Jump to content
Zeke

Ft.Lauderdale airport?

Recommended Posts

its a tragedy, it was terrible blah blah. all i know is now there's going to be a huge national debate about MORE gun control, MORE airport security, banning checking guns in baggage, etc all because of one mentally unstable jackass. 330 million people in this country, and because of one person everything will change, just like the aftermath of the shoe bomber. a few years from now some other enterprising crazy person will do something unanticipated and we'll start it all over again. the endgame here is a total police state folks, because you simply cannot account for the endless possibilities of crazy people to do harm in public spaces, and i cannot understand how all the talking heads don't see this. or maybe they do, and a total police state is in fact the endgame...

 

There certainly will be a discussion of those things.  I was looking in my local paper today to see if the din had started for restrictions on flying with firearms.  But if the recent past is any indication, nothing will change, much to the

frustration of the gun grabbers.  Oh, liberal bastions like NY, NJ, and MD may put more restrictions in place, but nationally there does not seem to be the political will to strip people of their 2A rights based on isolated instances.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

Sent from an undisclosed location

According to the fake news (AKA CNN) the perp walked into an Alaska FBI office in November--leaving his gun and a newborn child in the car--and stated that his mind was being controlled by U.S. Intel.  The FBI took his gun and ordered a mental health eval.  Apparently he was deemed mentally fit (Mind control and judgement of the capabilities of a newborn notwithstanding) and his gun was returned a month later.

 

I know this is coming from HRC CNN, so it is a hypothetical.  However, do you think someone who believes U.S. Intel is controlling their mind is mentally competent to be carrying?

 

I understand the essential liberty, and I do not know what came out of the mental eval, but hypothetically, at what point does the citizen forfeit this particular liberty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even forgetting his prior history with the Army, FBI and Police.

 

A ONE WAY ticket with the ONLY luggage being a pistol and ammo should have been a red flag by itself!

But no, Too much work!  Better and easier to just take all of our guns away than to deal with the real problem!

 

The TSA needs to go to the Ben Gurion Airport in Israel for training on how to get it right for a change.

That jackass would have NEVER gotten on a plane in Israel. See below, a clip from Wiki.

 

"Ben Gurion International Airport is one of the world's most secure airports.[44] Security operates on several levels.[45]

All cars, taxis, buses and trucks go through a preliminary security checkpoint before entering the airport compound. Armed guards spot-check the vehicles by looking into cars, taxis and boarding buses, exchanging a few words with the driver and passengers. Armed security personnel stationed at the terminal entrances keep a close watch on those who enter the buildings. If someone arouses their suspicion or looks nervous, they may strike up a conversation to further assess the person's intent. Plainclothes armed personnel patrol the area outside the building, and hidden surveillance cameras operate at all times.[46] Inside the building, both uniformed and plainclothes security officers are on constant patrol. Departing passengers are personally questioned by security agents even before arriving at the check-in desk. This interview can last as little as a minute, or as long as an hour if a passenger is selected for additional screening. Luggage and body searches may be conducted."

 

I think Israelis (and those that travel there frequently) understand the need for that level of security. It's already accepted there by the culture and "institutionalized," so to speak. I don't believe the US Citizenry is ready yet  to institutionalize that level of security into their culture.  We're still very much "freedom and liberty" oriented folks, here.  Does Israeli law permit average "non military or LE/Govt." citizens to transport firearms as the USA does for its citizens? if, tomorrow, Israeli style security were to become SOP magically here in the USA, I think, at least, recreational air travel would grind to a screeching halt, and maybe a significant portion of business air travel, as very few would put up with it, at present.

 

That said, I agree that  some form of "behavioral surveillance and analysis" (I hate that word "profiling") might be appropriate and effective for the check in counter and baggage claim, and passenger waiting areas.  Santiago should have been flagged immediately at the check in counter when the only baggage he submitted was the gun/ammo case.  I recall an episode of "Miami Vice" where Crocket and Tubbs were staking out a check in counter at MIA. The ticket agent flagged  a young boy that just paid cash for a one way ticket to Bogota, Columbia (the RAS being that he was going on a "mule run").   We should be able to do things like that where it might actually be effective and pose minimal inconvenience to law abiding citizens. You behave "abnormally," you get stopped and questioned. Or, perhaps, those transporting firearms might be required to pick them up in a different area of baggage claim, and then be escorted out of the building immediately. Need to hit the head? Do it before you pick up the checked firearm.  Still, none of these measure will stop someone from just entering these areas from the street, so....  GGWG's carrying in those non-sterile areas might help a little, but that would apply only to "visitors"  to those areas, as actual flying passengers probably would not be able to carry.

 

Ultimately, maybe we might have to go full "Israeli" at our airports, and the public will just have to get used to it. Still, I don't think it will deter the terrorists. They'll just find other, less secure venues to target.  We need to start looking at "root cause" solutions to the problem... eliminating it at its sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

Sent from an undisclosed location

I agree with that statement whole heartedly. IF all the information in some of the previous posts are correct and valid than this was a major screw up.

 

IF the information is valid why even bother having the FBI and TSA? This guy did all but write the agencies a handnote (turned himself in to FBI, said was being influenced by ISIS or he was mentally unstable, bought one way ticket and only traveling with gun and ammo, etc).

 

Disgusting and embarassing on so many levels if all the information is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... then he flew 4,000 miles with a handgun (previously confiscated) as his only luggage and attracted no attention.

 

IMO this should have attracted some attention. Stop patting down innocent children and pay attention to ....

 

My son flew down to see me last week, Newark profiled him because he was a chubby nerdy looking kid that had 2 laptops. His school macbook, and an evil black gaming laptop that they swabbed down. Well, it does have more than 15gb of ram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son flew down to see me last week, Newark profiled him because he was a chubby nerdy looking kid that had 2 laptops. His school macbook, and an evil black gaming laptop that they swabbed down. Well, it does have more than 15gb of ram.

 

When you say "profiled" him,  did they just simply swab the laptop(s) or did they take him over to the side for a "shake & bake" and other questioning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep....they dropped the ball on that one

^^ I disagree. They followed due process.

 

 

The FBI turned him over to local police who in turn checked him into a local hospital for a "welfare check." CNN reports his gun was taken away (source: cnn.com/ 2017/01/07/ us/fort-lauderdale-airport-shooting-main/index.html ), but he wasn't adjudicated mentally incompetent which would have prohibited him from owning a gun. (FWIW, had he been adjudicated mentally incompetent I don't know if the law would have allowed police to confiscate his weapons or require that he surrender them.) I don't think they dropped the ball, I think Santiago slipped through the cracks.

^^ This.

 

I don't know specifically what happened in this case, or AK law specific to the shooters past interaction with LE, but a 48-72 hr eval does not disqualify someone under Federal law 922(g)(4).

 

This falls under "words mean things." - specifically the word adjudicated.

 

Being detained for mental health evaluation, even involuntarily, doesn't equate to being adjudicated mentally ill. Think of it as the difference between being arrested for an inevitable crime and being convicted of an indictable crime. An arrest does not prohibit you from owning a gun. A conviction does.

 

Under 18 USC 922 (g)(4): a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been admitted to a mental institution is prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition. Adjudicated means it is done in court. Someone who checks themselves in for a mental eval, or is taken there under a non-custodial move by local LE (Feds don't have the authority), does not qualify as a prohibited person under Federal law. The mental adjudication takes time both for voluntary and involuntary commitments. If I commit myself voluntarily, and then change my mind and decide I'm good, unless the doctor can show I am a danger to myself or others I can check myself out. If my gun was turned in to the police for safe keeping, then without due process, they have to give it back to me (state law depending) when I request it.

 

There are those who would have wanted the FBI or APD to have violated the suspect's rights and taken his gun. The agencies appeared to have followed the law, as far as I can tell from my limited knowledge of the circumstances.

 

If people decide a mental health evaluation or 24/72hr hold should suffice to have someone's ability to own firearms suspended or revoked, then the law has to be amended to reflect that.

 

None of us would want the FBI to take our guns without due process. I'm not supporting the suspect, nor cheerleading for the FBI/APD. I am defending due process.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know specifically what happened in this case, or AK law specific to the shooters past interaction with LE, but a 48-72 hr eval does not disqualify someone under Federal law 922(g)(4).

 

This falls under "words mean things." - specifically the word adjudicated.

 

Being detained for mental health evaluation, even involuntarily, doesn't equate to being adjudicated mentally ill. Think of it as the difference between being arrested for an inevitable crime and being convicted of an indictable crime. An arrest does not prohibit you from owning a gun. A conviction does.

Any involuntary commitment is a disqualifier for firearm ownership, federally. No judge required. You would need some sort of relief or restoration of rights.

 

For instance, in PA we have something called a 302. It is, what a coincidence, a 72 hour evaluation. After 72 hours if they want to keep you they need a judge to sign off and it becomes a 304. But the 302 is a disqualifier for firearm ownership in and of itself. Not only that, Pennsylvania has no restoration of rights process due to a recent legal case. If you are involuntarily evaluated under a 302 (no judge required) for 30 seconds and then let go, you will never legally possess a firearm anywhere in the United States ever again. Because any involuntary mental custody, including evaluations, bans you from owning guns federally.

 

If you are certain that is not the case, I can put you in direct contact with a number of people that would pay you thousands of dollars for off the record advice on how to get their rights restored after suffering loss of them due to brief involuntary evaluations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to be running to this analysis-paralysis syndrome, much like our idle brained politicians. S**t happens once in a while. No need to analyze why, especially when those "why"s lead to further erosion of fundamental rights.

 

I just hope this incident doesn't lead to further restrictions on already crippled air travel and silly mental health laws. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to be running to this analysis-paralysis syndrome, much like our idle brained politicians. S**t happens once in a while. No need to analyze why, especially when those "why"s lead to further erosion of fundamental rights.

 

I just hope this incident doesn't lead to further restrictions on already crippled air travel and silly mental health laws.

I almost made the same post after reading some of the recent ones.

 

I mean, why don't we require 1" steel armor plate on the roof of every house in case of meteors?

 

As I already said, there is nothing sensitive about a baggage claim area. It is the same as the Walmart checkout line and not quite as sensitive as your average club on the weekend where you have a lot more people in a much smaller space. Somebody can walk into all three with a gun, and there are a heck of a lot more Walmarts and clubs than baggage claims.

 

People just tend to have knee jerk reactions, thinking that anything bad that ever happens is a problem that needs to be solved at any expense of liberty and treasury, when sometimes bad things just happen.

 

Of course, Leftists simply see them as opportunities to outlaw things they already didn't like.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say "profiled" him, did they just simply swab the laptop(s) or did they take him over to the side for a "shake & bake" and other questioning?

It was to be the whole shake-n-bake, they pulled and moved him to another area/line, in front of him there was a mom with 3 small kids that they were patting down and going thru all the toys, then there was a shift change and someone took out just the gaming laptop, swabbed it, and sent him on his way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was to be the whole shake-n-bake, they pulled and moved him to another area/line, in front of him there was a mom with 3 small kids that they were patting down and going thru all the toys, then there was a shift change and someone took out just the gaming laptop, swabbed it, and sent him on his way.

I always opt-out. I got time at the airport, need some entertainment and if my Govt decides to go down the stupid, illogical path, then I rather everyone see it in open. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh we can Monday morning quarterback all day long but the government fucked up with this guy and the multitude of recent Muslim shooters that were under under current or recent investigation. Why can't the FBI/CIA/NSA go to a local high school and get some nerds to track these guys activity for at least a year. Not take all their liberty away but maybe have a monitor who can see this guy flew one way with only a gun

... come on

 

this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh we can Monday morning quarterback all day long but the government fucked up with this guy and the multitude of recent Muslim shooters that were under under current or recent investigation. Why can't the FBI/CIA/NSA go to a local high school and get some nerds to track these guys activity for at least a year. Not take all their liberty away but maybe have a monitor who can see this guy flew one way with only a gun

... come on

 

this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count

People get put on the do not fly list for much less. He could have still just walked into the airport, but I can't imagine there would have been nearly as many people to target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course any one can walk into or drive into or ski into practically anywhere and inflict harm however creatively sick they want to but THIS one could have been stopped with a simple freaking computer alert. You can set up Google to alert you anytime a new keyworded item is added to their database. Why can't the government do this. Like in this case I'll break down my hypothetical scenario and you tell me where it gets scary. Young male, flying solo, army discharge, previously investigated, possible ISIS connection, pro ISIS Facebook posts, 1 checked bag, checked bag contains firearm. We have the systems in place, let's freaking use them

 

this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh we can Monday morning quarterback all day long but the government fucked up with this guy and the multitude of recent Muslim shooters that were under under current or recent investigation. Why can't the FBI/CIA/NSA go to a local high school and get some nerds to track these guys activity for at least a year. Not take all their liberty away but maybe have a monitor who can see this guy flew one way with only a gun

... come on

 

this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count

I've read both DHS and military threat analyses. The ones they have made public. It is clear they consider me more of a threat than an ISIS sympathizer. Even though I would never hurt anyone, they consider my politics far more dangerous than that of moslem extremist sympathizers. I know for a fact they are tracking me, because Governor Tom Corbett admitted it. Should I not be allowed to be able to travel one way with a gun? Because these measures are always turned against legal gun owners and vets, not potential terrorists.

 

Heck, Russia told the FBI twice that one of the Boston bombers was a terrorist that went through a training camp in Chechnya. FBI refused to do anything. So Russia told the CIA. CIA said, "You're right!" CIA called the FBI. FBI did nothing. What do you think would have happened if the NSA called the FBI and told them I was a Sovereign Citizen? (I am not part of the movement) They would have killed me, my dog, and my family.

 

Here is the problem. Too many people have their brains leak out their ears with the word "gun" or the word "airport" is involved. Neither is magic.

 

And, by the way, why are people STILL saying this shit when he could have walked into the terminal or the baggage claim in AK and shot up the place? Get it through your heads - this guy could have been Aiman al Zawahiri and on the no fly list and the FBI's most wanted list with a $10 million reward - keeping him from traveling on that plane with a gun would not have prevented him from shooting up an airport. Not in the slightest. We are just being set up for more aggravation, restrictions on Constitutionally guaranteed right of travel, not to mention 2A.

 

Now, I do wish somebody would have realized this guy was friggin bonkers and done more about it than the customary handoff. This seems like a really bad case in that respect. But it has nothing to do with transporting a gun on a plane. He did not have to transport a gun on a plane to shoot up a baggage area. Thank goodness he didn't walk into a club where there are a lot more people and a lot less space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read both DHS and military threat analyses. The ones they have made public. It is clear they consider me more of a threat than an ISIS sympathizer. Even though I would never hurt anyone, they consider my politics far more dangerous than that of moslem extremist sympathizers. I know for a fact they are tracking me, because Governor Tom Corbett admitted it. Should I not be allowed to be able to travel one way with a gun? Because these measures are always turned against legal gun owners and vets, not potential terrorists.

 

 

I think there have been some recent confessions of that on TV and Twitter, lately. Dana Loesch mentioned in today's; radio broadcast. Unfortunately, I don't have any URLs or references for it, but the gist of it is that someone in the Obama administration admitted that they were targeting veterans as the #1 threat.

 

Perhaps, Dana will also take it up in tonight's TV broadcast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is itching to solve the "problem", good place to start would be

 

1. Dismantle (completely) TSA, DHS, good portion FBI, ATF, NSA, some portion of CIA. Pretty much any and every domestic agency thats sh*ting on American People fundamental rights. 

2. Let People exercise their fundamental rights including 2A

3. Let local law take care of whats left of it

 

Best case scenario, we would have some missing gene pool that wasn't meant to be, dead nutjobs, child molesters, hardcore criminals, Baby Gs, ISIS sympathizers etc.

Worse case scenario, its status quo but we would have saved few Billion in taxes and make "terrorists" squirm as we all enjoy life as free men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...