> ************************************************************ > “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the > species exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a > moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, > enterprize, and independence to the mind. Games played > with the ball and others of that nature, are too > violent for the body and stamp no character on the > mind. Let your gun therefore by the constant companion > of your walks.” > -- Thomas Jefferson in 1785 letter to nephew Peter Carr > ************************************************************ > The New GUN WEEK, April 1, 2005 > Page 15 > > Hindsight > by Joseph P. Tartaro, > Executive Editor > > Grounded Millionaire Struggles To Make Point about Privacy > > Freedom to travel used to be a basic principle of American > life, but that was changing even before Sept. 11, 2001, the > date we now refer to as 9-11, or 9/11. > > But after that date, travel, particularly air travel, > started to get really hairy. So much so that I have met > quite a few people who refuse to use the airlines at all > and many who find even train travel more intrusive than ever > before. Pretty much the same rules established by the > Transportation Security Administration (TSA) of the > Homeland Security Department (HSD) apply, but the ones for > trains weren’t put into force at the same time as for > airline travel simply because there were not enough trained > security screeners. > > There are significant numbers of Americans who will only > travel if they can drive to their destination and back in > their own vehicles. Otherwise, they just don’t go. > > This was highlighted in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Feb. > 27 in a lengthy article by Dennis Roddy, about millionaire > John Gilmore who stays close to home to make a point about > privacy. > > According to Roddy’s column datelined San Francisco, Gilmore > is unable to travel because he refuses to present a > government-approved ID. > > According to Roddy’s column, Gilmore’s splendid isolation > began July 4, 2002, when, with defiance aforethought, he > strolled to the Southwest Airlines counter at Oakland, CA, > Airport and presented his ticket. > > The gate agent asked for his ID. > > Gilmore asked her why. > > It is the law, she said. > > Gilmore asked to see the law. > > Nobody could produce a copy. To date, nobody has. The > regulation that mandates ID at airports is “Sensitive > Security Information,” Roddy reported. The law, as it turns > out, is unavailable for inspection. > > The Law’s a Secret > > What started out as a weekend trip to Washington became a > crawl through the courts in search of an answer to Gilmore’s > question: Why? > > In post 9/11 America, asking “Why?” when someone from an > airline asks for identification can start some interesting > arguments. Gilmore, who learned to argue on the debate > team in his hometown of Bradford, McKean County, PA, has > started an argument that, should it reach its intended > target, the US Supreme Court, would turn the rules of > national security on end, reach deep into the tug-of-war > between private rights and public safety, and play havoc > with the Department of Homeland Security. > > At the heart of Gilmore’s stubbornness is the worry about > the thin line between safety and tyranny. > > “Are they just basically saying we just can’t travel without > identity papers? If that’s true, then I’d rather see us go > through a real debate that says we want to introduce > required identity papers in our society rather than trying > to legislate it through the back door through regulations > that say there’s not any other way to get around,” Gilmore > said, according to The Post-Gazette. “Basically what they > want is a show of obedience.” > > “As happens to the disobedient, Gilmore is grounded,” Roddy > reported. “He is rich —he estimates his net worth at $30 > million— and cannot fly inside the United States. Nor can > he ride Amtrak, rent room at most major hotels, or easily > clear security in the courthouses where his case, Gilmore v. > Ashcroft, is to be heard. In a time when more and more > people and places demand some form of government-issued > identification, Gilmore offers only his 49-year-old face: > a study in stringy hair, high forehead, wire-rimmed glasses, > Ho Chi Minh beard and the contrariness for which the dot.com > culture is renowned,” Roddy reported. > > “I think of myself as being under regional arrest,” he said. > Even with $30 million in the bank, regional arrest can be > hard. He takes the bus to and from events at which he is > applauded by less well-heeled computer techies who flew in > from around the country after showing a boarding pass and > one form of government-issued photo ID and arrived in > rental cars that required a valid driver’s license and one > major credit card. > > He was employee No. 5 at Sun Microsystems, which made Unix, > the free software of the Web, the world standard. He japed > the government by cracking its premier security code. He > campaigned to keep the software that runs the Internet free > of charge. After he left Sun, Gilmore started his own firm, > sold it for more money than he seems to have bothered to > count and has since devoted his time to giving it away to > favored causes: drug law reform, a campaign to standardize > computer voting machines and the Electronic Frontier > Foundation, something of an ACLU for the Information Age. > > To some, Gilmore’s argument is redolent of the conspiracy > theories from the black helicopter crowd. > > “That’s the problem. How it sounds,” Gilmore said, > according to The Post-Gazette. “He waved his hands like > some Cassandra: ‘They have all these secret laws! The UFOs > are coming! They have guards at every airport!” Yes, he > said, there is a certain odd flavor to the notion that > someone shouldn’t have to show ID to board a plane, but with > magnetometers at the gates, guards with security wands, > fortified cockpit doors and sky marshals abounding, Gilmore > is asking just how much citizens are giving up when they > hand their driver’s licenses to a third party, in this case > an airline, where it is put into a database they cannot see, > to meet a law that, as it turns out, they are not allowed to > read.’” > > Gilmore will show ID for an international flight because > he doesn’t expect to set the rules for other nations. > > “I will show a passport to travel internationally. I’m not > willing to show a passport to travel in my own country,” > Gilmore said. “I used to laugh at countries that had > internal passports. And it’s happened here and people don’t > even seem to know about it.” > > But John Gilmore, the principle in Roddy’s timely column, is > not alone. > > Worsening Proposals > > And the situation threatens to get worse. The federal > government is on the verge of forcing the states to issue > drivers’ licenses in such a form that they will become > virtual national ID cards, complete with some biometric > information—not just photos and Social Security numbers. > > In addition, Congress is getting ready to debate renewal of > the Patriot Act, which allows secret investigations and > searches of people the government suspects of terrorism, > organized crime and gang activity. > > Now, people like Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Jon Corzine > (both D NJ), with encouragement from other anti-gunners in > and out of Congress, want to add the government’s “watch > lists” to the National Instant Check System database. The > problem with that, as with many other items in the HSD’s > security schemes, is that the “watch list” isn’t just one > list, isn’t managed by one agency (even though FBI has the > authority to do) and, most important, isn’t very accurate > but is very secret. > > That means that when people like you and I or Sen. Edward > Kennedy (D MA) and family suffer the same fate as many other > citizens in being deprived admittance to an airline or > other travel because of a glitch in the “watch list, > there’s not much the aggrieved citizen can do. As far as > any one knows, there is no way to get your name off the > list, or to clarify that you are not the same person about > whom the “watch list” sounds alarms. > > Yes, the anti-gunners will use the general fear of > terrorism to promote more gun control, including bans on > .50-caliber rifles, bans on the FN FiveSevenN pistol, > renewal and expansion of the Clinton gun and standard > magazine ban, and prohibit secondary sales of guns between > private citizens at gun shows, matches and club events. > But, while gunowners should be concerned about the > anti-gunners’ agenda, they also need to be equally concerned > about the creeping intrusions into privacy and the Fourth > Amendment.