...But we still have
to take our shoes off at the airport
Here's a quandary that pits those two titans of political
theory, liberty and security, against each other yet again. A pesky Second Amendment-spawned
showdown over gun control crossed with a we-can’t-let-the-terrorists-win
scenario. Which side will sway your opinion with its set of arguments and
statistics nearly equally balanced out by those of the other side? Read on to
find out.
Here are the facts: according to the Government
Accountability Office, since 2004, nine out of ten people who the FBI thinks
are terrorists or terrorist associates have been able to purchase guns,
ammunition, and other typically restricted material such as explosives right
here in the United States. The FBI's Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB), the
official name for its terrorist watch list, has no legal bearing on whether or
not guns can be purchased by people on its rolls.
Here comes the outrage from the knee-jerk side: Are you
kidding me? We deny guns to garden-variety felons, illegal immigrants, and even
drug addicts, but let people we're pretty sure want to use those guns to kill
innocent American civilians plunk down some cash and receive an instrument
whose primary function is to end lives? What in the name of John McClane is
going on here? Why are we not stopping these guys from not only acquiring
killing machinery legally but also making us look like fools in the process?
The view that this is a serious state of affairs that needs
to be corrected has been espoused
by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), who has promised to introduce a bill that
would allow mere presence on the TSDB to be grounds for denying someone a
legally purchased firearm. Of course, the Attorney General's office would have
to actually act upon said legislation in order for it to be effective (which is
a dubious proposition), but something is at least being done about the current
situation.
On the contrary, we have the slightly more subtly reasoned
other side: What's the big deal? First, the terrorist watch list isn't 100%
accurate about who's really dangerous and who's not. Share a name with an
al-Qaeda operative, and you might find yourself simply out of luck. 24,000
people on that list are on there based on outdated or irrelevant information.
Don't we want to err on the side of freedom and constitutionally protected
rights here?
Second, this is a terrorist watch list. If they're dumb enough to buy guns using the
name that the FBI knows about, then doesn't that just help us figure out which
guys should be watched a little bit more closely, if you know what I mean? And
thirdly, the TSDB's members are secret. Not even they know they're on there. If
a citizen with no criminal record and no history of drug abuse or mental
illness gets denied a gun, it'll be pretty clear why. Trying to buy a gun could
be an easy test to see if you're being watched by the FBI or not.
So what do we do? Do we let the terrorists keep buying guns
from us and sacrifice a little bit of peace of mind? Or do we let our
justifiable fear curb civil liberties by a little bit and force ourselves to
accept the possibility of mistakes? Undoubtedly, there's no right answer. It's
not a catch-22, but it is a delicate balance that could easily be upset by a
few voices on one side or the other yelling too loudly that they are in
possession of the right answer, leaving those of us with an appreciation for
just how thorny this situation is wishing that humans had never invented
devices that made it so easy to kill other people.
Also Interesting:
[+] Google refuses Senator's request to remove all terrorist videos
[+] What to do in a Terrorist Attack
[+] GAO Finds Faults in TSA Screening
[+] Amtrak Will Begin Screening Passengers' Bags
[+] Security Watch: TSA increasing use of full body image scans
[+] A day in the life of a Transportation Security Officer