![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
nobody wrote:
Your handgun serves only one purpose: to kill or seriously injur a human. Same with machine guns. If you own such a deadly weapon for self defense, the fact remains that if you must use the gun, it will be to either kill or severely injur the person you believe is going to attack you. It is normal that a government woudl want to verify your motives for the gun and also test your ability to judge whether pulling the trigger is necessary or not. I'll pass on the gun debate. Suffice to say that because guns are of no interest to you does not mean someone else can have a valid interest, and use of them. I find it interesting that you feel a deep background check is OK for someone wishing to own a firearm, because "it's only used for killing", yet fingerprinting someone coming into the US, for anti-terrorist reasons (also an activity largely defined as killing and injuring someone) seems to be a problem. Or do you not have problems with the fingerprinting? When a tourist enters the country, it isn't the fingerprints that are important, it is what is in his luggage. Unless, of course, the deadly weapons he will use to cause harm to your country are freely available in your country. No, it's the terrorist himself that is important, thus the need for effective identity recognition. Please note that there have been plenty of terrorists in the USA, especially the ones who go in a shooting rampage in schools etc. All done with "made in the USA" all over (the person, the victims and the weapon). Yes. So what? The thing is that no matter how strick you become at airports, terrorists will always find a way around. You cannot stop a determined terrorist. And there are many terrorists you don't know about (like the guy who blew up the Oklahoma city building). Thus the reasons for increased security measures. The real "war on terrorism" is stopping whatever a countrie does that irritates people so much that they take to terror to fight back. Unformtunatly, for short term politicians, the results of such a policy don't come soon enough. But it is the only way to really stop it. You mean appeasement? History doesn't show that technique to be especially effective. SMH |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
30 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 31st 04 03:55 AM |
15 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 15th 03 10:01 PM |
27 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 1 | November 30th 03 05:57 PM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |