Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Opening brief in Chicago case | Main | BATFE explosives ruling overturned »

New Admin and arming pilots

Posted by David Hardy · 17 March 2009 08:33 AM

A Washington Times editorial. Mind you, given how lousy the last administration was on the issue, it would be hard to do worse, but they're at least giving it a game try.

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Ed Stone | March 17, 2009 2:02 PM | Reply

Terrible editorial with little to no information. Does anybody have any further information? A man claiming to be an FFDO posted a comment over there that claims this is helping the program because requalification for the 10,000 existing FFDOs was underfunded.

Dave R | March 18, 2009 12:10 AM | Reply

Ed Stone:

The existing program was bad enough that the Times is likely correct, although it might have been more persuasive if they'd rehashed some of the existing history. Participation has been low by pilots, in part because of the intrusive and redundant psychiatric exam, in part due to only having one (remote) training facility in the country, and in part due to general bureaucratic foot-dragging and hostility. Requalification may well be under-funded, that's plausible, but stealing funding from new training looks an awful lot like shutting off the trickle of new trainees without the political cost of officially cancelling it.

70% of commercial pilots are ex-military. Does anyone believe only ten to twelve thousand wanted to be armed after 9-11? The program was a poison pill from the beginning. Even the Bush administration coddled liberal mandarin sensibilities. It's not jumping at shadows to think they'll tighten up even more under an Obama (and Holder, and Emanuel) administration.

Leave a comment