This site provides writing advice. If you're writing a superhero novel or comic book, please also read our superhero writing articles.

Would you like to subscribe to our RSS feed?

It’s almost halftime and the score is 17-14, MSU. Notre Dame is performing much better on both sides of the ball. We’re currently at a third-and-17, not exactly promising, but the situation is much rarer today than in our past outings.  Our two offensive touchdowns are the first for us this season.

UPDATE: MSU just made two monster third down conversions, including a third-and-17. That drive ended in an MSU touchdown. 24-14 MSU.

4th and 1, Notre Dame goes for it but the runner is quickly tripled for a loss of yards.   Darn.  I would have gone for it, too.

An MIT student is “lucky to be alive” after wearing a shirt with wiring and circuits that looked like a suicide vest in Boston’s Logan International Airport.

Logan is pretty serious about security. It was the origin of two of the flights hijacked on 9-11 and is in Boston, which suffered the Aqua Teen Hunger Force bomb scare fairly recently. At least she didn’t show off her art at Ben Gurion…

Incidentally, I’ve been to Logan before for academic conferences and Model UN*. The guards definitely had submachine guns, seemingly an unusual weapon for airport security. They have all the accuracy of a mortar, which is particularly problematic in a civilian-heavy environment like an airport.

I was under the impression that the main advantages of a SMG over a rifle were…

1. Easier to conceal under clothing

2. Portable/lightweight

3. Easier to draw quickly?

4. Easier to handle at really close range

5. Can be dual-wielded? (I’m really reaching here).

6. Price? (Ditto).

Ease of concealment doesn’t exactly help the uniformed security I saw. I also assume that wielding two SMGs is also off the table because the increased rate of fire and decreased accuracy would unduly endanger civilians.

The weight difference doesn’t matter that much, either. The M-16 is pretty light at 9 pounds, roughly twice as heavy as an unloaded MP5.

My impression is that– if both weapons were holstered or strapped– drawing an SMG would be slightly faster than a rifle. I’m not sure on this, but I vaguely remember the security guards having their guns drawn. If that were the case, then draw-speed wouldn’t matter.

Even if they did have their weapons holstered, draw-speed probably matters much less than accuracy. If the guards have their weapons holstered, the airport’s strategic environment virtually guarantees that the terrorist(s) will shoot first. The guard has to look out for many more potential threats than the terrorist does. It doesn’t seem like an SMG guard would fare much better than a rifle guard in terms of initiative.

However, the rifle seems conspicuously more useful in a hostage crisis or any situation involving long-range shots. If a policeman had to shoot at a terrorist with a human shield, a rifle is more accurate and somewhat more likely to be lethal. And I think that long-range accuracy is critical in an airport that is probably open and sprawling.

I mentioned price before, kind of jokingly. The M-16’s unit replacement cost is listed at $600. Compared to the cost of training and employing the policeman, the difference between $600 and a cheaper weapon couldn’t matter.

Am I missing something? This is going to drive me crazy. Must… control urge… to call Logan security… and inquire about armament selection policy.

*I mentioned a Model United Nations conference before. One of the topics I discussed was the international trafficking of small arms (anything small enough to be carried by hand). Go figure.

The past three weeks have been… unsatisfying for Irish fans everywhere. Vegas has given us a very kind spread of -10 1/2 points. If you can legally gamble, I *highly* betting on MSU.

I would be really pleased if we kept it within 10.  Anything within 14 would probably show that the team has improved to a tolerable level. “Tolerable.” That probably sounds really vicious and cutthroat. Maybe. If a student failed academically, we’d let him go. Why shouldn’t we expect athletes to perform?  After all, many of our football players get full scholarships.

I think that winning seasons are a reasonable minimal standard for the team. I don’t expect annual bowl appearances, let alone wins. Factors beyond the team’s control virtually guarantee bowl losses. Bowls make selections influenced by fan appeal and other economic considerations, so Notre Dame will always be placed against much stronger teams. The only way to overcome this is either to 1) play far beyond our level of raw talent in the clutch or 2) become a viable contender for the National Championship. If we are already at the top, then affirmative action can’t screw us.

It’s hard to tell whether 1) or 2) is less likely.  It’s especially frustrating because Notre Dame’s players have, I think, a lot of talent. The defense shows potential.  The offense, well… the offense has the potential to get us to a winning season.  Just not this season.  Claussen might be really good. It’s hard to tell, though, because the offensive line is failing so badly. Even Dan Marino were our quarterback, he could not win unless he either ran the ball himself every play or caught his own passes.

The Football-Comic Book Connection

I have previously suggested that a winning season would require, among other happy events, an accident at the genetics lab or Radiation Center that makes a player develop superpowers. One reason this is more likely to happen to ND than other schools: our players have classes. Another factor in our favor: accidents usually affect loveable losers (cough, Peter Parker).  Name three players on the team that don’t fit that description.

The problem: Notre Dame isn’t within 20 miles of New York City, which reduces the odds of comic book activity to zero. Damn.