back ground

[gerry f]

what is the current rqu. for r/bs on back ground checks. does your local d/s do any checks.

 

[caveseeker7]

what is the current rqu. for r/bs on back ground checks.
does your local d/s do any checks.

d/s? Credit check if you want to use a card ?!

 

[gerry f]

do you think there should be back ground checks on poeple renting r/b

 

[gkndivebum]

A while back my rebreather instructor was interviewed by the FBI. He reports that
that it kinda bugged them that he wasn't even a US citizen (Canadian) :sigh_2:

 

[caveseeker7]

A while back my rebreather instructor was interviewed by the FBI.
He reports that it kinda bugged them that he wasn't even a US citizen (Canadian) :sigh_2:

Those are the worst. There isn't a person here in the US who's not afraid of the Canadian invasion.

But seriously, while CCRs offer themselves for clandestine operations, and oxygen rebreathers are made specifically for those, I don't see them all that much of a major thread.

How often have they been used for terrorist acts? The only one that I'm aware of is the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior and murder of the Greenpeace guy on board. And that was done by French government employees who I'm sure passed a background check to get their jobs. Even the bomb happy Palestinians haven't utilized CCRs to my knowledge.

But plenty of car bombs. Look at Oklahoma City. Truck bomb. Much easier to pass the driver's test than CCR certification (especially here in the US). Much cheaper to rent a car or truck than to rent a CCR. Much less suspicious, too.
Would probably make more sense do check backgrounds of driver's licences holders, applicants and car/truck rentals. Just not very practical ... .

Finally, if you can get the explosives illegally, or smuggle kilos of illegal drugs across the border, I'm sure you can get a LAR V or C96 in under the radar, too.

Keeping the borders safe, as well as comon sense of all of us (including instructors and places that rent CCRs) will be more successfull in preventing future attacks.

 

[BigJetDriver]

Those are the worst. There isn't a person here in the US who's not afraid of the Canadian invasion.

Judging from news reports I have seen lately about the warm reception and free ride the Canadian government gives to people who arrive with extremely questionable backgrounds and status, we in the U.S. have a lot to worry about when it comes to "Canadians" who travel to the United States.

In any case, Caveseeker is quite right in his comments about background checks for CCR end-users.

BJD :anakinpod

 

[caveseeker7]

Judging from news reports I have seen lately about the warm reception and free ride the Canadian government gives to people who arrive with extremely questionable backgrounds and status, we in the U.S. have a lot to worry about when it comes to "Canadians" who travel to the United States.

That's why we gotta keep the borders safe.

 

[fins wake]

do you think there should be back ground checks on poeple renting r/b

No.

Of course, common sense is never out-of-order. If somebody turns up in a LDS near a naval facility wanting to rent a non-magnetic rebreather (what is the likelihood of that? and of the person waving e.g. a commercial Mk16 certificate, providing they even can be had?), speaking darkly of "no need to use fresh scrubber" or "no need for bailout" but at the same time wanting to rent a goody bag to "transport something in", yes, I'd call the FBI ...

(Gosh, the DEA might be just as relevant as subaquatic means have been used by drugs smugglers.)

Remember, as Caveseeker has already mentioned, that al-Qaida has never used subaquatic means for terrorist attacks. Aquatic means, yes (e.g. in Yemen and alleged planned attacks in Gibraltar and elsewhere), but then by surface means and fast boat access only. Also, these attacks have uniformly occurred at or near geographical areas close to the terrorists' logistical support (e.g. Middle East or North Africa).

(Yet again, if a truly suspect person transported a rebreather e.g. into Oahu, I'd be very vigilant and certainly inform authorities, in this case due to the proximity to Pearl Harbor and the symbolic importance attached to this particular place by these crazies.)

But a general registration and surveillance of rebreather divers - rental or otherwise - in the U.S. is counterproductive IMHO.

It's time-consuming, meaning that good security officials waste time better spent on real suspects, it would provide negative impetus to the rebreather industry, and it would unnecessarily antagonize the vast majority of law-abiding 'rebreather citizens'. The latter is part of terrorism philosophy and it is very important not to let terrorists decide the agenda for us normal folk. That's exactly what they aim to do.

Painting rebreather diving with the 'terrorism brush' is one sure way of killing it off in the United States. That'd be a tragedy.

 

[BigJetDriver]

Of course, common sense is never out-of-order. If somebody turns up in a LDS near a naval facility wanting to rent a non-magnetic rebreather, what is the likelihood of that? Yes, I'd call the FBI!
(Gosh, the DEA might be just as relevant, as subaquatic means have been used by drugs smugglers.)

Remember, as Caveseeker has already mentioned, that al-Qaida has never used subaquatic means for terrorist attacks (yet). Aquatic means, yes (e.g. in Yemen and alleged planned attacks in Gibraltar and elsewhere), but then by surface means and fast boat access only. Also, these attacks have uniformly occurred at or near geographical areas close to the terrorists' logistical support (e.g. Middle East or North Africa).

(Yet again, if a truly suspect person transported a rebreather e.g. into Oahu, I'd be very vigilant and certainly inform authorities, in this case due to the proximity to Pearl Harbor and the symbolic importance attached to this particular place by these crazies.)

But a general registration and surveillance of rebreather divers - rental or otherwise - in the U.S. is counterproductive IMHO.

It's time-consuming, meaning that good security officials waste time better spent on real suspects, it would provide negative impetus to the rebreather industry, and it would unnecessarily antagonize the vast majority of law-abiding 'rebreather citizens'. The latter is part of terrorism philosophy and it is very important not to let terrorists decide the agenda for us normal folk. That's exactly what they aim to do.

Painting rebreather diving with the 'terrorism brush' is one sure way of killing it off in the United States. That'd be a tragedy.

Fins has made some excellent points here. I fully agree with them. There is always a balance to be struck between vigilance and paranoia.

Of course, it's important to remember that: "Just because you are paranoid does not mean that they're not out to get you!" (I did try to go to a meeting of "Paranoids Anonymous" once, but they wouldn't tell me where it was!)

Speaking of RB's, I did post this the other day:
If anyone is interested, I know of a LAR 5 available, NIB, on offer. I have seen the unit, and it is in pristine condition. It was built in 1993 by Draeger (of course) and is in the metal box, with the protective talc on the rubber parts, has the sealed plastic bag with spare parts, and the Draeger manual in both English and German. It also comes with all necessary paperwork. Instruction is offered as part of the asking price.

Anyone interested should contact:

Justin Wehring, CHT, DMT

<justin_wehring@mhhs.org>

Now, its possible that this should excite some intell interest, except that, of the two guys sitting in an office in Houston discussing this, one is a high-speed low-drag type from the Navy, and the other is a police officer, and both have political views that make Attila the Hun look like a Pinko! The first question to be discussed was the legal paperwork and the required stamps and chops! Inquiries welcome.

Cheers, lads and ladies! Happy no-bubbles diving! BJD

P.S.---Kjell, Have they chipped you out of the ice of the glacier yet? BJD

 

[glbirch]

Judging from news reports I have seen lately about the warm reception and free ride the Canadian government gives to people who arrive with extremely questionable backgrounds and status, we in the U.S. have a lot to worry about when it comes to "Canadians" who travel to the United States.

In any case, Caveseeker is quite right in his comments about background checks for CCR end-users.

BJD :anakinpod

That's right. Even while you sit, complacent and unknowing, there are dozens of highly trained terrorist dogsled teams poised to silently infiltrate across the Canada/US border, sweep south, and set fire to the White House (again.)

Geez...