It was really close...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Yes, people debate the intent now [...]

My point in mentioning that was to attempt to discourage someone from
latching onto that question and diverting the real issue in my post.
Apparently, I was unsuccessful.

And, yes, common small arms and rudimentary weapons can have a very
effective impact. Look at Vietnam, Irag, etc.

Not really sure what you mean. The folks in Vietnam were NOT limited to
"common small arms and rudimentary weapons" (I'd hardly call a SAM site a
"rudimentary weapon", for example). In Iraq, the folks causing trouble
aren't coming close to taking over the country, nor will they ever.

Try again?

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Sure, but someday you may have to defend yourself against your
government
and hence the second amendment. The writers of the constitution
were well
aware of this potential and thus they planned for it.

People can (and do) debate the intent behind the 2nd amendment. But
do you
(or anyone else) seriously think that the kinds of arms we are
permitted as
US citizens provide ANY serious potential for defense against our own

government?

I know I don't. If that was the intent, the protection intended has
long
been voided.

If a Cessna 152 scares the **** out of them just turn up with a 747 and
they won't stop running until they get to Canada.....

We have restricted areas over our seat of government for very clear and
well-defined reasons, and every certificated pilot knows it

REALLY,,, seriously Jay. Do you really take the time to think about your
beliefs? Scenario: (God forbid!) Commercial Jumbo jet off from the airport
(look at a TAC of that area and see how close it is to the 'seat of
government') - capable of at least a few hundred knots and loaded with jet
fuel, momentum and sheer mass. Let's say that fighters are miraculously
scrambled soon enough and they shoot down the hijacked plane before it
reaches the capitol; a lethal rain of metal, jet fuel, and unfortunate
occupants on the thousands of people who live below (which would be over
one of the most densely populated urban areas in our country).

So, thousands of innocents will be sacrificed - families, children, mothers
and more? Sounds like a no-win scenario to me..sounds like a plan made out
of panic and paranoia.

I can't be the only one who winced with embarrassment and disgust to see the
video footage of all our elected leaders running like bloated, fat chickens
FROM A CESSNA 150 of all things! How those wicked terrorist groups must be
laughing heartily at us now. They really won - they succeeded in creating
paranoia and terror in their victim - one of the goals of terrorism!
It was just sickening, having our government's yellowed-belly showing to all
the world on their TV's.

Heck, look at Iraq right now,,, despite our presence we can't even begin to
stop the daily car bombings that are going on there. And our poor
recruits,,, 'making it' to the day their service is supposed to end and then
repeatedly being told that it is being extended (bad move for morale). At
least this is the last presidential term for G.W. Being grateful for small
favors!


Cecil

And prohibiting GA traffic tightens security in WHICH way, exactly?

I'm really looking forward to explanations.

There probably isn't any..... Was it Emerson (I think?) who said that "A
foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Do you lock your doors at night?

Why?

Probably because he knows there are people out there like you, who vote
yikes! really scary! GRIN

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Recently, posted:

Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, Jose posted:

To put it in perspective, suppose all the highways into and out of
DC were blockaded, [...]

SNIP

Great analogy. I don't understand why people just don't get the
significantly greater threat that ground-based vehicles pose to our
"security". It's idiotic to be concerned about long-shots such as GA
when there is absolutely nothing done to protect against far greater
and more practical means of doing damage.

I'm calling BS on this. Do you *know* nothing else is being done?

Because insignificant efforts are irrelevant. There is nothing stopping
traffic from travelling through downtown D.C.

You can't drive a good-sized truck right up next to the Capitol or WH.
A truck bomb is very effective but you still need to get close to the
target to do structural damage.

Who cares about the Capitol or WH, besides the cowards that hang out
there? There are a lot of real people in D.C., too.

The gov't sure as hell is monitoring the trade in explosive precursors
since the OK City bombing. Likewise, I strongly suspect there is
monitoring of truck rentals going on, but I can't say that for sure.

Why not rent a truck and find out? UHaul and Ryder are still doing a brisk
business, AFAICT.

Neil

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message news:4285f68b$0$28822

Huh? Where did you get that?

I heard a news report a couple of days ago to the effect that the government
planned to take no action against the pair. Obviously erroneous.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message news:a2nhe.2413

said he got lost, but even so, how hard would it be to know that you need
to fly west, not east when in that area?

More to the point, going from PA to NC, how hard is it to know that the DC
Metro area lies across your path? ....and that it just might be an area to
avoid? Even if he did get lost initially, how hard is it to recognize DC
and stay the hell away? After many years, I've concluded that the single
greatest weakness in both cars and small airplanes is the simple inability
of certain people to just pay attention to what the hell is going on.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

I heard a news report a couple of days ago to the effect that the
government
planned to take no action against the pair. Obviously erroneous.


Probably referring to TSA, FBI, Secret Service etc. FAA will take action in
the next few days, I am sure.

--
Hello, my name is Mike, and I am an airplane addict....

Jay Honeck wrote:
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.

************************************************ *******************************
Now they are willing to kill people who get lost and cross invisible
lines in the sky so that the powerful and the politically connected can
feel safe... Will they next start shooting our children because they
ride their bikes across an invisible line on the ground?


Denny, normally I'm right with you and your thoughts -- but this is an
absurd comparison.

We have restricted areas over our seat of government for very clear and
well-defined reasons, and every certificated pilot knows it. To compare
this situation to what the Nazis did is to trivialize the death of millions.
Jay,
You missed the point. If you don't stand up and defend all just causes
then there will be no just causes left to defend. Also, what is the
"clear and well-defined reason" for the FRZ. I got to talk to the F-16
pilots a few years ago and they aren't concerned about "you little guys"
because they knew "you can do anything anyway". The FRZ is window
dressing to make citizen feel safe. It does nothing.