Why GA is Dying

In article et,
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

[snip]
I don't know about the rest of the group, but I'll go with what TSA has to
say on this, as actually, I already know what they will say.

Asking TSA would be fine except that the TSA has demonstrated fundemental
flaws wrt understanding security. The TSA has approved "security" measures
which don't do anything to enhance security. (and let's not get started on
the complete nonsense airline passengers have to deal with)

I would like to give specific examples from my home airport, but technically
I'm not allowed to discuss the specifics of the "security" measures in place.
Indeed, it would be inappropriate to openly discuss the numerous flaws and
vulnerabilities left exposed by the "security" measures.

Can you think of the flaws in a requirement to chain an aircraft to
a tie-down? How hard is it to defeat a proplock? While biometrics might
be required for access to the airport from the street, what security is
in place controlling access from the air?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article et,
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

[snip]
I don't know about the rest of the group, but I'll go with what TSA has
to
say on this, as actually, I already know what they will say.

Asking TSA would be fine except that the TSA has demonstrated fundemental
flaws wrt understanding security. The TSA has approved "security"
measures
which don't do anything to enhance security. (and let's not get started
on
the complete nonsense airline passengers have to deal with)

I would like to give specific examples from my home airport, but
technically
I'm not allowed to discuss the specifics of the "security" measures in
place.
Indeed, it would be inappropriate to openly discuss the numerous flaws and
vulnerabilities left exposed by the "security" measures.

Can you think of the flaws in a requirement to chain an aircraft to
a tie-down? How hard is it to defeat a proplock? While biometrics might
be required for access to the airport from the street, what security is
in place controlling access from the air?

All this is fine, and probably very true, but the quality of airport
security isn't the issue being discussed here. I think we all agree that the
system is not what it should be.The issue here is whether or not taking
photographs at major airports is on the security watch list which some have
indicated it isn't. It is of course. Personal opinions on how this policy is
carried out, or what you or I happen to like or dislike about the system is
not the issue.
Dudley Henriques

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Newps,

How is that any different than your
neighbors setting up a neighborhood watch program? When you notice
something or someone out of the ordinary some action is taken.


Yep. The Nazis in my country called that "Blockwart". Nice concept.

Damn, and here I thought I was going to be the first.

Personally, I think neighborhood watches are creepy.

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

In fact, this is the exact process used for determining what
constitutes a security issue.
:-)

Then we are no longer a free country, and should export our freedom to
other nations, since we are no longer using them.

Seriously, to allow the police to say what it is that consititutes a
police matter is =extremely= dangerous. We might as well let the TSA
decide whether little airplanes consititue a risk around big cities, and
politely accept their dictates there too.

Um....haven't we?

Martin Hotze wrote:
"Crash Lander" wrote:

If the kid had nothing to hide, [...]

*woahhhh*

#m
I thought I was the only person who was annoyed by that concept.

kontiki wrote:
Emily wrote:
Well, I'm not 50 years old, but I have less freedom than I did 10
years ago. Actually, I was a minor 10 years ago, so let's see I have
less freedom than I did five years ago.

Give an example of a freedom you had 10 years ago that you do not have now.

Like I'm stupid enough to post any here. But the Sudafed example
someone gives later is a good one.

The issue here is whether or not taking
photographs at major airports is on the security watch list

No, the issue is whether taking photographs at an airport (it wasn't
disclosed that it was a major airport, by the OP I assumed it was a
minor airport and hold to that pending clarification) is a security
risk. There is a difference between =being= a security risk, and being
on the security watch list.

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

You are easily annoyed.
Crash Lander

"Emily" wrote in message
...
Martin Hotze wrote:
"Crash Lander" wrote:

If the kid had nothing to hide, [...]

*woahhhh*

#m
I thought I was the only person who was annoyed by that concept.

"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
The issue here is whether or not taking photographs at major airports is
on the security watch list

No, the issue is whether taking photographs at an airport (it wasn't
disclosed that it was a major airport, by the OP I assumed it was a minor
airport and hold to that pending clarification) is a security risk. There
is a difference between =being= a security risk, and being on the security
watch list.

Semantics.

Being on the security watch list establishes any item as a security MATTER,
which is what has been discussed. You can parse this till doomsday, but the
fact still remains, people taking photographs at airports....any airport,
are POTENTIAL security risks, and this is the context in which we have been
discussing these people as relates to the term "security risk".
Naturally, no one is a bonafide confirmed security risk unless that has been
established by the process we're discussing.
This tactic is beneath you. :-)
Dudley

Hi Dudley!
This is fun innit! :-)

The funny thing is that you guys and girls that are complaining about
unnecessary security measures actually actively engage in them every day!
For example. You lock your doors and windows at night. Now, chances are,
you'll never get broken into and robbed, but you lock up anyway! Why? If
someone wants to get in, do you really think a little window lock or a
deadbolt on a door will stop them?
I suppose you refuse to show your passport when you go overseas, because
it's none of their buisness who you are or what you're planning on doing in
that other country? Of course you don't! How about a little consistency in
your arguments people!
Crash Lander