We all remembered 911/2001 yesterday. The airborne attacks we not just a crime against America, but against the western world.
I also read all the posts in the “where were you on that day” thread. People reacted to the disaster in some very different ways. I couldn’t bring myself to talk about it for a couple of months. But for many, including a couple of people from the other thread, the reaction was to grab a gun, oil it up, and reload it ready for use. One person even “thanked God for the right to own guns”, a statement you might agree with, or one which contains one or even two counts of misplaced faith, depending on your point of view. In the aftermath of 911/2001, gun sales in America soared, and sales of ammunition increased by 70%! I pondered over that for a while. Why would anyone think that possession of a gun might be a safeguard against organised terrorist hijackers? Does Al Qa’eda have any history of making house calls? Erm... no. It kind of reminded me about that nutty guy in NY state who was so paranoid about Y2K that he built his own shelter in a remote area, constructed from parts salvaged from 45 yellow school buses! And then Y2K came and went, and... nothing.
As I understand it, the US coastline is protected by an identification system which requires all aircraft to report their presence and intentions within 60 miles of the nearest coastal point. If an aircraft has not done so within 10 miles of the coast, it faces military interception. Great, but what about the danger from within? I had been amazed (until 2001) at the ease with which one could board an aircraft in the US, compared to the same thing here. It was as if terrorism did not exist on US soil...
...and that was the Achilles heel that provided the terrorists with their window of opportunity. US Immigration makes checks on every foreigner entering the country. I have to fill in a form when I come, and answer questions like ”Have you ever been a member of the Communist party?”, and ”Have you ever belonged to the party governing Nazi Germany 1933-1945?” – hardly likely for the vast majority of modern air travellers.
And yet, once inside the country, security was very much relaxed. Seems like the terrorists had that figured out.
We’ve had our gun debates, and this isn’t going to be another one. But I do wonder about the “gun grabbers” when an incident of national security arises. My feeling is that too many people place too much faith in the protection that a gun offers, and grossly overestimate the likelihood of needing one – not that such a scenario never occurs.
But what is far more likely is an attack from within. The average person in the western world is far more likely to die from an avoidable accident in the home, or from a disease stemming from lack of exercise, bad diet, obesity, smoking or alcohol abuse.
But just as the US itself is vigilant against attacks from outside, and relaxed about the threat from within, so it could be said of the average gun owning home owner, who is unlikely to be attacked from outside, and much more likely to find that his seeds of doom were the contents of his refrigerator, that easy chair in front of the TV, and the lifestyle that results.
