"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
k.net...
This type of post is of course an opinion post and as such should be
respected in that context.
My personal opinion on this is that you are either going to have airport
security or you're not..period!

Bingo. Bothering somone taking pictures doesn't make sense when the field
has minimal, if any security. E.G. my home field. They don't ID pilots or
passengers - even transients. Presumably folks in an airplane are bigger
threats than people taking pictures, so why does the buck stop with a kid
taking pictures?

What I see with most not all of the "security" procedures we face today is
that they inconvenience the innocent folks, but would have no impact on an
actual threat. A great example is the TFR around a sporting event. Anything
with wings could penetrate the TFR. Unless it is the Superbowl or World
Series, there won't be anything in place to stop even a C-150 if somebody
wanted to use one to create mayhem. The TFR is eyewash.

Same thing with getting the ID of a kid taking pictures. It doesn't stop
someone from taking pictures. Nor would it stop him if he was up to no-good.

That said, the point I was trying to make is that the FBO employee (or his
boss) pulled this "rule" out of his you-know-what. An excellent example of
how to drive off a prospective client. The kind of client who is sorely
needed by GA if it is going to survive another 50 years.

KB