Will the new government have any effect on GA?

Let's take the silly ones first:

No freedoms are silly when they are taken away.

1. I recently flew over Washington, DC. It was bone-simple.

Did you really? I just got off the phone with the Leesburg FSS to check
my info. They tell me that ABSOLUTELY NO VFR flight is permitted in the
FRZ, except for based aircraft whose pilots have undergone a background
check, received a PIN number for that flight, received permission for
conducting that flight, and have previously visited the airport (there's
one in particular, but I didn't ask) IN PERSON to make application,
which means driving in the first time. This is not "bone simple".

IFR flight is not permitted either, unless one is going into National,
and in that case you must land outside the ADIZ and pick up an armed
flight marshall who will fly aboard your aircraft while you fly into the
FRZ.

I remember you made a big deal out of going to Dulles, for a special
event where the way was paved for you. But that's not the same as
flying over the Nation's Capital. Washington DC is =inside= the FRZ.

So, tell me. What exactly =did= you do?

2. With only a few airworthy space shuttles left -- and a political
climate that makes replacing them impossible -- I see nothing wrong
with restricting the airspace around Cape Canaveral.

Why? Perhaps a little one mile ring to keep people who can't maneuver
an airplane with that degree of precision away, but if you think this
keeps intentional harm away from the complex, that is laughable.

3. I'm sure I can buy wine anywhere.

So what? The freedom to carry =my= wine in =my= carry-on is not a silly
freedom. Besides, many of the wines one can get in California are not
available anywhere else. There just isn't enough made. I don't want
the government telling me what wine I can drink, which is what
effectively happens.

I guess you wouldn't understand though. You drink beer.

The wine rule came about because wine is a liquid, and somebody tried to
use liquid explosive. Ever played with powdered sugar around a heat
source?

4. Letting people carry weapons on an airliner has proven to be a "bad
thing." I believe this restriction is in the "common sense" category.

People carrying weapons is not a Bad Thing. It is only when Bad people
carry weapons where Good people can't that it's a Bad Thing. And a
Swiss Army Knife is not a weapon, except in the sense that anything can
be used as one (including a pencil).

The PA airliner didn't make it to the White House because Good People
fought the terrorists back. The solution is to keep weapons away from
Good People. Hmmm. Common sense?

Now on to the meatier examples:
1. The library rule will be overturned. Luckily, it's so unworkable,
in practice, that it is not used.

Really? You must get more use out of your time machine than you do out
of the Pathfinder. I don't see any reason for the government to
overturn the library rule, and it's the government that made it. All
they have to do is keep quiet about it. As it is, most people aren't
aware of it, and many that are are of the opinion that "if you aren't
reading anything bad, you have nothing to worry about."

How do you know that the library rule is not used? Part of the rule is
that the librarians are NOT ALLOWED TO SAY when it's been used.

2. I hadn't heard that US citizens could have their homes searched
without due process. Are you referring to wire tapping overseas phone
calls?

Anybody can have their homes searched without due process if the feds
use the magic words "national security". I'm also referring to aspects
of "home" that are not geographical, such as the contents of your hard
drive (which may be seized and searched if you try to bring a laptop on
an airliner), the expanded wiretapping and internet tapping
surveillance, and other tramplings of what we once considered private.
These measures are being pushed through without much resistance, in the
name of National Security. Each one passed makes it easier to pass the
next one.

3. I hadn't head that US citizens could be held without charges being
brought.

If the charges are based on National Security, the government could deem
them too secret to present to you. I have no first-hand experience with
this, but I am no longer convinced that we are not all vulnerable to it.

We're going to win the war on terrorism just like we won the war on drugs.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
news
Let's take the silly ones first:

No freedoms are silly when they are taken away.

1. I recently flew over Washington, DC. It was bone-simple.

Did you really? I just got off the phone with the Leesburg FSS to check my
info. They tell me that ABSOLUTELY NO VFR flight is permitted in the FRZ,
except for based aircraft whose pilots have undergone a background check,
received a PIN number for that flight, received permission for conducting
that flight, and have previously visited the airport (there's one in
particular, but I didn't ask) IN PERSON to make application, which means
driving in the first time. This is not "bone simple".

IFR flight is not permitted either, unless one is going into National, and
in that case you must land outside the ADIZ and pick up an armed flight
marshall who will fly aboard your aircraft while you fly into the FRZ.

I remember you made a big deal out of going to Dulles, for a special event
where the way was paved for you. But that's not the same as flying over
the Nation's Capital. Washington DC is =inside= the FRZ.


SNIP

AFAIK, the Capitol and the White House have always been under a P-XXXX
designation, have they not?

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

AFAIK, the Capitol and the White House have always been under a P-XXXX
designation, have they not?

Yes, there are teeny prohibited areas around those two buildings. The
rest of our Captal was unencubered until we got the Class Bravo. Even
then, all it required was a clearance, just like around any large airport.

The FRZ is thirty miles across, and covers the entire city.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
AFAIK, the Capitol and the White House have always been under a P-XXXX
designation, have they not?

Yes, there are teeny prohibited areas around those two buildings. The
rest of our Captal was unencubered until we got the Class Bravo. Even
then, all it required was a clearance, just like around any large airport.

The FRZ is thirty miles across, and covers the entire city.

Jose

Point made...

Jay B

I remember you made a big deal out of going to Dulles, for a special
event where the way was paved for you. But that's not the same as
flying over the Nation's Capital. Washington DC is =inside= the FRZ.

Well, the way into the Washington ADIZ wasn't paved for us -- we had to
do everything by the book. It took ten minutes, tops, and was no more
difficult than filing any other kind of flight plan.

Now, if you're talking about flying over the White House or the
National Mall, well, duh.

2. With only a few airworthy space shuttles left -- and a political
climate that makes replacing them impossible -- I see nothing wrong
with restricting the airspace around Cape Canaveral.

Why? Perhaps a little one mile ring to keep people who can't maneuver
an airplane with that degree of precision away, but if you think this
keeps intentional harm away from the complex, that is laughable.

You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone around the
Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a no-fly zone
is appropriate?

3. I'm sure I can buy wine anywhere.

So what? The freedom to carry =my= wine in =my= carry-on is not a silly
freedom.

Yes, it is. And it's just another impetus to spur the growth of GA, in
any case.

Besides, many of the wines one can get in California are not
available anywhere else. There just isn't enough made. I don't want
the government telling me what wine I can drink, which is what
effectively happens.

And if a terrorist smuggles four "bottles" of explosives on the plane,
killing everyone on board, well, that's just acceptable collateral
damage? After all, your merlot was an excellent year!

Gimme a break.

I guess you wouldn't understand though. You drink beer.

Exactly. ;-)

The wine rule came about because wine is a liquid, and somebody tried to
use liquid explosive. Ever played with powdered sugar around a heat
source?

Not recently.

4. Letting people carry weapons on an airliner has proven to be a "bad
thing." I believe this restriction is in the "common sense" category.

People carrying weapons is not a Bad Thing. It is only when Bad people
carry weapons where Good people can't that it's a Bad Thing. And a
Swiss Army Knife is not a weapon, except in the sense that anything can
be used as one (including a pencil).

The PA airliner didn't make it to the White House because Good People
fought the terrorists back. The solution is to keep weapons away from
Good People. Hmmm. Common sense?

No, the solution is to make all airline passengers fly naked. I'd fly
on THAT airline.

;-)

1. The library rule will be overturned. Luckily, it's so unworkable,
in practice, that it is not used.

Really? You must get more use out of your time machine than you do out
of the Pathfinder. I don't see any reason for the government to
overturn the library rule, and it's the government that made it. All
they have to do is keep quiet about it. As it is, most people aren't
aware of it, and many that are are of the opinion that "if you aren't
reading anything bad, you have nothing to worry about."

How do you know that the library rule is not used? Part of the rule is
that the librarians are NOT ALLOWED TO SAY when it's been used.

Because the librarians around here protested it when it first was
announced, and declared that it would not be followed. Remember, Iowa
City has gone so far as to declare itself to be a "Nuclear Weapons-Free
Zone", and is the only city in America to elect a card-carrying member
of the communist party.

No one rounded up the librarians when they said that, and no one will.
It's a dumb, unenforceable, unworkable law, that will fall by the
wayside like the 200,000 other stupid laws we've got on the books that
no one obeys.

2. I hadn't heard that US citizens could have their homes searched
without due process. Are you referring to wire tapping overseas phone
calls?

Anybody can have their homes searched without due process if the feds
use the magic words "national security". I'm also referring to aspects
of "home" that are not geographical, such as the contents of your hard
drive (which may be seized and searched if you try to bring a laptop on
an airliner), the expanded wiretapping and internet tapping
surveillance, and other tramplings of what we once considered private.
These measures are being pushed through without much resistance, in the
name of National Security. Each one passed makes it easier to pass the
next one.

3. I hadn't head that US citizens could be held without charges being
brought.

If the charges are based on National Security, the government could deem
them too secret to present to you. I have no first-hand experience with
this, but I am no longer convinced that we are not all vulnerable to it.

We're going to win the war on terrorism just like we won the war on drugs.

You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative responses that
make any more sense.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Why not have all airline passengers fly sedated and strapped
in a straight jacket?

Or arm all pilots and passengers, search for bombs and
profile passengers to fins and screen the known risks.

But actually looking for a Muslim terrorist is some how
religious intolerance. It seems that when there is a bank
robbery and the media reports a white man, with a beard,
5-10-6 feet wearing a T-shirt and ball cap, or a Hispanic
male as the suspect it's is OK, but when they don't report a
description, we "know" it was a black man.

Airplane hijacked by little white haired lady with knitting
needles, we know it was a woman. But if they say riots in
Paris, cars burned, police station burned by "youths" we
know it was Muslim youthful terrorist wannabes.



"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
| I remember you made a big deal out of going to Dulles,
for a special
| event where the way was paved for you. But that's not
the same as
| flying over the Nation's Capital. Washington DC is
=inside= the FRZ.
|
| Well, the way into the Washington ADIZ wasn't paved for
us -- we had to
| do everything by the book. It took ten minutes, tops, and
was no more
| difficult than filing any other kind of flight plan.
|
| Now, if you're talking about flying over the White House
or the
| National Mall, well, duh.
|
| 2. With only a few airworthy space shuttles left --
and a political
| climate that makes replacing them impossible -- I see
nothing wrong
| with restricting the airspace around Cape Canaveral.
|
| Why? Perhaps a little one mile ring to keep people who
can't maneuver
| an airplane with that degree of precision away, but if
you think this
| keeps intentional harm away from the complex, that is
laughable.
|
| You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone
around the
| Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a
no-fly zone
| is appropriate?
|
| 3. I'm sure I can buy wine anywhere.
|
| So what? The freedom to carry =my= wine in =my=
carry-on is not a silly
| freedom.
|
| Yes, it is. And it's just another impetus to spur the
growth of GA, in
| any case.
|
| Besides, many of the wines one can get in California are
not
| available anywhere else. There just isn't enough made.
I don't want
| the government telling me what wine I can drink, which
is what
| effectively happens.
|
| And if a terrorist smuggles four "bottles" of explosives
on the plane,
| killing everyone on board, well, that's just acceptable
collateral
| damage? After all, your merlot was an excellent year!
|
| Gimme a break.
|
| I guess you wouldn't understand though. You drink beer.

|
| Exactly. ;-)
|
| The wine rule came about because wine is a liquid, and
somebody tried to
| use liquid explosive. Ever played with powdered sugar
around a heat
| source?
|
| Not recently.
|
| 4. Letting people carry weapons on an airliner has
proven to be a "bad
| thing." I believe this restriction is in the "common
sense" category.
|
| People carrying weapons is not a Bad Thing. It is only
when Bad people
| carry weapons where Good people can't that it's a Bad
Thing. And a
| Swiss Army Knife is not a weapon, except in the sense
that anything can
| be used as one (including a pencil).
|
| The PA airliner didn't make it to the White House
because Good People
| fought the terrorists back. The solution is to keep
weapons away from
| Good People. Hmmm. Common sense?
|
| No, the solution is to make all airline passengers fly
naked. I'd fly
| on THAT airline.
|
| ;-)
|
| 1. The library rule will be overturned. Luckily, it's
so unworkable,
| in practice, that it is not used.
|
| Really? You must get more use out of your time machine
than you do out
| of the Pathfinder. I don't see any reason for the
government to
| overturn the library rule, and it's the government that
made it. All
| they have to do is keep quiet about it. As it is, most
people aren't
| aware of it, and many that are are of the opinion that
"if you aren't
| reading anything bad, you have nothing to worry about."
|
| How do you know that the library rule is not used? Part
of the rule is
| that the librarians are NOT ALLOWED TO SAY when it's
been used.
|
| Because the librarians around here protested it when it
first was
| announced, and declared that it would not be followed.
Remember, Iowa
| City has gone so far as to declare itself to be a "Nuclear
Weapons-Free
| Zone", and is the only city in America to elect a
card-carrying member
| of the communist party.
|
| No one rounded up the librarians when they said that, and
no one will.
| It's a dumb, unenforceable, unworkable law, that will fall
by the
| wayside like the 200,000 other stupid laws we've got on
the books that
| no one obeys.
|
| 2. I hadn't heard that US citizens could have their
homes searched
| without due process. Are you referring to wire
tapping overseas phone
| calls?
|
| Anybody can have their homes searched without due
process if the feds
| use the magic words "national security". I'm also
referring to aspects
| of "home" that are not geographical, such as the
contents of your hard
| drive (which may be seized and searched if you try to
bring a laptop on
| an airliner), the expanded wiretapping and internet
tapping
| surveillance, and other tramplings of what we once
considered private.
| These measures are being pushed through without much
resistance, in the
| name of National Security. Each one passed makes it
easier to pass the
| next one.
|
| 3. I hadn't head that US citizens could be held
without charges being
| brought.
|
| If the charges are based on National Security, the
government could deem
| them too secret to present to you. I have no first-hand
experience with
| this, but I am no longer convinced that we are not all
vulnerable to it.
|
| We're going to win the war on terrorism just like we won
the war on drugs.
|
| You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative
responses that
| make any more sense.
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|
|

On Nov 14, 5:29 pm, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

But if they say riots in
Paris, cars burned, police station burned by "youths" we
know it was Muslim youthful terrorist wannabes.

That's exactly the kind of thinking that's going to lose this war.

Doesn't anybody realize anymore that it takes intelligence (as in
"smarts" not "information") and not just expensive machinery to win a
war?

The day patriotism and nuanced thinking are mutually exclusive is the
day we really will have lost.

Anyway, none of this has to do with flying. I'm outta this thread.....

Marc

Well, the way into the Washington ADIZ

The Washington ADIZ is not over our Capital. I have been in the ADIZ
many times. There's nothing under it but trees and suburbs.

We have lost the freedom to fly over our Capital. This is strictly
9-11. For a long time we lost the freedom to fly over NY and Boston. I
won't even talk about Chicago.

You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone around the
Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a no-fly zone
is appropriate?

The teeny ones that existed prior to 9-11 were appropriate.

The freedom to carry =my= wine in =my= carry-on is not a silly
freedom.
Yes, it is.

There are no silly freedoms. What if it were beer?

And if a terrorist smuggles four "bottles" of explosives on the plane,
killing everyone on board, well, that's just acceptable collateral
damage? After all, your merlot was an excellent year!

"If only one child is saved...". Yes, it's acceptable collateral
damage. Goddamnit, LIVING is risky. You think the terrorists can't
figure out another way? Gimme a break.

Ever played with powdered sugar around a heat source?
Not recently.

It's an explosive. Somebody will try it, and powders will be banned.
Pretty soon we'll all fly naked in handcuffs.

I'd fly on THAT airline.

Somebody might pick their nose.

No one rounded up the librarians when they said that, and no one will.

No. But they will ask a librarian for records, and she will comply or
not. If she refuses, she'll go to jail. If she breaks the secret,
she'll go to jail. It is not at all unenforcable. It is only needed
sometimes, and those times you can be sure it will be enforced.

We're going to win the war on terrorism just like we won the war on drugs.
You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative responses that
make any more sense.

Accept the fact that life is risky. Accept the fact that freedom is
lost long before security is gained. Go from there. Somewhere in your
Holy Book there is a passage on that; something to do with cheeks.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose writes:

No. But they will ask a librarian for records, and she will comply or
not. If she refuses, she'll go to jail. If she breaks the secret,
she'll go to jail. It is not at all unenforcable. It is only needed
sometimes, and those times you can be sure it will be enforced.

I've heard of libraries that regularly announce that they haven't been
told to provide records (which is legal). One day they stop
announcing that, and you know that the government demanded someone's
records.

Accept the fact that life is risky. Accept the fact that freedom is
lost long before security is gained.

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Fear is routinely used
to undermine freedom.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jay Honeck writes:

You don't think it's appropriate to have a no-fly zone around the
Kennedy Space Center? Tell me, Jose, where DO you think a no-fly zone
is appropriate?

Wherever there are other things in the air that can cause conflicts,
such as balloons, projectiles (for military practice), and so on.

Just forbidding overflight out of concerns about "terrorists" isn't
justified, at least not as long as they can still drive into the area
in vehicles or navigate into it with boats.

No, the solution is to make all airline passengers fly naked. I'd fly
on THAT airline.

No, the solution is to profile and interrogate passengers, rather than
search their luggage. It's not what they are carrying that counts,
it's what they intend to do with it.

You may be right, but I haven't heard any alternative responses that
make any more sense.

There are many alternatives, such as the ones I've mentioned above.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.