Another Attempt To Hinder GA

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...
I think that this would infringe on my Right to Life, Liberty, and the
Pursuit of Happiness.

They, uh, left those out of the Constitution when they wrote it... not that
any of the rights that actually got in are any better off.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

They, uh, left those out of the Constitution when they wrote it... not
that
any of the rights that actually got in are any better off.


They left all rights out of the Constitution when they wrote it.

NW_PILOT wrote:

I think that this would infringe on my Right to Life, Liberty, and the
Pursuit of Happiness.

So?

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

His email is

I have personally seen the fool giving out flyers in Bklyn. He leaves
the impression of a complete retard, with slogans like "fight crime"
and "improve commute". I see with this bill he's doing both.

Anyway, pls drop him a line... he could use some attention.

-Toly.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

They, uh, left those out of the Constitution when they wrote it... not
that
any of the rights that actually got in are any better off.


They left all rights out of the Constitution when they wrote it.

True, but they did try to put some of them back in with amendments.

On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:29:32 -0700, "Jay Beckman"
wrote in qc90d.136551$4o.14720@fed1read01::

From today's EAA E-Newsletter:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...09_weiner.html



EAA URGES MEMBERS TO OPPOSE OUTRAGEOUS HOUSE BILL THAT WOULD SEVERELY
RESTRICT GENERAL AVIATION

EAA AVIATION CENTER, OSHKOSH, Wis. - (Sept. 9, 2004) - The
Experimental Aircraft Association is urging its members and all
aviation enthusiasts to contact their Congressional representatives
and strongly oppose a newly introduced bill by Rep. Anthony Weiner
(D-N.Y.)


Here's a little information about this misguided Representative:

http://www.house.gov/weiner/

1122 Longworth HOB
Washington DC 20515
(202) 225-6616

As a member of the Science Committee, Subcommittee on Space and
Aeronautics, Weiner has been a driving force behind the
investigation into the space shuttle Columbia disaster. He has
also passed a measure to expand research into quieter aircraft
engines.

Weiner also serves on the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, where he sits on the Aviation and Highways
Subcommittees where he is leading the fight to reduce airport air
noise.


This bill (H.R. 5035) would require the Department of Homeland
Security to create a method of screening all passengers and property
on each flight of all passenger aircraft in the U.S., including
general aviation aircraft of all types.

Rep. Weiner obviously has no concept of the large number of GA
operations that occur daily from many times more airports than
originate at airline hubs. To accomplish GA passenger screening
at all airports serving GA aircraft would require an enormous
increase in federal personnel and equipment.

It would also prohibit any non-airline aircraft from flying within
1,500 feet of any structure or building,

How is that supposed to increase homeland security? Does Rep.
Weiner expect terrorists to obey the regulations?

and prohibit non-airline aircraft from flying over any U.S. city with
a population of 1 million or more.

Ummm... Let me see if I understand this correctly. Rep. Weiner
feels that only AIRLINE traffic has the RIGHT to airspace over
metropolitan areas. I'm beginning to smell the stench of
graft money....


It would further require that pilots of all aircraft in U.S. airspace
remain in contact with the Federal Aviation Administration, presumably
by radio, regardless of altitude or location.

Ostensibly, this requirement would identify those flights failing
to comply as suspected terrorists. Unfortunately, low-level
flights, such as pipeline patrol, and crop dusting, and flights in
outlying areas would find it difficult to comply with this
proposed requirement.

"The extreme shortsightedness of this bill speaks for itself and
completely counters the government's own security experts, who have
continually stated that general aviation does not pose a significant
security threat to the U.S.," said Doug Macnair, EAA's vice president
of government relations. "It's sad that the solemn anniversary of the
9/11 terrorist attacks is being used to introduce this bill, which
does nothing to enhance security and smacks of election-year
grandstanding."

Actually, it smacks of airline influence, IMNSHO.

With 17,000 landing facilities and nearly 200,000 aircraft in the
United States, EAA maintains that it is inconceivable that the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FAA could ever fund and
administer such a plan. DHS and the Transportation Security
Administration have repeatedly indicated that general aviation does
not warrant such levels of security when compared to other
transportation modes and threats.

"We as a nation need to focus our limited resources on the most
serious vulnerabilities and threats to our security," Macnair added.
"TSA has made extensive studies of those threats and nowhere has that
agency ever suggested such draconian measures as those proposed in
this bill."

EAA members and others can express their opposition to this bill to
their congressional representatives by finding their contact
information at http://www.house.gov. EAA immediately contacted members
of the House Aviation Subcommittee to state its extreme opposition to
this legislation.

"R. David Steele" /OMEGA wrote in message
...
[...] For
what ever reasons, it does seem that we are seeing more democrats
than republicans with their "heads up their ass", so to speak.

They are just trying to catch up with the biggest "head up his ass" of all,
the President responsible for the Department of Homeland Security. It's
going to be pretty tough to top that act. I'm not sure there are enough
heads and asses even to accomplish that.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in
:



what ever reasons, it does seem that we are seeing more democrats
than republicans with their "heads up their ass", so to speak.

They are just trying to catch up with the biggest "head up his ass" of
all, the President responsible for the Department of Homeland
Security. It's going to be pretty tough to top that act. I'm not
sure there are enough heads and asses even to accomplish that.



Your right, Our President should have sat back and kept the status-quo
after our country was attacked. Lord knows we shouldnt disrupt YOUR
flying.

So easy for you to call it from the cheap seats.. things gotta change we
cannot sit back and think oceans will protect us any longer.


-Doug

"10 out of 10 Terrorists agree... Kerry for President"

Sorry but Homeland Security belongs to the military.


Hmmm, don't think so. It brings to mind the term "posse comitatus."

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Your right, Our President should have sat back and kept the status-quo
after our country was attacked. Lord knows we shouldnt disrupt YOUR
flying.

You say that as though we are safer now than we were before.

Nothing that has been implemented that restricts my flying in any way
improves security for this country. Precious little of ANY of the DHS
activities improve security for this country, and much of what Bush has
overseen has decreased security for this country by increasing global
hostility toward us.

So easy for you to call it from the cheap seats.. things gotta change we
cannot sit back and think oceans will protect us any longer.

I never thought that before. If you have so little imagination that the
only solution you can think of is to turn ourselves into a police state,
then you are beyond help.

Pete