Steve Scalise: After 9/11, We Didn't Ban Airplanes

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  3 weeks ago  •  12 comments

By:   Jonathan Chait (Intelligencer)

Steve Scalise: After 9/11, We Didn't Ban Airplanes
House Minority Whip Steve Scalise objects to gun control as a response to mass shootings because, on 9/11, airplanes "were used that day as the weapon to kill thousands of people … There wasn't a conversation about banning airplanes."

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Here in America, when one of our regular mass-shooting events occurs on a sufficiently large or horrifying scale, we often spend a few days debating small-scale reforms that might reduce the frequency of similar atrocities — before Republicans vote them down.

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise objects to this ritual — not the failing, but the trying. He grasped for a comparison to demonstrate the absurdity of being stampeded into enacting safety regulations merely because a ghastly tragedy occurred. He settled, strangely, on 9/11.

After that tragedy, he explained, nobody limited access to the weapon that was used, airplanes:


Airplanes were used that day as the weapon to kill thousands of people and to inflict terror on our country. There wasn't a conversation about banning airplanes. There was a conversation about connecting the dots. How we can try to figure out if there are signs we can see to stop the next attack from happening.

Scalise may have borrowed this comparison from his colleague, Lauren Boebert, who recently asserted, "When 9/11 happened, we didn't ban planes. We secured the cockpits." But relying on Boebert as a source of well-grounded, factual analysis is generally not a good idea.

In fact, after 9/11, Congress enacted sweeping restrictions on air travel. Before 9/11, you only had to pass through a metal detector to get onto a flight. You didn't need a photo ID, you didn't need to remove your shoes, you didn't need to pass through a body scanner, you could bring liquids on board, and your family could come meet you at the gate. The "no-fly list" didn't even exist.

After Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, and then beefed up security with a series of subsequent measures, none of that is true. Now, law-abiding citizens are subject to a great deal of hassle. A couple years ago, my wife, who is not a terrorist, was pulled aside and subjected to a pat-down search because she mistakenly included some soup in the meal she packed for her flight.

Whether or not one agrees with all these measures, it's very clear why they exist: to deny a tiny number of dangerous maniacs access to a dangerous weapon. That is the precise inconvenience Scalise refuses to impose on gun owners.

As ridiculous as Scalise's assumption that 9/11 did not lead to federal restrictions on access to airplanes is, don't sleep on the next part of his answer. ("There was a conversation about connecting the dots. How we can try to figure out if there are signs we can see to stop the next attack from happening.") In fact, the Bush administration connected the dots from the 9/11 attacks to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which had absolutely no connection to the attacks at all. Not a very smart comparison!


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago
Whether or not one agrees with all these measures, it's very clear why they exist: to deny a tiny number of dangerous maniacs access to a dangerous weapon. That is the precise inconvenience Scalise refuses to impose on gun owners
 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

You can't keep a determined maniac from obtaining a weapon.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    3 weeks ago

Our war on drugs worked, why wouldn't a war on weapons work?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  seeder  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

It is interesting how Boebert and now Scalise do not understand that they are making the gun regulators case for them

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  seeder  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

There is only one pediatrician in Uvalde. Today, that doctor told Congess that two of the murdered children in the Robb school massacre had been decapitated by the bullets from an AR-15. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1  Kavika   replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

beyond horrible.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago
Today, that doctor told Congess that two of the murdered children in the Robb school massacre had been decapitated by the bullets from an AR-15. 

Exactly, the condition of a dead body should make all the difference.  Just like that teenager that was decapitated by a roller coaster at Six Flags Over Georgia.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2    3 weeks ago

I bet you those who fall in front of a commuter train dont look too good when its over either. What the fuck does that have to do with a mass shooting of 10 year olds? 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

That's even more sickening than the image of a man shot in the face by an AR-15 that I posted as a comment to an article from npr that I posted about what happens to the human body when it's been shot.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4  Drinker of the Wry    3 weeks ago
 What the fuck does that have to do with a mass shooting of 10 year olds? 

Didn't you bring up the condition of the body in 3.0?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
5  charger 383    3 weeks ago

If the government does not want people to have something, that just makes many want it more

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6  seeder  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago
www.chron.com   /news/houston-texas/article/Uvalde-Texas-school-shooting-Salvador-Ramos-forum-17226232.php
The U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security warned on Tuesday that people in online forums known for hosting violent extremist content are lauding the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas —and are pushing others to commit further attacks. 
“Individuals in online forums that routinely promulgate domestic violent extremist and conspiracy theory-related content have praised the May 2022 mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas and encouraged copycat attacks,” DHS officials wrote in a bulletin released Tuesday morning. 
DHS officials explained that others have capitalized on the shooting—during which a lone gunman shot and killed 19 children and two teachers—to push conspiracy theories, including the false claim that the federal government faked the shooting to boost support for gun control measures. 

DHS officials also noted that the alleged perpetrator of a mass shooting that killed 10 in a majority-Black neighborhood of Buffalo, NY 10 days before the Uvalde shooting, was motivated by racist conspiracies he found online; the shooter that killed 23 in a majority Latinx neighborhood in El Paso in 2019 was animated by many of the same theories. 

Officials advised readers to “maintain digital and media literacy” and practice recognizing “false or misleading narratives” to protect themselves against proliferating misinformation.  

Mass shootings have fomented similar conspiracies in the past: after a gunman killed 20 kids at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in 2012, Austin-based far-right provocateur Alex Jones pushed the lie that the federal government had staged the shooting to drum up support for gun control measures. 

After Buffalo,   claims that the shooting was an orchestrated ‘false flag’ operation   bubbled up again. Jones’ website ‘Infowars’ trumpeted that he’d predicted a false flag operation at a grocery store in the days after;   an Arizona state lawmaker is now under investigation for endorsing the conspiracy on Telegram following the shooting .

The bulletin comes as evidence of law enforcement’s calamitous mishandling of the shooting continues to emerge. 

Officers took more than an hour to enter the school after the attack began, as parents implored them to intervene.   One Uvalde mother who rescued her two children from the school while the shooter was still inside   said U.S. marshals tried to stop her by threatening her with arrest and handcuffing her. 

A   New York Times story published Friday alleged   that Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District Police Chief Pete Arredondo committed disastrous communication errors that slowed law enforcement’s response as the shooting unfolded.  
 
 

Who is online


37 visitors