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: 'Sensitive noses, Eyes and fingers' John McCaslin, the Washington Times

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...plate=nextpage

    Sensitive noses

    The U.S. government has just finished "imprinting" a new team of bomb-sniffing canines with the amazing capability of detecting the odors of 19,000 different explosives.

    After an intensive 10-week training period, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) says it graduated last week from its Front Royal, Va., canine-training center a new class of canines and handlers from the CIA, Pentagon, U.S. Marshals Service and the Federal Protective Service.

    The ATF said seven canine teams that graduated last week will be used for safeguarding federal and national events, including this summer's Republican and Democratic national conventions.

    "These dedicated students have been training for seven days a week since January 7," said acting ATF Director Michael Sullivan. "They and their highly trained canine partners are now prepared to use their skills to protect the public and prevent terrorism."

    Eyes and fingers

    Speaking of advances in security, the "Clear" fast security-verification lanes at Washington's Reagan and Dulles airports will open tomorrow for participating travelers who have been iris- or fingerprint-identified — allowing expedited passage through usually jammed security checkpoints.

    Which obviously cuts way down on the hassle of arriving at airports two hours in advance of a scheduled flight.

    So far, the Clear system has signed up 120,000 government-approved travelers nationwide, who pay an annual fee of $128 for the privilege of skipping the long security lines. Clear cards are operational at 16 U.S. airports.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    How very nice.

    For only $11 a month, I can pay for the PRIVILEGE of not being treated like a terrorist because I don't want to drive for a day and a half to get somewhere. :quirky

    Thanks for the info, Doug.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Speaking of advances in security, the "Clear" fast security-verification lanes at Washington's Reagan and Dulles airports will open tomorrow for participating travelers who have been iris- or fingerprint-identified — allowing expedited passage through usually jammed security checkpoints.
    Unbelievable. That's completely non-reversible. If the government ever does go worse than it already is and decide to pick you up and they have your iris scan, better not be within 50 miles of any city.

    "So this is how liberty dies.With thunderous applause" -- Senator Amidala

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    How very nice.

    For only $11 a month, I can pay for the PRIVILEGE of not being treated like a terrorist because I don't want to drive for a day and a half to get somewhere. :quirky

    Thanks for the info, Doug.
    I need to get a pre-screened card.

    It is sad that so many people must suffer for the actions of a few. But what else can you do?

    Terrorist attacks have happened and people have or tried to bring guns and other dangerous items on-board the aircraft.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    How very nice.

    For only $11 a month, I can pay for the PRIVILEGE of not being treated like a terrorist because I don't want to drive for a day and a half to get somewhere. :quirky

    Thanks for the info, Doug.
    I need to get a pre-screened card.

    It is sad that so many people must suffer for the actions of a few. But what else can you do?

    Terrorist attacks have happened and people have or tried to bring guns and other dangerous items on-board the aircraft.
    We can do a lot of things.

    1) We can do what El Al airlines does and profile terrorists. They have never had a terrorist attack or hijacking on their airline yet they don't violate the rights of every single passenger. But then they are not a bunch of wussy PC'ers either. All we have to do is ask them how to do it. They have offered to train us before.

    2) We can have a national CCW act that allows citizens to go through the same background checks and training required of commercial pilots and then conceal carry on any domestic public transportation. Afterall, commercial pilots are just citizens too, and we "lesser citizens" aren't even in control of a craft proven to be effective as essentially a guided missle so I see no reason why, with the same background checks and training, we would not have parity to defend ourselves, our fellow citizens and perhaps tens of thousands of people on the ground from a hijacker.

    I find the concept of taking specialized training and submitting to intensive background checks preferable to passively being blown out of the sky by a sidewinder missle if the plane is hijacked and is going to be flown into another building. The federal government has proven time and again that it has no honest intent to protect me or my family, yet that is what we are expected to believe every time we get onto public transportation.

    *side note: For those of you who would oppose such training and background checks, IMO traveling in an aluminum tube, full of people and jet fuel, at near the speed of sound, 35,000 feet off the ground, is a unique, specialized circumstance that reasonably requires specialized training and background verification to ensure that only law abiding citizens are armed and to such armed citizen with the best intentions from accidently bringing down the airplane or killing several co-passengers.

    3+ ) The other things I started typing up as suggestions are OT as to firearms so in the interest of not provoking a thread lock I will stop here.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    We can do a lot of things.

    1) We can do what El Al airlines does and profile terrorists. They have never had a terrorist attack or hijacking on their airline yet they don't violate the rights of every single passenger. But then they are not a bunch of wussy PC'ers either. All we have to do is ask them how to do it. They have offered to train us before.

    2) We can have a national CCW act that allows citizens to go through the same background checks and training required of commercial pilots and then conceal carry on any domestic public transportation. Afterall, commercial pilots are just citizens too, and we "lesser citizens" aren't even in control of a craft proven to be effective as essentially a guided missle so I see no reason why, with the same background checks and training, we would not have parity to defend ourselves, our fellow citizens and perhaps tens of thousands of people on the ground from a hijacker.

    I find the concept of taking specialized training and submitting to intensive background checks preferable to passively being blown out of the sky by a sidewinder missle if the plane is hijacked and is going to be flown into another building. The federal government has proven time and again that it has no honest intent to protect me or my family, yet that is what we are expected to believe every time we get onto public transportation.

    *side note: For those of you who would oppose such training and background checks, IMO traveling in an aluminum tube, full of people and jet fuel, at near the speed of sound, 35,000 feet off the ground, is a unique, specialized circumstance that reasonably requires specialized training and background verification to ensure that only law abiding citizens are armed and to such armed citizen with the best intentions from accidently bringing down the airplane or killing several co-passengers.

    3+ ) The other things I started typing up as suggestions are OT as to firearms so in the interest of not provoking a thread lock I will stop here.
    The UScannot single out a group of people in the US as being the enemy.They did that when they placed all the Japanese-Americansin a campafter Japan attacked us. We knew who the enemy was but they have rights even if they can be a threat. During war it may have been viewed as finebut today it was viewed as so wrong.

    Same goes for terrorists from the middle east. We know who to suspect but the US will not single out the known group. Being PC is the standard and it is more acceptableto suspect us all as potential terrorists.

    In regards to citizens packing a gun on the aircraft.....not good. This opens the door for anyone to take a gun on the aircraft and this door can be entered by terrorists that can also qualify.

    Sure.... The pilot gets to carry on the aircraft and they are just average citizens too. But here is the thing you are missing.... they are in control of the aircraft already and could fly it into a building if they wanted to.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    deepdiver wrote:
    We can do a lot of things.

    1) We can do what El Al airlines does and profile terrorists. They have never had a terrorist attack or hijacking on their airline yet they don't violate the rights of every single passenger. But then they are not a bunch of wussy PC'ers either. All we have to do is ask them how to do it. They have offered to train us before.

    2) We can have a national CCW act that allows citizens to go through the same background checks and training required of commercial pilots and then conceal carry on any domestic public transportation. Afterall, commercial pilots are just citizens too, and we "lesser citizens" aren't even in control of a craft proven to be effective as essentially a guided missle so I see no reason why, with the same background checks and training, we would not have parity to defend ourselves, our fellow citizens and perhaps tens of thousands of people on the ground from a hijacker.

    I find the concept of taking specialized training and submitting to intensive background checks preferable to passively being blown out of the sky by a sidewinder missle if the plane is hijacked and is going to be flown into another building. The federal government has proven time and again that it has no honest intent to protect me or my family, yet that is what we are expected to believe every time we get onto public transportation.

    *side note: For those of you who would oppose such training and background checks, IMO traveling in an aluminum tube, full of people and jet fuel, at near the speed of sound, 35,000 feet off the ground, is a unique, specialized circumstance that reasonably requires specialized training and background verification to ensure that only law abiding citizens are armed and to such armed citizen with the best intentions from accidently bringing down the airplane or killing several co-passengers.

    3+ ) The other things I started typing up as suggestions are OT as to firearms so in the interest of not provoking a thread lock I will stop here.
    The UScannot single out a group of people in the US as being the enemy.They did that when they placed all the Japanese-Americansin a campafter Japan attacked us. We knew who the enemy was but they have rights even if they can be a threat. During war it may have been viewed as finebut today it was viewed as so wrong.

    Same goes for terrorists from the middle east. We know who to suspect but the US will not single out the known group. Being PC is the standard and it is more acceptableto suspect us all as potential terrorists.

    In regards to citizens packing a gun on the aircraft.....not good. This opens the door for anyone to take a gun on the aircraft and this door can be entered by terrorists that can also qualify.

    Sure.... The pilot gets to carry on the aircraft and they are just average citizens too. But here is the thing you are missing.... they are in control of the aircraft already and could fly it into a building if they wanted to.
    You said, "But what else can we do?"

    I offered ideas and you responded, essentially, "Yeah, but". You did not ask what our modern, wussy, PC, determined to keep getting our butts kicked until we have no choice but apocolyptic war politicians and society WOULD be willing to do. That is a different question than what can we do. We know what they are willing to do. They are doing it. You just made an argument for the status quo using the status quo's own arguments.

    And profiling properly does not mean that every single person of middle east descent gets additional scrutiny. There is a near science to it - a science that El Al has down to, um, a science. It also doesn't mean that people of other descent will not get additional scrutiny. It is not a race/heritage based profile from all I have read.

    And I didn't miss diddly about the pilots. Your argument is that since they are already in a position to do harm, what does it matter if they are in a position to do different harm. That doesn't make sense on numerous levels.

    And where the heck did I say let "anyone" take a gun on an airplane? I specifically argued for background checks and training equal to what pilots must go through before being licensed to do so. Also, I specified "citizens" which eliminates a lot of the potential terrorists. Yes, if we passed such a law I think it should be clearly limited to United States Citizens and no one else. Tough background checks will screen out many more potential terrorist types.

    And sure, one may get through. One may get through now with the current system that is abusive to everyone's rights. So, do you want the system we have now where one may very well get through and the other passengers have no option but to rush him and pray, or do we want a system where if the terrorist slips through airport screening or the citizenship requirement, the background checks and the training and then when he pulls his firearm on the airplane, 4-5 other citizens and maybe, maybe not, an air marshall or two are armed as well?
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Cody, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    Very well said Deepdiver. Leo, I'm surprised. I've been impressed with most of your posts so far, especially seeing as how you are an officer. I say this because we have all had run ins with cops who are... less than thrilled that people want to exercise their rights. But here you seem to be almost an anti. I'm surprised that more people haven't shown displeasure at your remarks.

    We shouldn't carry on planes period because a terrorist might get through? COME ON. With that thinking, we shouldn't let people carry when driving, sailing, walking! Hell, we better not let people buy guns period. It would be a hell of a lot easier for a terrorist to buy a gun than to get one onto a plane. Give me a break. This is the kind of thinking that starts off innocent, and quickly strips people of their rights. "Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile".

    We all know what they say the road to hell is paved with.

    Face it, taking people's rights away because a few idiots got away with something terrible is not only anti patriotic and anti american, but seriously dangerous.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    The UScannot single out a group of people in the US as being the enemy.
    So, Leo, when you get a broasdcast description do you check out everybody, or just those that match the broadcast description?

    The enemy, since begore 9/11/01, has not been single males of Middle Eastern descent between the ages of 20 and 35. The enemy has been folks who want to hurt innocent people because they disagree with our society and our culture (whatever those things are).

    El Al does not screen for nationality or for hair color. They create stress scenarios through extended and repeated conversations and observations with all ticketed passengers during the mandatory multi-hour wait between check-in and flight time. They do that in a relatively comfortable area and without degrading and insulting any potential passengers or potential terrorists. most of the folks undergoing that extended scrutiny seem to think it is the baggage being checked, not the people (based on a limited experience of 2 flights).

    The difference, as I see it, is that El Al is not treating everybody as a potential terrorist until strip-searched. They are letting the potential terorists self-identify, while everybody else goes about their business.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    After 20 years in the Navy, they already have my fingerprints, DNA, blood, dental records, sperm samples, rectal exam records, what the F else do they waht? I'm not giving them anything else. Let them learn how to talk amongst themselves and figure it out.

    Soon we'll all be marked with RFID chips and anyone that refuses will be a criminal. Can you say "Revelations"?





  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Cody, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    After 20 years in the Navy, they already have my fingerprints, DNA, blood, dental records, sperm samples, rectal exam records, what the F else do they waht?* I'm not giving them anything else.* Let them learn how to talk amongst themselves and figure it out.

    Soon we'll all be marked with RFID chips and anyone that refuses will be a criminal.* Can you say "Revelations"?

    *

    *
    Talk about hitting the nail on the head...

    RFID in required national ID cards first, then something similar in a required implant form, (already doing it in pets and in some states babies, though not required yet...unless they are doing it without our knowledge). It won't be long before cops just drive around and an alarm goes off if they are in the vicinity of someone with a warrant out, or speeding, or out past curfew ...and then GPS regulated speed in cars...satellite override for cars will be added to the Patriot Act...

    Not to mention serial numbers on currency, to keep tabs on who has every dollar in the country, which means no "private debts" without paperwork or a liscense....

    And most of this will come AFTER they feel they've figured out how to control guns.

    Offering our rights freely because of plane security is like liberty suicide.


    "Those who would trade freedom for protection deserve neither."

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Re: "Safety" training for citizens to exercise their rights on planes: "Safety is a good tool for tyrants; no one can be against safety."

    Screw it. I'll drive.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SeaTac, Washington, USA
    Posts
    434

    Post imported post

    I see nothing wrong with shooting a BG on an airplane. As a matter of fact I think open carry would be great on airplanes. Lets see three hundred eighty good guys with guns against three bad guys with box cutters. Travelers should get a discount for carrying a gun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •