8 ms·

The solution may very well be more testing, control, and regulation. But there's a difference between minor tweaks to address the root causes of this issue (hy

The solution may very well be more testing, control, and regulation. But there's a difference between minor tweaks to address the root causes of this issue (hypothetical: maybe the drug got contaminated in transit and post-shipping verification of contents needs to be done) and a "Shut it down, shut it all down" reaction. To draw a thin (but perhaps appropriate analogy): after the hijackings of airplanes on September 11th, the United States responded by expanding the air marshall program, significantly jacking up security and restrictions on passengers, and putting combination locks on airplane cabins. Only the last policy, I think, is actually necessary to address what happened on September 11th, and it's all they should have done.

mkaziz 11y ago
Personally, I like the idea of air marshalls as well. It makes feel safer while flying. The TSA, on the other hand, definitely makes me feel less safe.
- richmarr 11y ago
  Interestingly air marshalls get arrested more frequently than they make arrests (as of 2010 at least). https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/the_effectivene.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/the_effective...
ared38 11y ago
I hate how politicians pander to the base with vague promises to increase or decrease regulation instead of debating to find which regulations are the most effective. Same situation for welfare programs, use of military power overseas, and taxation. There are undoubtedly better ways to use or collect the resources government currently has or even do more with less but they are never considered.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  This is pretty much where gun control is right now. Obama was in 'tears' using the Sandy Hook shooting to justify his executive orders, but those executive orders changed nothing that would've prevented the shooting from occurring. The shooter hadn't gotten his weapons through the supposed/alleged 'gun show loophole', for example. It just lets him claim he 'did something', and makes the base democratic voters happy.
  - mjevans 11y ago
    It is harder and more difficult for me to legally drive a car than it is for me to legally own a gun. All of those things which we require of drivers should be required of those who operate guns.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      That's a blanket statement with no supporting argument? How about toasters? How about kitchen knives? Knives actually were controlled devices in many nations. In America, there's this confounding problem of that Amendment. To change anything, that's got to change too.
    - refurb 11y ago
      Driving a car is not a constitutionally protected right.
    - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
      It certainly isn't here in Illinois, yet gun violence certainly isn't any better here. But the point is, the political rhetoric was completely disingenuous, and unrelated to the laws in question. We need to fix our violence problem, nobody disagrees about this. But it seems like many Democrats, like Obama, are convinced the only right way to do that is making it more difficult for gun owners to buy guns. Rather than say, targeting actual problems with a clearly defined link to the crime: Many school shooters steal guns from family members. If Obama actually wanted to reduce shootings, he'd look into how to solve that, rather than pursuing a party agenda instead.
  - ared38 11y ago
    I'd argue mass shootings themselves are a red herring when considering gun deaths. While horrific, the vast majority of gun homicide deaths are handgun crimes that make the local frontpage at best. The Cure Violence program has demonstrated ~30% reductions in gangland shootings and doesn't even require more gun control, but the debate is totally focused on assault rifles and high capacity magazines.
    - 11y ago
knodi123 11y ago
> after the hijackings of airplanes on September 11th, the United States responded by creating the air marhsll program No, just expanding it. It has existed since the 60s.
- fixermark 11y ago
  Thank you for the correction. Updated the original.

mkaziz 11y ago

Personally, I like the idea of air marshalls as well. It makes feel safer while flying. The TSA, on the other hand, definitely makes me feel less safe.

richmarr 11y ago
Interestingly air marshalls get arrested more frequently than they make arrests (as of 2010 at least). https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/the_effectivene.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/the_effective...

ared38 11y ago

I hate how politicians pander to the base with vague promises to increase or decrease regulation instead of debating to find which regulations are the most effective. Same situation for welfare programs, use of military power overseas, and taxation. There are undoubtedly better ways to use or collect the resources government currently has or even do more with less but they are never considered.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago
This is pretty much where gun control is right now. Obama was in 'tears' using the Sandy Hook shooting to justify his executive orders, but those executive orders changed nothing that would've prevented the shooting from occurring. The shooter hadn't gotten his weapons through the supposed/alleged 'gun show loophole', for example. It just lets him claim he 'did something', and makes the base democratic voters happy.
- mjevans 11y ago
  It is harder and more difficult for me to legally drive a car than it is for me to legally own a gun. All of those things which we require of drivers should be required of those who operate guns.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    That's a blanket statement with no supporting argument? How about toasters? How about kitchen knives? Knives actually were controlled devices in many nations. In America, there's this confounding problem of that Amendment. To change anything, that's got to change too.
  - refurb 11y ago
    Driving a car is not a constitutionally protected right.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    It certainly isn't here in Illinois, yet gun violence certainly isn't any better here. But the point is, the political rhetoric was completely disingenuous, and unrelated to the laws in question. We need to fix our violence problem, nobody disagrees about this. But it seems like many Democrats, like Obama, are convinced the only right way to do that is making it more difficult for gun owners to buy guns. Rather than say, targeting actual problems with a clearly defined link to the crime: Many school shooters steal guns from family members. If Obama actually wanted to reduce shootings, he'd look into how to solve that, rather than pursuing a party agenda instead.
- ared38 11y ago
  I'd argue mass shootings themselves are a red herring when considering gun deaths. While horrific, the vast majority of gun homicide deaths are handgun crimes that make the local frontpage at best. The Cure Violence program has demonstrated ~30% reductions in gangland shootings and doesn't even require more gun control, but the debate is totally focused on assault rifles and high capacity magazines.
  - 11y ago

knodi123 11y ago

> after the hijackings of airplanes on September 11th, the United States responded by creating the air marhsll program No, just expanding it. It has existed since the 60s.

fixermark 11y ago
Thank you for the correction. Updated the original.