![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
by " Dec 14, 2005 at 01:24
PM Your tone was indicative (to me anyway) that GA was somehow responsible for the attack snip Today, yes. I don't think that was the case in 1993(?) when the Murrah building was wiped out. But you missed the point. What reasonable standard exists to protect the public without infringing too much on the right of the law-abiding. snip I recall hearing something about that as well not long after 9/11. A day late and a dollar short, as my mother used to say Sorry about the wise-ass tone. My criticisms of GA are limited mostly to complete lack of community control over any aspect of airport operations at many facilities. Noise, and certain rude pilots who simply ignore noise abatement being my main gripe... No other industry/activity enjoys such protections from community noise statutes. If I am wrong in this assertion, please correct me. No one ever has, and I cannot find any facts that indicate otherwise. Regarding security, I think you ask the $99 question: "What reasonable standard exists to protect the public without infringing too much on the right of the law-abiding?" Trade-offs suck, but when we have psychotic terrorists killing our citizens, using our "freedoms" to their twisted advantage, I think everyone would agree that their needs to be some restrictions on personal liberty. Regarding noise, I think people on the ground should have some "rights." Presently, we have none. "Rights" to free skies (ficticious, really -- this just refers to FARs which people at the EAA and AOPA would like to see enshrined in the Constitution, but aren't) needs to be balanced with people's right to peace and quiet, IMO. I think this is especially true for those unfortunates who live miles away from an airport and have no way of knowing that they will suddenly be under a flight path (or acrobatic training box) designated by some anonymous bureaucrat at an aloof federal bureaucracy (the FAA) who doesn't give a hoot about them. Sadly, compromise with the flight schools/pilots is obviously not possible in my neck of the woods. So we, being stubborn New Englanders, will fight back using all legal, political methods at our disposal. Those who dismiss all of the "anti-noise/GA" activists as kooks and looneys |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
TSA requirement of Security Awareness Training | dancingstar | Piloting | 3 | October 5th 04 02:17 AM |
What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixed | What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixe | Naval Aviation | 5 | August 21st 04 12:50 AM |