This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on February 24, 2008 6:28 PM.
The previous post in this blog was Why we live here.
The next post in this blog is Federal funds well spent.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
You can spend $1,000 or $100,000. But the $100K one isn't gonna be that much bigger. Or faster. (well, maybe 2-3x, but not 100x)
Speaking of spendy rifles, I know somebody who makes customer rifles for about $60K-$100K. But you can't drive his guns. And they don't shoot any faster bullets, but the scroll work is awesome.
I love this: "Firearms stored as luggage have been stolen from airports in other cities, including Seattle, Chicago and Philadelphia. Some airports have considered installing surveillance cameras in the baggage tunnels, but the idea is often nixed as too costly."
So when they're keeping track of the general public, spare no expense. But when it comes time to secure the property with which they have been entrusted by the flying public, it's too expensive to put cameras in. Cameras should go in, pronto. Seems like a basic safety measure to me, as this guy could have committed a crime with the guns that he stole. Even though guns are unloaded, you can pack factory-packaged ammo in the same suitcase with your pistol.
Baggage handlers that steal should face enhanced sentences for their abuse of vulnerable passengers. This guy is getting off too easy.
Comments (3)
$12,500 for a gun? what the heck is he buying a howitzer?
Posted by philip | February 25, 2008 4:08 AM
A Howitzer?
Guns are like cars.
You can spend $1,000 or $100,000. But the $100K one isn't gonna be that much bigger. Or faster. (well, maybe 2-3x, but not 100x)
Speaking of spendy rifles, I know somebody who makes customer rifles for about $60K-$100K. But you can't drive his guns. And they don't shoot any faster bullets, but the scroll work is awesome.
Posted by Harry | February 25, 2008 2:14 PM
I love this: "Firearms stored as luggage have been stolen from airports in other cities, including Seattle, Chicago and Philadelphia. Some airports have considered installing surveillance cameras in the baggage tunnels, but the idea is often nixed as too costly."
So when they're keeping track of the general public, spare no expense. But when it comes time to secure the property with which they have been entrusted by the flying public, it's too expensive to put cameras in. Cameras should go in, pronto. Seems like a basic safety measure to me, as this guy could have committed a crime with the guns that he stole. Even though guns are unloaded, you can pack factory-packaged ammo in the same suitcase with your pistol.
Baggage handlers that steal should face enhanced sentences for their abuse of vulnerable passengers. This guy is getting off too easy.
Posted by al | February 26, 2008 6:31 AM