Why GA is Dying

Going to another
country is not suspicious, however, each and every person is required to
produce a passport, and explain their reasons for entering that country. I
don't see them being so high and mighty and enforcing their 'rights' in that
circumstance.

Going to another country, you don't have the "rights" you have here.
You have whatever rights and privilages the other country (your host)
grants you. You are not a member of their club.

If it scared the young lad away
from learning to fly, then I'd suggest he is pretty thin skinned, and not at
all dedicated to his implied interest in aviation.

He may not have =been= "dedicated". (if he were, he'd be flying
already). But, we may have lost somebody who may have become dedicated
in the future.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...
I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the lawyer.

Interesting take on this thread... How many would have thought a more
"friendly" approach would have been to simply go out to the ramp (FBO
employee, or whomever was tasked to be ramp nazi that day) and socialize
with the photographer?

Ask him nicely about what he's doing.. comment on the nice weather... ask
him where he's from.. shake his hand.. get his name.. Ask him if he wants
to get flying lessons, maybe point out a place down the road that does
discovery flights, and offer to forward his name and phone number to
them.. Invite him to come sign a visitor's log in the lobby, which your
FBO keeps there for that purpose.. look at this ID there..

If the "visitor" gets evasive or otherwise suspicious, then play "bad cop"
and switch gears.. until then, with the friendly approach, you have made
the visitor aware that he IS being watched, while at the same time being
accomodating and promoting GA. Remember.. just about all of us started off
by going to the local field and hanging around for a bit (unless you were
born into aviation, or a product of the military).

If we keep turning small airports in to private clubs with barbed wire and
keypad entries, they will soon become OLD FARTS private clubs with rusting
fences and declining membership.

Dave

Well said...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
the fact remains that taking pictures at airports has now been placed
within the realm of a possible security issue

So is wearing shoes, taking notes, walking around, and sneezing. It's all
within the realm of a possible security issue. In fact posting on Usenet
is most certainly a security issue, so anybody who posts on Usenet should
accept that they may be accosted at any time for any reason by security
should they wish to be at an airport.

So tell me, what =is= it that makes taking pictures a "security issue"
while your likely response to my prior paragraph would be ridicule?

Something doesn't become a security issue simply because a security person
says so.

Jose

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the airlines had strictures against
photographing personell, procedures, etc... for quite some time (going back
well before 9/11?)

Jay B

Dudley,

These decisions ARE made by civilian leaders at the highest level of ELECTED
GOVERNMENT. These leaders consult with ALL the necessary specialists in the
field, both civilian and military when making these decisions, then the
decisions are made at the highest level, which is the elected civilian
government.


And you actually believe that your (or any) government works that way? Wow,
that's beyond naive, IMHO. It's also not at all born out in everyday
experience. Not even remotely.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Emily,

Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.


Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws. But let's not go
there, the thread is bad enough as it is.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Dudley,

write a simple email to TSA where it does matter, and
ask THEM if the taking of photographs at major airports is, or is not, one
of the issues their security people are specifically trained to consider in
the airport security equation


What's that got to do with the question whether it's a security issue or not?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jose,

There is a difference between =being= a security risk, and being
on the security watch list.


Thanks! It really IS that easy.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Not enough guns in use by honest citizens.



--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in
message ...
| Emily,
|
| Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.
|
|
| Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws. But
let's not go
| there, the thread is bad enough as it is.
|
| --
| Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote

Not enough guns in use by honest citizens.

What do you expect? Thomas says we have laws where we have to "lose" our
guns. ;-)

Thomas wrote:
| Especially in a country with, well, lose gun laws.

Morgans,

What do you expect? Thomas says we have laws where we have to "lose" our
guns. ;-)


Ops ;-)

My supply of o's is dwindling.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)