I'll Take Freedom

In the meantime I've received a copy of an e-mail which was sent by the airport security director to a member of the news media. (It came third-hand to me via Leroy Pyle.) In that e-mail note, I learned that the officers on duty at Reno International that day have been interviewed and they all deny any knowledge of any such incident. Based on that indirect response, I again wrote the Mayor and airport authority, providing them with additional information. Still no reply.

I have been able to demonstrate that I have no bone to pick with the City of Reno, Reno PD, or Reno Airport. I was just going about my own business when the situation unfolded before me. I have no reason to fabricate the incident, nor do I stand to benefit in any way by making a false accusation. I have dedicated my life to honest, ethical law enforcement, but sadly that can not be said of all officers. I was hoping for an explanation, or an excuse, not a denial. I saw what I saw, but I have been branded a liar by some who were once my colleagues. I know the truth, and so do the officers involved.

In the overall scheme of things, I am but one voice and what I saw in Reno, on a monetary scale, does not amount to much. However, the actions and subsequent denials by two police officers, stains Reno PD and the entire law enforcement community. The larger impact is, freedom takes yet another hit. The officer who took it upon himself to uphold some vague notion of "zero tolerance" has, when called on it, lied. I can not know his motivation, but I can speculate that it's roots and the reason for the confiscation, lay in an elitist attitude among some officers, regarding "mere citizens" possessing and using firearms.

It is a legitimate government function to provide police services to the public, of that there can be no argument. That is one of the foundations of society. The problem as I see it is, some believe that ONLY government can provide protection to the public. The constant assault on our rights by some politically motivated groups and their willing accomplices in the major news media, has resulted in a popular belief that the mere presence of firearms leads to crime and violence. That belief is not based on truth, but on emotion and distorted facts. That belief is formed not from reasoned debate, but by propaganda. The "big lie." Is this the result of some mysterious conspiracy? I'll leave that debate for another place and time, but there can be no argument that those who control information, controls public opinion. In an attempt to lay a foundation for further gun control efforts, Emory University professor Michael Bellesiles, wrote a book outlining his findings that contrary to popular belief, pre-Civil War Americans owned relatively few guns. Professor Bellesiles' work resulted in praise from elite academia and the news media. His book, Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture, was cited by the Clinton Administration's Justice Department, while arguing the U.S. vs. Emerson case. Trouble is, the research has been proven to be a lie.* If the gun control crowd truly has a noble and righteous cause, why would they have to lie? The truth will stand on it's own merit.

In modern society, not only in the United States but world wide, those who control information share an elitist view that common people should not possess the means to defend themselves. The United Nations met last summer, to address small arms control on a global scale. Under the Bush administration, the United States refused to go along with the UN crowd, explaining to the world that the proposals put forth violates our Constitution, in that private citizens have a right to possess firearms. Under previous and perhaps future administrations, that argument would not be made and more likely the UN efforts would instead be embraced.

Some police officers who do not engage in independent thought, believe that as the guardians of society, they and only they should be armed to fight crime. Any honest police officer, or police administrator, has to admit that the police are the last ones to arrive at a crime scene. Sure, law enforcement does its best to identify and apprehend the criminals, but only after the damage has been done in most cases. It is simply not possible to deploy police officers in sufficient numbers to protect everyone. The American public would not and should not, tolerate the intrusion of government in order to provide such protection.

The ugly truth is, the police are not capable of preventing violent crime. In the year 2000, there were 15,517 murders, 90,186 forcible rapes, 407,842 robberies, and 910,744 aggravated assaults.** In each and every one of those cases, the police were not there to protect anyone. Had many of those victims had the means and the wherewithal to defend themselves, one can argue that the numbers would be much lower. Recent studies have shown that in the United States, firearms are used between 2 and 3 million times annually to stop crime.*** Clearly, law abiding private citizens have demonstrated a willingness and ability to lawfully defend themselves, most often without firing a shot.

I am confident that the overwhelming majority of police officers in Reno Nevada, are honest, ethical and conscientious in their duties. In the past I've had the pleasure of professional relations with Reno PD. The actions I observed at Reno International Airport, could just as easily occurred at Portland, San Jose, Denver, or any other airport in the United States. Given what I know about human nature and the realities of police work, I'm sure they have occurred elsewhere. In this case it was a one cent plastic lapel pin, shaped like a pistol. I've heard of other incidents involving fingernail clippers being confiscated from the very pilots who fly the airplanes. To believe they would use the clippers as weapons against themselves is, not to put too fine an edge on it, stupid. We've all heard stories, I'm sure, about grandmothers being "wand raped" at airports while able bodied young men who fit the terrorist profiles are allowed to board unimpeded. The notion of "zero tolerance" to put forth the illusion of safety, is in the words of Tom Gresham (Tom Gresham's Gun Talk), "zero intelligence." Police officers must use their God given intelligence to make rational, logical decisions, not rely on an unproven politically correct concepts to intercept criminals and terrorists.

BACK