Bush, space ships and the second amendment
A while back, the FAA took the collective rights interpretation of the second amendment with respect to space flight. Well, the FAA has reconsidered and now supports the individual rights model (i.e., the correct model).
February 21st, 2007 at 10:42 am
I still wonder about this part of the FAA statement, though: prohibiting a space flight participant from carrying on board “any explosives, firearms, knives or other weapons.”
I can’t see much use for firearms on a spaceflight under current conditions, but they ride into space on a stack of explosives outweighing the orbital vehicle, and they often need tools. The knife is one of the first two tools invented (along with the hammer/club), and is still a necessary part of any toolkit, and often the tool you need to keep closest in case of emergencies. If they’re sending up incomplete toolkits because they’re afraid of astronauts stabbing each other…
February 21st, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Ironically, the last case I’m aware of in which the Supreme Court implicitly endorsed the “actually means something” interpretation of the Second Amendment was U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, which also suggested that constitutional rights of “the people” mean little or nothing outside U.S. borders. By that interpretation, debating on what the Second Amendment means in space makes about as much sense as debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
February 21st, 2007 at 10:10 pm
So is the FAA saying that Soyuz capsules are or are not allowed to land in the United States? As you can see in via this link (the first one I could find to include a picture), the standard kit of survival gear includes a gun:
http://www.firstafricaninspace.com/home/gallery/blacksea/19.shtml
This second link tells more of the story:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/spaceguns/
Enjoy!
February 22nd, 2007 at 12:08 am
This would be one of those situations to remember next time the ‘But what has Bush done for us’ question comes up. I suspect the original FAA statement was either a bit of bureacratic reaching or a mistake that never got caught rather than anything darker, but does anyone think that the FAA in an Obama or Hillary administration would issue such a correction?