View Single Post
  #4  
Old October 21st 04, 08:37 PM
Gig Giacona
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:iZRdd.404357$mD.228025@attbi_s02...
"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


My point is that there is that the rule in no way restricts the transfer of
knowledge. It does restict the transfer of knowledge in order to attain a US
government issued certificate.

Feel free to go and teach as many people as you can how to fly or build
nuclear weapons. As long as you don't do it while excersing the privledges
of your US Governement issued certificate.

Gig

P.S. I said Daniel instead of Gary in a earlier post ... Sorry Daniel.