"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
Ross goes on to proclaim the law abiding
responsibleness of airmen, but that wasn't questioned in the article
and seems irrelevant; for it would be amoral criminal terrorists
perpetrating terrorist acts not regular law abiding airmen.
Well that's the whole point now, isn't it?
Does any critically-thinking person believe that a suicidal zealot,
hell-bent
on wreaking havoc, is going to pay any attention to "no fly zones" and
TFRs?
NEWS FLASH!! The planes that flew into the WTC both busted the NY Class
B.
Yet it is we careful, law-abiding, rule-obeying pilots who are the
recipients
of all the punitive and restrictive "security precautions" perpetrated on
us.
I hope to God I am preachin' to the choir here.
Well I agree with Larry. Regardless of what you and I may think about what
small airplanes may or may not be able to accomplish in terms of a terrorist
attack, it is certainly not anti-GA hysteria to discuss the possibility and
to imagine scenarios by which a terrorist could employ a Cessna to wreak
destruction. In fact it would be irresponsible not to consider them. There
are a lot of advantages to using a small aircraft to transport a bomb or
poison, they can go just about anywhere, and no road or other security
measure is of much use in stopping something that flies through the air. We
may dismiss possible terrorist scenarios as the work of pin-headed
bureacrats in washington (to use everyone's favorite cliche) but I would
think that a small flying machine would offer a lot of enticing
possibilities. Maybe this is why all the interest by AlQaeda in crop dusters
a few years back.
The responses in this group are far more "knee-jerk" than anything that
appeared in the Globe article. They sound like the typical response of a
special interest group --- lets fight terrorism, but god forbid it might
impinge on my hobby.
Of course we should not let increased anti-terrorist measures erode our
personal liberties and freedoms we enjoy, including being able to fly our
own machines. Same can be said for right to privacy, freedom of speech etc.
But simply to demonize anyone who discusses the possibilities of using GA in
a terrorist attack, seems to me to be very close-minded.
-Marc
|