“I have continued to be in the process of taking a look and seeking input at the best way to address the transportation of firearms. There’s a variety of ways that you can approach it. And I want to make sure that we don’t get caught up in the politics of the Second Amendment.” – Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz in Banning Guns On Planes Is Just One Option For Avoiding Future Airport Shootings, Officials Say [via worn.com]
What, pray tell, is the politics of the 2nd Amendment?
When someone wants to restrict or abolish a fundamental right, perhaps?
I just want to hear Debbie Washerhair-Schultz admit that.
“I want to make sure that we don’t get caught up in the politics of the Second Amendment.”
Good luck with that. It already is. It shouldn’t be, but it is.
What she really means to say, I think, is avoiding the attention of groups and citizens that care about the 2A and other rights, and will fight to protect them.
Uh, guns are already banned on planes, Schultz, you fucking dumbass.
You need to listen better. You can carry *your* gun in checked baggage, and manufacturers, FFLs etc can ship their product by air. Bitch means *NO* guns on airplanes, with her negative IQ probably including air crew, Air Marshals, FBI, or local police responding to violent attacks on crew or passengers, NO guns on airplanes. Because she is dumber than a firearm.
The problem isn’t Islam and schizophrenia, the problem is the gun. Got it…
This is the second occurrence of someone shooting up an airport using weapons carried in checked baggage in 45 years. And as is normal for the Democratic party, “Something must be done!”
http://www.timesofisrael.com/echoes-of-tel-aviv-1972-in-florida-shooting/
At least the third, MSP got hit back in the 90’s.
Something *should* be done! How ’bout we outlaw murdering people in airports? Wouldn’t that work? Yo, Debbie? No answer, huh? Guess she’s doing Dallas.
I am so appreciative of her insight and support.
Overwhelmed by her love.
I have been concerned about the transportation of stupidity.
I want to keep options open, but have made an appointment for her for a lobotomy.
My guess is she already has had one.
Forget it, Lou. She has three names. She’s better than us.
Three names like famous serial killers?
there is no jon wayne taylor on this list.
http://www.newsoftheweird.com/wayne.html
pretty impressive.
Laundrywoman is really two name alone so call it 4 name bimbo.
Remember, she has proven to everyone that she is that stupid. She contradict herself on live news about the Palm Beach airport shooting.
The only politics of she knows is how to restrict everyone’s rights and freedoms for her and her elitist bubble living morons.
Come on, give little Debbie a brwak. She helped put the Donald in the white House.
I really don’t think she is that stupid. She’s just betting voters are that stupid.
Some from column A, some from column B.
Anyone notice the date today – April 1st. Situational awareness guys!
Every day is April fools day when you’re Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
I’m sure glad she help knock Bernie out of the primary.
Smarmy and condescending… barf. Your false “concern” does not in the least conceal the lust you have to control other people
Tell me, Debbido… how many armed guards do you have? I have one… me. I transport my gun on my gunbelt, or keep one very near my hands at all times, in spite of people like you.
And thanks, I’m not going anywhere near an airport anyway. The combination of being helpless and sexually molested are simply not drawing cards.
“in spite of people like you.”
Also, because of people like you.
If criminals didn’t have so many left-wing apologists worried about their treatment, there wouldn’t be as many criminals.
“Also, because of people like you.”
Well, not here so much. People like her stand out like sore thumbs, and they don’t usually linger through the winter. 🙂 I am seeing more and more local people, even other women, open carrying here these days. Love it!
Really Debbie? Come on, tell the truth. Government control good. Serfs bad. Ban Guns good. F you and your corrupt DemoCrud friends.
I haven’t flown in a long time, but it’s my understanding that only the carry on luggage gets inspected, so what’s to keep someone from illegally flying with an undeclared firearm? And if shooting up the airport is your goal, why would it matter if it was in a secured area or not? Why not just walk in and start shooting? So what if the baggage claim area is secured? Even if you succeeded in securing the entire airport, why would a spree killer not just find another unsecured area with lots of people?
I think DW-S would just love to use this one random act of violence to punish all g un owners because in her mind it’s all our fault because we won’t give up our guns for the greater good. That or the TSA’s wanting to go through all your luggage so they can fondle your panties.
Remember who you’re talking about, Guv. Another trillion or so a year, we can have accomplish nothing but inspect all bags by opening and rifling thru by 10th grade dropout parolees, sorry we can’t afford to supervise or insure them, because it takes another couple trillion to move the security theater out to a mile from the airport entrance. Hey, it will mean lots of JOBS, see, and I don’t have to pay for it!
A lot of airports if most or if not all have upgraded to have checked baggage go through x-ray machines and bomb detection machines. Some terminals were to be set up to test machines to check for nuclear materials that “may” be in a checked bag or parcel being shipped.
Still, what’s to stop someone from just walking in off the street and opening fire at the crowded line to get into the ‘secure’ areas?
Dang!!! Sure hope no “terrorists” think of that!!!
This has been a concern of mine for quite awhile. TSA and the other .gov folks are only concerned with ensuring that the “secure area” of the airport is secure (a job they fail at as much as 95% of the time according to auditing).
They don’t seem to care much at all about what happens outside security. As such they’ve created massive bottlenecks. The largest plane I know of is the Airbus A380 which, in certain configurations can hold 800 people. Granted, that’s a fair number of people and perhaps a 9/11 style attack could take out more people but that’s unlikely these days since trying to hijack a plane in the US today would likely get you beaten to death by the passengers and requires the skill to fly the thing once you take over.
Attacking the security line with explosives or even just humble old firearms is comparatively easy and, done right, at the right airport and with a group of moderately well trained people with even sub-par intelligence I would imagine you could get a similar, if not higher, body count. Even if you didn’t get a higher body count than you might crashing a plane it would create a whole new set of fears at the airports and effectively shut down air travel for some period of time due to fear and government scrambling to find a method to prevent this “new” style of attack.
The current system hasn’t made anything “safer”. It’s just moved the target, and in many cases, made that target larger and easier to access due to the bottlenecks the system creates.
I think that’s why it’s called ‘security theater’. They’re not really accomplishing anything, it’s all for show. TSA’s hardly the only group engaged in it though.
Well, with my military experience, I see another advantage lots of people may not have thought of. Without some manner of preparations to positively prevent another 911 from being initiated, sooner or later we would be looking at some poor bastard in a fighter having to push the button which shoots an American airliner down, killing everyone on board and possibly many more on the ground. Complete with film at 11. Good lord, what a screaming mess that would be, worth a lot of wasted money and inconvenience to avoid.
“They’re not really accomplishing anything, it’s all for show.”
In a way you’re right and in a way you’re wrong. They haven’t accomplished much that’s useful, but the have accomplished making the targets larger and easier to get at.
On the plus side, no one is going to try to hijack a US airliner for the foreseeable future and if they do they will fail. The people on a plane won’t put up with drunks who say stupid things. Drunks now get an ass-whipping and tied up. If you stand up waving around a real weapon like a box cutter or something everyone is going to attack you.
No way in hell you’re getting into the cockpit these days. That fact has nearly nothing to do with the government or reinforced doors or Air Marshals, it has everything to do with the fact that 9/11 changed the paradigm from a hijacking that diverts the plane to somewhere else to one where it becomes a weapon and the passengers won’t put up with it. There would be no need to ever shoot down a plane because the terrorists would be dead or incapacitated before a fighter ever got off the ground, or if it was airborne, got close enough to do anything.
If you want to find out what it’s like to get beat to death with your own shoes, just stand up on a plane, get into the aisle, yell “Allah Akbar!” and rush toward the front of the plane.
Interesting point strych, in 2001 there had been a long history dating back to (I think) the 6 Day War of guys with names like Mohamed and Ahmed hijacking commercial flights only to divert the plane to an airport in some unfriendly country and demand ransom. The safest plan of action under the circumstances would seem to be to sit tight and do what they say. Naturally, that was something they’d only be able to pull off once and it will be a very, very long time (centuries probably) before we forget.
Strych, I would bet good money that you’re correct, I know that my brother and I flew to the far side of the world on 9/26 of 2001, like an 11 hour flight on a nearly empty jumbo jet (everybody with sense had cancelled), we had decided before we boarded that no one was taking over that airplane while we were breathing. I assume, as you say, it will be decades or centuries before another successful hijacking other than by the pilot, which there just isn’t any help for. But even the most remote possibility of an actual shootdown fills me with fear. I am forced to support the concept of the security theater, if its effect is only 1% of what is needed.
Wow you guys got them this year 🙂
Little Debbie is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Clinton machine and is still running off the fumes of the previous campaign. She will eventually sell herself to the next highest bidder as Democrat politicians do. They are the other group that earns a living on their back; at least she gets to be face up some of the time, even if she is expected to make noises like she enjoys it.
SCHULLLLLLLLLLTZ!!!
She knows nothing!
Hmm, I’m pretty sure checked luggage is X-Rayed before you get on that plane. “Other Security Measures” for checked baggage besides X-Ray mentioned in the first article I googled. So, if your bag matches your drivers licence and your ticket, you’re separated from your gun pretty darn quickly.
However, there’s not much but Security walking around as a person enters most airports. Plenty of people at the ticket counters.
A full out and out gun ban at airports would hurt the tourism industry, the competitive gun industry, and collegiate sporting industry. Olympic qualifying trials?
She sounds pretty to the anti-gunners, but she just can’t do it.
That is a feature, not a bug!
During periods of high traffic, holidays and such, I have seen several soldier types in vests with M-16s in our airport, I’m sure she would get them disarmed pretty quick. I mean, somebody might take his gun and shoot a child, right?
Now there’s a face I’d surly like to forget… This woman is pure evil.
Thinking past my nausea, she has been helpful to our cause though; unbeknownst to her I’m sure. Sometimes your enemies can be very helpful… 🙂
God Bless…
She is just eaten up with stupid.
I think that Wasserman Schultz failed her Wassermann Test.
Um – April Fool? She sure is . . .
That face would gag a maggot!!
DWS doesn’t want to give the impression that she will allow you to have a gun. Ever.