Gun control is a contentious issue. A class of people want the nation to give up most, but not all of its guns. the issue, though not officially researched by the institute, was treated back in 2010 on Long Hill. Below is the column as submitted in the December, 2010 issue of the Sturbridge Times Magazine.
The Gift of Insecurity
November saw much
discussion in the media about the vast resources allocated to insure the
president’s safe trip to India. There
was some disagreement about the number of naval vessels that would accompany
him. Even the lesser number than
originally quoted would have been enough to destroy all but the world’s largest
navies. To insure a peaceful sleep, it
sounded as if every hotel room in Mumbai was to be reserved, just in case.
The security mania did
not start with the incumbent and Mumbai does have an image problem around
safety after the 2008 siege. Still, the
recent foreign tour highlights what to some, namely me, might seem a problem.
An article, Lunch With
George, written by the publisher and editor of this publication has been on my
mind since it appeared in the August of 2008 issue. Paul Carr wrote about an afternoon spent in
the near company of George Bush the elder.
I did not think his portrayal of the ex president to be unsympathetic,
but neither was it fawning. It was a day
in the life of a man who had had his day in the sun. The 41st president was just enjoying post
celebrity mode.
What I took away from
Paul’s article was not about the man being out and noticed by the public. What caught my eye were the security arrangements. The man had been out of office over a decade
and a half. The only person known to
have it in for him lethally went to the gallows. Yet, he will be accompanied by men described
in the article as “behemoths” as long as he lives. Every president will have this protection for
life.
Contrast this with the
current state of travel for an American citizen. He or she may have to go through a machine
that will leave nothing about their anatomy to speculation. If they opt out of the electronic pat down,
the physical one is more demeaning.
So are we being
paranoid? Let’s do the math. It has been
reported that we have passed the million mark on our national No Fly List.
Breaking down the numbers, on 911 it was a team of 19 men who executed the
plan. Assume that there were six liaison, handlers and other staff. That makes
up a crew of 25. That means a possible 40,000 terror teams whose potential
members we know about, but just won’t let fly. I may never come out from under
my bed.
It seems we are going to
the National Security State with us all on lockdown. A few years ago a car
veered off our street. An officer responded and did a normal investigation. It
was a little strange that he was wearing a SWAT uniform. At our town meeting,
the department requested and was voted the police version of the M-16. There is
almost never an arrest here. It is that boring aspect of the town that we love.
Yet, our town dads and moms can be easily stampeded into paranoia.
Never mind that
statistics show that we are pretty safe. We are still told that without a
constant effort we will be at the mercy of the terrorists. With what we are
paying for our Department of Homeland Security, we should not have a care in
the world.
There is reason for a
climate of fear. We are in danger. It’s
just not the danger being sold. When we screw our courage to the sticking point
and finally get in the car to get a slurpie down at a convenience store, we
have a good chance of becoming a casualty. Not from Abdul the Jihadi, but from
another driver crashing into us. Go and poll undertakers in your region about
how many kids they’ve buried due to a drowning in the family pool. Ask them how many local terrorists have caused
any funerals.
So we are heading toward
more and more control. We need “Real Id” to make us feel better. In a scene
from the movie The Hunt for Red October, Sam Neill's character is talking with
Sean Connery's. Neill talks about how he
is going to travel from state to state in his recreational vehicle when he
becomes an American. At one point he says, "No papers?" and Connery
affirms, "No Papers." It is the difference between a free and unfree
country. What will we say when we have to hear, “Your papers, please.”
I expect to be
accused of Lèse majesté for the
suggestion I intend to make, but so be it.
It is time to take away the Secret Service protection of presidents and
candidates and other officials and people of importance. Now, before giving
vent to paroxysms of rage, think about it. A vast sum of money is spent to
protect him and a fortune is spent to watch you in your own name. There is no
incentive to change the system.
I have no desire to see
anyone in government be the victim of any violence. Let me not mince words. I
wish it to happen to my lumpen countrymen far less. We should all have the same
level of protection or the same risk.
The desire to protect the
president is understandable. There have been a number of assassination attempts
since JFK. Like all my contemporaries, I remember my circumstances that day.
The funeral was spectacle, but it was heart wrenching no less for that.
Since then we’ve had the
King shooting, the attempt on Reagan’s life. The multiple bizarre attempts on
Ford didn’t help. Remember Arthur Lee Bremer? We started getting paranoid even about fringe
candidates.
That all is true, but the
thing about the presidency is there is never a dearth of ambitious men (and
some women) who seek it. It is a pinnacle of success. It is also a position of
leadership and therefore should not be without risk. Serious risk. Though not a
betting man, I would be happy to wager that even without the coterie of guards
we now provide, there would still be a surfeit of aspirants.
So how would this reform
help anything? If the president cannot have a protecting force for himself, he
may be cognizant of a shared risk. Our protection should be his protection and
his should be ours. It is theory we should be willing to test.
Who knows, we could get
back to a real human presidency. Harry Truman used to walk down to the drugstore
by himself in the morning to get the paper. That may never happen, but if the
president doesn’t want to go out without a helicopter hovering overhead, he can
subscribe.
Oh well, things won’t
change. I should just seek a sinecure
that leads to the need for protection. I want three security personnel and a
driver on the federal dime. Would be willing to trade one of the agents for a
masseuse.