.

The FAA rules which insist on disarming me when I fly have bugged the hell out of me for many years. Today we have had a horribly graphic lesson why they and any other restrictions on self-defense are so wrong and evil. It's war, folks, and the first thing we have to do is clear the gutless wonders demanding that we walk around unarmed out of the theater of operations before they give any more aid and comfort to the enemy. That means, hoplophobes, the party is over, and the border is that-a-way. Clean out yer locker, kid, yer outta here!

One man with a legally carried self-defense pistol and frangible ammo could have saved any one of those planes today. Even if he weren't equipped with the proper ammunition, what's the worst that could possibly have happened? The loss of the plane and everyone aboard somewhere over open country? That would have reduced the death toll by untold thousands, now wouldn't it?

The government and airlines were forced to admit publicly today that their security measures were inadequate. More than one security expert allowed that a suicide attack is almost impossible to stop. No matter how much they ratchet up the infringements on our freedoms, a man who is willing to die to accomplish his horrific mission always has a chance of getting through.

Only one thing has a rational chance of stopping him. The Israelis have proven that over and over for many years. Armed citizens can stop terrorism dead in its tracks - literally. I will readily concede that there are problems with this idea, but none of them are insurmountable. 34 states already routinely determine whether their citizens are "qualified" to carry a gun. While I am dubious of the idea of giving such a decision to government at any level on philosophical grounds, it certainly provides a ready mechanism to determine whether someone displays the necessary level of training and judgment.

Penetration of the airframe and resulting depressurization is a solved problem, too, albeit imperfectly as I understand it. The FAA's Air Marshals routinely use special frangible ammunition to minimize the danger, and such ammunition could readily be provided to air crews and passengers. The airlines would be well within their rights to insist on inspecting any and all ammo brought aboard the planes to protect their investment and liability. Perhaps they could even conveniently keep a stock of this ammunition in common calibres at the ticket counter for sale to passengers. I doubt anyone would mind if they charged a hefty premium for the convenience.

That thought allows me to modestly take a detour through the issue of costs. Ignoring for the moment any damage to our liberties, any level of increased security on airline flights is going to incur some tangible dollar costs. But allowing civilians to exercise their rights as guaranteed by the US and most state Constitutions places the burden of the costs mostly on the shoulders of the people who choose to bear it. There are already hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans who have both the training and most of the equipment to provide a very credible defense against hijackers. Rather than implementing draconian measures that are going to drive our tax burden up yet further, why not let freedom solve the problem at a very low cost?

Marksmanship and judgment are other possible objections that can be disposed of quite easily. Records of justifiable self-defense shootings indicate that civilians have both remarkably good sense about when to shoot, and at least as good a record of hitting their targets as the police. But there is a very simple argument to counter this problem, regardless of what level of proficiency you think is necessary. A hijacking, like all other violent crimes, is not a terribly subtle event. Target acquisition and identification is not a major problem. The shoot/no shoot decision becomes really easy when some maniac is screaming orders at the passengers and aircrew.

I have a real simple question for any idiot who is worried about the possibility of bad marksmanship. Would you rather take a chance on accidentally killing an innocent passenger who catches a stray bullet, or the certainty of every soul on the plane dying? Not to mention the potential thousands on the ground. I for one do not intend to ever fly again until I am allowed the means to defend myself, and I invite you to join me in this pledge. "If it saves just one life....."