The Probability Broach: The self-rescuing hostage, part 1

The wreckage of a bomb-destroyed plane in a hangar

The Probability Broach, chapter 17

Win Bear and his friends are en route to the Continental Congress via cross-country airship. Win is still incredulous, as he might well be, that people in this world are allowed to bring guns on airplanes:

“Look, friends,” I said, once we’d cleared security, “I know you’re enthusiastic about weapons, but haven’t you heard about hijacking?” I had to explain.

“Silly way to commit suicide.” Ed laughed. “And if you lived, you’d be paying restitution for the rest of your life!”

… “What about capturing the crew?” I insisted.

“Like to see ’em try that on my ship!” Lucy, our former combat pilot, said. “One of these big balloons, they’d just switch over to auxiliary control, while the regular crew mopped your brains off the dashboard.”

“Security’s pretty good, these days,” Ed added. “Crew-country bulkheads are titanium. No one gets in unless invited. Besides, the minute you ban handguns, criminals will take up less detectable and less discriminating weapons. Bombs, for instance.”

Once again, Smith doubles down on his bizarre belief that terrorists only resort to bombs because airports ban guns.

This book was written before 9/11, but that doesn’t mean that airplane bombings were unknown to him. One example is the 1949 crash of Canadian Pacific Air Lines Flight 108, in which a disgruntled man named Albert Guay sent his wife on a plane with a time bomb hidden in her luggage. His goal was to blow up the plane and kill her so he could marry his mistress. The bomb did go off, the plane crashed, and Guay’s wife died along with everyone else on board, but he didn’t get away with it. His guilt was quickly discovered, and he was convicted and executed.

There are many other examples as well. In all of these cases, the perpetrators didn’t resort to bombs because they first tried to hijack the plane with a gun and failed. The bombing was the plan from the start, whether to assassinate a specific person, or just to spread terror and destruction as a way of getting revenge on a country they had a grudge against.

Smith has no answer at all to these kinds of crimes. All the armed passengers and crew in the world won’t help when a bomb goes off at 30,000 feet and ruptures your airship’s helium envelope like a popped balloon.

Given the extremely light security he envisions, it would be very easy to smuggle explosives on board one of the North American Confederacy’s airships. As we’ll see later in this chapter, you can depart by shuttle while it’s between stops, so it wouldn’t even be a suicide mission. Just set a timer and leave the bomb on board when you go.

Indeed, you have to ask why the bad guys don’t do this more often. Given that the Hamiltonians want to force this world to adopt centralized government, why don’t they commit some spectacular terrorist attacks, to make more people afraid for their lives and persuade them that they need a government for protection?

Win is supposed to be the skeptical outsider, probing for flaws in this system so that the other characters can easily dispatch his objections with their common-sense political philosophy. But he never asks about this, most likely because Smith doesn’t let him pose questions that his belief system doesn’t have an answer for.

I persisted. “But what happens if I point a gun at the passenger sitting next to me, and threaten to blow his head off if they don’t take me, say, to Algeria?”

“Algeria?” Lucy asked. “Isn’t that somewhere at the bottom of the Sahara Sea?”

“Come on, you’re stalling! What happens if I take a hostage?”

“The hostage kills you,” Clarissa said, and that seemed to be that.

It’s not a spoiler to say that this exact scenario plays out in this chapter, just a few pages from now, and it doesn’t go the way Smith’s characters claim it would. In fact, hostage-taking is a highly effective strategy in this anarcho-capitalist society.

This is just what we should expect. It’s unrealistic to imagine that giving a gun to an ordinary civilian would transform them into a badass action hero who can competently defend themselves in a sudden life-or-death situation. (That’s why it’s so stupid for gun-loving conservatives to suggest that teachers should be armed to deal with school shooters.)

A more realistic expectation is that most civilians would freeze, panic, fire blindly, or make other terrible decisions in a crisis. A hardened criminal—let alone a gang of criminals—would easily overpower them. That’s the glaring flaw in Smith’s world, which asserts that you have to rescue yourself from muggers, hostage-takers and murderers because no one else will.

Image via Wikimedia Commons

New reviews of The Probability Broach will go up every Friday on my Patreon page. Sign up to see new posts early and other bonus stuff!

Other posts in this series:

The Probability Broach: Fly the heavily armed skies

Airport security sign reading "No Sharp Objects"

The Probability Broach, chapter 17

This chapter begins with another of the fake quotes L. Neil Smith loves. This one is attributed to his fictional anarchist philosopher Mary Ross-Byrd:

Nine tenths of everything is tax. Everything you buy has a complicated history of robbery: land, raw materials, energy, tools, buildings, transport, storage, sales, profits. Don’t forget the share you contribute toward the personal income tax of every worker who has anything to do with the process.

Inflation by taxation: there are a hundred taxes on a loaf of bread. What kind of living standard would we enjoy if everything cost a tenth of what it does? What kind of world? Think of your home, your car, your TV, your shoes, your supper—all at a 90% discount!

Government can’t fight poverty—poverty is its proudest achievement!

—Mary Ross-Byrd
Toward a New Liberty

We’ve been over this before, but this quote offers an especially vivid example of Smith’s ideologically-driven economic illiteracy. He thinks that all the money we pay in taxes vanishes into a black hole, providing no value in return.

How did that loaf of bread get to the market or to my house? By truck? Those trucks travel on highways, bridges and tunnels—how did those get built? Who paid the costs of construction? When it snows, who plows the roads to keep them open? When there’s a pothole, who fills it? When there’s an accident, who clears it?

Was there any kind of food safety inspection at the bakery, to make sure they’re not putting toxic alum, chalk or sawdust in the dough to save money? Or do you just have to take the company’s word for it?

Where does the factory get electricity to keep the lights on and run the appliances? Who generates it and how? Who regulates the utilities to make sure their reactors don’t melt down and they don’t spill toxic waste into the drinking water?

Even in a hypothetical scenario where there’s no government and private corporations perform the same services, those services have a cost that isn’t zero. Why wouldn’t those costs be built into the price of bread in the anarcho-capitalist utopia, just like they are now?

Smith’s assertion that everything would cost “a tenth of what it does” if not for government is pure magical thinking. It’s on a level with saying all the money we pay farmers is wasted because crops just spring out of the ground on their own.

In this chapter, Win and his friends are doing their best to alert the world to the Hamiltonian threat, and their efforts have borne fruit. The North American Confederacy’s version of Congress has agreed to meet, and our protagonists are traveling to the seat of government (which isn’t Washington, D.C., as we’ll see shortly) to testify in person.

Rather than one of the NAC’s jet liners (“thousand-passenger fusion-powered titanium monsters that bash their way through near-space at five times the speed of sound”), they’re taking a zeppelin, because zeppelins are cool. Smith describes them as enormous and luxurious—a mile long, like floating cruise ships with lavish suites, shopping malls and restaurants on board, with power supplied by fusion reactors which also generate helium for buoyancy.

However, there’s a tiny problem. As you may remember, everyone in this anarcho-capitalist world goes heavily armed at all times. How does that work with air travel?

Riding the corridor to the elevators, we encountered a security setup not too different from the ones back home. Ed bellied up, drew his Browning, pulled the clip and chamber round. Lucy’s horse-pistol materialized from some region of her person, and Clarissa unsheathed her Webley Electric. Following their example, I unholstered my Smith & Wesson, wondering what would happen next.

At home, the officer would lose control of her sphincters, and forty thousand federal marshals would trample in and haul us away for the next several eons…. Whatever happened to the Fourth and Fifth Amendments at U.S. airports? Or the First, for that matter?

This is one of those spit-take moments you keep running into while reading this book. Smith thinks people have a constitutional right to carry guns on airplanes? On zeppelins, even?!

Note that he mentions the Fourth Amendment—i.e., the right to privacy—implying that it’s a violation of his rights to be searched, even at an airport security checkpoint.

“Excuse me, sir,” the attendant said politely. “Is your ammunition in compliance with aeroline policies?”

Ed nodded. “Frangibles, at under nine hundred feet per second.”

Even a gun-worshipping fanatic like L. Neil Smith recognizes the problems that would ensue if people started blasting away in an airplane cabin. This is his answer to that. In his ancap utopia, you’re allowed to bring guns on planes, but only if they’re loaded with special ammunition that kills people but won’t damage the structural fabric of the vehicle.

Everyone’s weapon passes the safety check except Win’s pistol, which is an antique by the standards of this world:

The official took a hard look at my revolver. Naturally, she couldn’t find it in any of her references. “I’m terribly sorry, sir, would you mind if we took your, er, gun, until you reach your destination?”

Ed grinned smugly. “See the trouble that museum piece causes? Use the cartridges in the yellow box.”

…I reloaded cylinder, speed-loaders, and my derringer—which caused another round of dithering—with this new stuff: bright-yellow plastic bullets. They’d explode into harmless powder on aerocraft-tolerance materials.

Thank goodness. Now we can riddle other passengers with bullets without causing midair explosive decompression. Much better.

Note, however, that the attendant makes only a cursory effort to verify this. She asks them to take out their weapons, inspects them, and asks if the ammunition they’re loaded with is compliant with airline policy. No one gets patted down; no one has to go through a security scanner or send their luggage through an X-ray machine. It all seems to be voluntary.

It’s fair to assume that people who outright refuse to cooperate with inspection would be denied boarding. But if you wanted to bring a noncompliant weapon on board, could you just keep it under your coat and not produce it when asked, like teenagers smuggling outside snacks into a movie theater? Or what if you took regular ammunition, but in the box of a frangible brand? Would anyone check or be able to tell?

In the real world, air rage is a problem every airline has to grapple with: angry, disorderly passengers assaulting each other or the crew. It’s almost inherent to the industry. Expensive tickets, stressful travel plans, uncomfortable seats, jet lag, and alcohol create a pressure-cooker environment in which some people’s worst impulses explode. There’s no scenario in which this gets better if everyone is armed, even if Smith makes the token concession of ensuring they can’t accidentally shoot down the entire aircraft.

Much like the section on traffic regulation (or lack thereof), these are wildly dangerous policies that would cause mass death and devastation if they were ever implemented in the real world. But Smith waves these problems away through the power of authorial fiat, scripting a world where they (somehow) lead to greater safety and security, and then holding that world out as an appealing place where we should want to live. It’s a circular argument, using a fictional scenario as proof of itself.

Image credit: Edward Betts, released under CC BY-SA 3.0 license

New reviews of The Probability Broach will go up every Friday on my Patreon page. Sign up to see new posts early and other bonus stuff!

Other posts in this series: