Pilot, possibly intoxicated, flies around Philly for 3 hours

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
...
| In article om,
| "John T" wrote:
|
| "Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
|
|
| The bottom line is that if the small
| fields don't get a grip on REASONABLE security, one of these days
| something bad is going to hb_men and there is going to be UNREASONABLE
| over-reaction.
|
| Can you define "reasonable security" for us?
|
| Reasonable security would include airport ID badges for those who have a
| reason to be on the field, perimeter fencing that is tall enough and
| sealed well enough to be a deterrent, gates that work, and some type of
| continuous airport surveillence. Those are common sense things that, in
| most cases, are SUPPOSED to be done anyway at most of these airports,
| and actually serve to protect the aircraft owners based at the field
| from theft and vandalism (it's happened around here).

It would be interesting to see how this would improve the security at, say,
Ocotillo Wells in California. This is a dirt strip out in the middle of
nowhere built on a dry lake bed. There are no buildings, no fuel, etc. There
is a diner across the highway, but that is the only building for several
miles.

Or what about Copalis Beach in Washington State? This is a state operated
airport located on a stretch of beach. The 'runway' is just the damp sand
near the water's edge and it is under water at high tide. For me, security
at that airport would be arresting the lady who throws rocks at airplanes
that land on 'her' beach. There is no fuel there, no buildings, not even any
road access.

Or the airports scattered around the Frank Church Wilderness in Idaho? The
firefighting emergency strips in Montana, Wyoming, or other western states?

What about Apex Air Park near Silverdale, WA? They have something like a
gazillion Marines guarding the place. But no one would argue that that
airport is any more secure than Sequim Airport.

At Tacoma Narrows we no longer let the neighbors walk their dogs around the
approach lights any more, but that hasn't kept local kids from vandalizing
the lights. If anything, the effect of the policy was to eliminate witnesses
and make it easier for the vandals.

All of this is an illusion... No amount of badges, fences, lights, signs,
whatever, will stop someone who is willing to die for his 'cause'...
Only slaves, and cattle being fattened for the slaughter, have the security
of knowing their fate...To have a free society you must accept that freedom
contains risks, and from time to time the tree of liberty will be watered
with the blood of it's patriots... I am willing to take the risks of freedom
in order to be free... I am not willing to watch my country become a Gulag,
so that the neurotic who are willing to sell my freedoms in order to assuage
their insecurity, may feel safe...
denny

"C J Campbell"

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message ...
All of this is an illusion... No amount of badges, fences, lights, signs,
whatever, will stop someone who is willing to die for his 'cause'...
.... To have a free society you must accept that freedom
contains risks, and from time to time the tree of liberty will be watered
with the blood of it's patriots... I am willing to take the risks of freedom
in order to be free... I am not willing to watch my country become a Gulag,
so that the neurotic who are willing to sell my freedoms in order to assuage
their insecurity, may feel safe...

Wow! Well said, Dennis.

Brought a tear to my eye. If you ever bring Fat Albert
near the Gateway Arch, I'll buy you a brew on the
strength of it.

Now, being pragmatic -- I think it's reasonable to take
"reasonable" precautions, just as I lock the doors of
my house and my car and my hangar and my plane.

But part of what makes a precaution "reasonable", is
giving careful thought to what threat one is trying
to deter, how probable that threat is, how effective
a deterrant is likely to be, and what impact it will
have on legitimate users.

I just don't see that happening.

Cheers,
Sydney

If I have a reason for the fat boy to grunt his way to the Arch, I'll give
you a buzz on here...

"Snowbird" wrote in message
But part of what makes a precaution "reasonable", is
giving careful thought to what threat one is trying
to deter, how probable that threat is, how effective
a deterrant is likely to be, and what impact it will
have on legitimate users.

Exactly!

denny