FAA regulates competition

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 05:33:29 GMT, Jose
wrote in ::

I agree, but without specific examples of alleged FAA inspector abuse
of power to discuss, it's difficult to argue the point.

I agree, but you were the one that brought up the idea of having to
prove one's innocence. One should never have to prove one's innocence
to the FAA, or to any government agency. Just the =idea= that that
might be necessary gives them unwarranted power.


It's not merely an =idea=; it's a fact. :-(

It's not merely an =idea=; it's a fact. :-(

Then that supplies your specific example of alleged FAA inspector abuse
of power. Nothing need happen for the power to be abused.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

Then that supplies your specific example of alleged FAA inspector abuse
of power. Nothing need happen for the power to be abused.

And, as Wally once asked in the Dilbert strip, "What would be the other uses of
power?"

George Patterson
We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop
playing.

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 04:16:55 GMT, Jose
wrote in ::


Then that supplies your specific example of alleged FAA inspector abuse
of power. Nothing need happen for the power to be abused.

So now it is you who is finding FAA inspectors guilty before they have
committed any acts?

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 04:22:01 GMT, George Patterson
wrote in Jjwhf.25257$%%5.20829@trndny06::

"What would be the other uses of power?"

Legitimate enforcement of FARs comes to mind.

So now it is you who is finding FAA inspectors guilty before they have
committed any acts?

I'm entitled. It is the government that must prove itself innocent, and
must prove us guilty. If the FAA has a history of actions and decisions
that are overbearing (something I do not know firsthand) then we should
all be suspicious and cautious when dealing with them. If the FAA has a
history of decisions and actions that are fair, balanced, not abusive,
and with full concern for the rights of the accused, then they have
earned our respect and tentative trust.

Trust in government should always be tentative.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

If the FAA has a
history of decisions and actions that are fair, balanced, not abusive,
and with full concern for the rights of the accused, then they have
earned our respect and tentative trust.

The reality is a bit different. We all have anecdotal stories of the
FAA being abusive.

A friend of mine was cited for flying an unairworthy airplane when he
showed up for a CFI initial checkride. The airworthiness items were a
placard that was curled up in one corner and a TSO tag on the seatbelt
that was supposedly illegible (I could read it fine). The plane had
been gone over with a fine tooth comb in preparation for the checkride,
but when a fed wants to get you, he will get you.

However, why mess with anecdotes when we have official findings from
the DOT inspector general? Check it out for yourself.

http://www.avweb.com/pdf/brinell_report.pdf

Michael

Larry Dighera wrote:


If you are able to prove your innocence, the FAA is powerless.

Wonderful. All you have to do is prove your innocence.

Why do we give bureaucracy more leeway than the courts to prosecute, and
persecute?


Jack

-- Vote Libertarian --

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:01:54 GMT, Jack wrote in
::

Why do we give bureaucracy more leeway than the courts to prosecute, and
persecute?

That's a good question. That is the way the system was when I became
involved in aviation in 1970 (35 years ago). Perhaps someone knows
the answer can provide some insight.

Could it be that because FAA actions are civil, that there is no
presumption of innocence? That being the case, the burden of proof of
compliance rests on the individual committing the violation of the
rule/administrative rule.

If the offense becomes criminal, and is heard by an administrative law
judge, then the burden of proof lies with the FAA.

My 2 cents worth.



On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:01:54 GMT, Jack wrote:

Larry Dighera wrote:


If you are able to prove your innocence, the FAA is powerless.

Wonderful. All you have to do is prove your innocence.

Why do we give bureaucracy more leeway than the courts to prosecute, and
persecute?


Jack

-- Vote Libertarian --