View Single Post
  #4  
Old October 21st 04, 06:03 PM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gig Giacona" wrote in message
...
1) The presence or absence of government certification of an instructor
has no bearing on how dangerous the imparted knowledge is. 2) Instruction
in driving a car, and in basic chemistry, has also been used in a
large-scale terrorist attack on US citizens. 3) If the goal is to prevent
future attacks, we must consider not just the forms of knowledge that

have already been used against us, but those that might be in the future.
So the rationale for criminalizing unauthorized learning about aviation
can be applied much more generally.

--Gary


It does have a bearing on the governments ability to regulate though. If
you have knowledge of chemistry nobody is trying to stop you from teaching
it to anyone you choose. If you happen to be a public school chemistry
teacher they most certainly do control whom you teach it to while on duty
at the public school.


Right, and it would be analogous to restrict what a CFI does while on duty
in the employ of the government. But few if any CFIs are working for the
government when they teach. So the TSA intrusion goes far beyond your
public-school analogy. (Plus, the point of public-school eligibility
restrictions is not to try to keep people from acquiring general knowledge
without government authorization.)

--Gary