Brought to my attention by The Smallest Minority who has a somewhat different viewpoint.  In an effort to “banish street crime“ they are banning certain types of clothes in England now.  And I thought banning knives was so low the only way they could go was up.  I was wrong:

The United Kingdom is the most-monitored nation in the world, with more than 4 million closed-circuit television cameras operating around the country. But culprits frequently evade Big Brother’s watchful eye by concealing their identities with the ubiquitous head wear.

“I think the fact you go around with these hats and these covers… I mean, it is a uniform, in a sense,” Prescott said last week.

As a result, a large shopping center in southeast England offered a new tact by implementing a “code of conduct” that includes a ban on the wearing of “hoodies.”

…

“I think it’s marvelous,” Bluewater shopper Jill Hopper said of the initiative this week.

…

Cropper, a doorman, and Thomas, a bar manager, both added that they would like to see a complete ban on caps and hoods in city centers.

What will it take for them to realize the problem isn’t that they don’t have enough laws but they have too many?  If a few potential vicitims emptied a couple of 15 round magazines of jacketed hollowpoints into a gang of thugs attempting a violent crime two things would happen:

1. Thugs would be less inclined commit crimes.
2. There would be fewer repeat offenders.

But that won’t happen.  I can’t imagine what will be next but I’m certain they will think of something else to ban.

Another report is soon to be out and the results are as expected:

WASHINGTON — Screening at U.S. airports is no better now than before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to a member of the U.S. House of Representatives who was briefed Friday about an investigation conducted by the Government Accountability Office and one by the Homeland Security Department. 

“A lot of people will be shocked at the billions of dollars we’ve spent and the results they’re going to see,” said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House aviation subcommittee.

Improving the ability to find dangerous materials has been a top goal of the U.S. Transportation Security Administration since it took over the security task at about 450 airports in early 2002. More than 45,000 people were hired.

Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, the ranking Democrat on the aviation subcommittee, also was briefed on the two reports, which are to be released within a month.

…

The TSA, which did not immediately return telephone calls Friday seeking comment, has said in the past that the tests used to measure screener performance are much more rigorous than they were before the Sept. 11 hijackings.

Since then, screeners have been much more aggressive about seizing prohibited items. Each month, screeners confiscate about a half-million objects from passengers, including, on average, 160,000 knives, 2,000 box cutters and 70 guns.

Although they will claim they just need more money for training and better equipment the real problem is that it’s an unsolvable problem from this approach.  There are better solutions available but they are politically unacceptable.

At the NRA convention last week one news organization managed to take a few Ted Nugent quotes out of context and make him sound a bit on the extreme side:

HOUSTON (AP) – With an assault weapon in each hand, rocker and gun rights advocate Ted Nugent urged National Rifle Association members to be “hardcore, radical extremists demanding the right to self defense.”

Speaking at the NRA’s annual convention Saturday, Nugent said each NRA member should try to enroll 10 new members over the next year and associate only with other members.

“Let’s next year sit here and say, ‘Holy smokes, the NRA has 40 million members now,'” he said. “No one is allowed at our barbecues unless they are an NRA member. Do that in your life.”

Nugent sang and played a guitar painted with red and white stripes for the crowd at Houston’s downtown convention center.

He drew the most cheers when he told gun owners they should never give up their right to bear arms and should use their guns to protect themselves if needed.

“Remember the Alamo! Shoot ’em!” he screamed to applause. “To show you how radical I am, I want carjackers dead. I want rapists dead. I want burglars dead. I want child molesters dead. I want the bad guys dead. No court case. No parole. No early release. I want ’em dead. Get a gun and when they attack you, shoot ’em.”

Of course almost every gun rights activist knows the NRA is the gun owners organization most likely to hand over our rights on a silver platter to victim disarmament crowd and cannot considered radical.  And even though I disagree with the philosophy of only associating with NRA members the world would be a safer and better place if the anti-freedom biogots of the world like Henry Boitel were in the mental wards rather than the Ted Nugents as Henry suggests would be appropriate.

From the Toronto Star: $1B gun registry branded `useless’.  And some critics think the true cost is pushing $2 B now.  The proponents have been feeding the monster money “under the table”.  Alphecca has quotes and an analysis of the Star article.  One thing he didn’t mention was this:

Alex Swann, spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, who is responsible for public safety and emergency preparedness, defended the registry.

“Obviously, no measure can strip away all risk in society, but the gun registry is a frequently used tool for police,” Swann said.

He said he could not discuss Roszko’s specific case, but emphasized gun registration ensures accountability for guns, and tightens ownership. That can help track the transport of guns, he said, including whether legally registered guns are moving into the hands of those who are not licensed.

Swann said police make about 2,000 queries on the firearms database every day.

Two thousand queries a day does not make people safer.  The only valid objective of restrictions on firearms ownership is to make people safer.  The defenders of the registry don’t make that claim.  Reporters and the general public should be asking just one question.  When the defenders of the registry stammer, pause, and avoid the question they should be given the same sort of treatment one would give any other con artist that defrauds the public of over a billion dollars.  The Canadian people wasted that money in an experiment to answer a question.  We have the answer now.  Let just hope the politicians in this country can learn from the billion dollar mistakes of others.