If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Photo Pilot Certificates
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-3-046x.html
Quote: "AOPA worked closely with the committee, including the senior minority member, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), to make sure pilots would not have only one option — the closest flight standards district office (FSDO) — for having their pictures taken. The bill would require the FAA to assign designees — most likely aviation medical examiners (AMEs) — to take official photos." The pros/cons of the measure notwithstanding, wouldn't it make sense to work with state driver's licensing centers? I mean, aren't they already in the business of issuing (semi) secure identification cards... in somewhat convenient locations nationwide? --- Kay PP-ASEL email: remove ns from aviationns |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
KayInPA wrote: The pros/cons of the measure notwithstanding, wouldn't it make sense to work with state driver's licensing centers? I mean, aren't they already in the business of issuing (semi) secure identification cards... in somewhat convenient locations nationwide? It would make more sense to simply require that the pilot submit photos in exactly the same format and method as that currently used for passports. George Patterson If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have been looking for it. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ... KayInPA wrote: The pros/cons of the measure notwithstanding, wouldn't it make sense to work with state driver's licensing centers? I mean, aren't they already in the business of issuing (semi) secure identification cards... in somewhat convenient locations nationwide? It would make more sense to simply require that the pilot submit photos in exactly the same format and method as that currently used for passports. George Patterson If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have been looking for it. That's what I was thinking but the post office would charge you $80.00 to take and seal your info. unless you could have it done for free at a local FSDO like at the passport agency |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quite honestly, in the day of Photoshop, photos don't mean a darned thing.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Really. Why not stop these terrorist people from getting into the country in the
first place? Seems like what we are doing now is hiring a bunch of government employees to plug holes in the dike. When they run out of fingers they start looking for civilian "volunteers". Its a huge joke, because illegal immigration is the dirty little secret that very damn few politicians will even talk about, much less do anything about. Oh well... Nero fiddled while Rome burned. C J Campbell wrote: Quite honestly, in the day of Photoshop, photos don't mean a darned thing. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
kontiki wrote:
Why not stop these terrorist people from getting into the country in the first place? The above comment you made is so vague and generic as to defy description. So why don't you come back to the group and specifically tell us all just exactly you would do to stop any terrorist from getting into your country in the first place. Seems like what we are doing now is hiring a bunch of government employees to plug holes in the dike. Who is "we"..... All your doing is mouthing off in a newsgroup about a problem your government is well aware of, and you are not giving any specific examples of just what should be or could be done to plug all the holes in that dike. Rhetoric is one thing that everyone in a newsgroup is good at. Specific and viable solutions to the problem are a different matter altogether. So hop to it kontiki, hoist that sail, grab your oar, and tell us exactly how you would solve the problem..... and leave your rhetoric behind. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Shiver Me Timbers wrote:
kontiki wrote: Why not stop these terrorist people from getting into the country in the first place? The above comment you made is so vague and generic as to defy description. So why don't you come back to the group and specifically tell us all just exactly you would do to stop any terrorist from getting into your country in the first place. Okay.. thank you for allowing me to elaborate. Every single day hundreds of unknown, undocumented individuals enter this country across our borders. The Border Patrol makes but a dent in this number. Who these people are, where they come from and their exact intentions are totally unknown. Yes, many of them come from Mexico and countries in South America looking for a better life. An unknown quantity of other individuals, however, are coming here for other purposes. These are the ones that would do us harm and they know they have a 50/50 chance of getting in here *totally* undetected. No paperwork... no way to determine their motives... their intentions or their criminal or political history. There is also a northern border that is just as porus. I submit that a reasonable person would conclude that a good use of a percentage of US forces might be to assist the Border Patrol monitor and secure these borders to a greater extent than they are today. I bet if you took a poll of all troops in Iraq and asked them if they would rather serve their tours assisting the border patrol HERE in the US or in the deserts of Iraq would find a lot of volunteers for the program. In fact.... I one might also conclude that critical monitoring of who GOT a Visa and who didn't and just what these visa holders where actually DOING in this country might have prevented 9-11. It was, after all, the responsibility of the INS to do this very thing, which they utterly failed to do. The result was that the INS was dissolved... I don't know about you but I feel better already. Seems like what we are doing now is hiring a bunch of government employees to plug holes in the dike. Who is "we"..... All your doing is mouthing off in a newsgroup about a problem your government is well aware of, and you are not giving any specific examples of just what should be or could be done to plug all the holes in that dike. "WE" are American citizens and LEGAL immigrants/visitors. I just one specific examples above, please read. If you desire more I will gladly oblige. Rhetoric is one thing that everyone in a newsgroup is good at. Please highlight ANYTHING I just said that any reasonable person would consider to be simply "rhetoric". Specific and viable solutions to the problem are a different matter altogether. I just gave one. I could give more if you are really interested. So hop to it kontiki, hoist that sail, grab your oar, and tell us exactly how you would solve the problem..... and leave your rhetoric behind. Balls in your court... diagram all of my rhetoric to the rest of the group. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
So are you suggesting that we pull the troops out of Iraq and station them
on the US borders? That makes perfectly good sense, the news media love it. They can drastically cut their costs of covering the terrorist attacks. They won't have to go overseas for the daily "car bombing at a border crossing" report, they can go to our Southern border during the winter and our Northern border during the summer. Nice scenery and decent weather -- not bad working conditions for the news crews. I agree with SMT that almost everything you wrote is rhetoric. I could find only the one tangible suggestion in your whole post. So how about a few more? 1. Implement RFID tagging of identity documents. We already have magnetic strips on most driver licenses, but they are too easy to defeat. RFID would add another layer of security and can be scanned from as far away as 25' when properly configured. 2. Establish a single, central repository of the identity records. It is way too difficult for the states and feds to share documentation in the current environment and in today's technological world, it is ridiculous that our officials don't implement something from this century. 3. Divert the ridiculous funding allocations from the GA security initiatives and put them into bolstering our border defenses. I don't mean gun emplacements, but how about some much more efficient ID verification systems, more control points, more airborne surveillance, and a system that identifies welcome visitors rather than forcing them to swim a river to get in. 4. Stop trying to win hearts and minds until the battle is over and the field is secured. With the press documenting every step a soldier takes, our peacekeepers are having to watch their backs as much as anything. We need to understand that war is messy, brutal, and not politically correct. Find the *******s, kill the *******s, secure the field, and then rebuild the country. (Can you imagine trying to use the same strategy on Japan in WW2 as we are using on Iraq now?) 5. We are dealing with a small group of people (I use that term liberally) that place no value whatsoever on human life. They demonstrate that fact on a daily basis, yet we are reluctant to brutally use their own methods in retaliation. We need to selectively kill (not capture) this vermin because they are a threat to the entire human, civilized race. Let's quit playing nice and quit talking about a kinder, gentler war. How asinine! 6. Pull the civilian and government contractors out of areas where security can't be guaranteed. Let the military finish the job of dealing with the insurgents, and let the contractors work in other parts of Iraq. Let elections go forward in secure areas and let the other areas continue to live under martial law until they are secured. Okay, here are my first 6 suggestions. I'm sure others will find more; some will disagree (violently probably) while yet others will nod knowingly. But hey, let's talk specific solutions and quit just complaining about the problem. -- Jim Carter "kontiki" wrote in message ... Okay.. thank you for allowing me to elaborate. Every single day hundreds of unknown, undocumented individuals enter this country across our borders. The Border Patrol makes but a dent in this number. Who these people are, where they come from and their exact intentions are totally unknown. Yes, many of them come from Mexico and countries in South America looking for a better life. An unknown quantity of other individuals, however, are coming here for other purposes. These are the ones that would do us harm and they know they have a 50/50 chance of getting in here *totally* undetected. No paperwork... no way to determine their motives... their intentions or their criminal or political history. There is also a northern border that is just as porus. I submit that a reasonable person would conclude that a good use of a percentage of US forces might be to assist the Border Patrol monitor and secure these borders to a greater extent than they are today. I bet if you took a poll of all troops in Iraq and asked them if they would rather serve their tours assisting the border patrol HERE in the US or in the deserts of Iraq would find a lot of volunteers for the program. In fact.... I one might also conclude that critical monitoring of who GOT a Visa and who didn't and just what these visa holders where actually DOING in this country might have prevented 9-11. It was, after all, the responsibility of the INS to do this very thing, which they utterly failed to do. The result was that the INS was dissolved... I don't know about you but I feel better already. ... clipped for brevity "WE" are American citizens and LEGAL immigrants/visitors. I just one specific examples above, please read. If you desire more I will gladly oblige. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
you already have terrorists in the country.. and they are US citizens...
remember Oklahoma City BT "Shiver Me Timbers" wrote in message ... kontiki wrote: Why not stop these terrorist people from getting into the country in the first place? The above comment you made is so vague and generic as to defy description. So why don't you come back to the group and specifically tell us all just exactly you would do to stop any terrorist from getting into your country in the first place. Seems like what we are doing now is hiring a bunch of government employees to plug holes in the dike. Who is "we"..... All your doing is mouthing off in a newsgroup about a problem your government is well aware of, and you are not giving any specific examples of just what should be or could be done to plug all the holes in that dike. Rhetoric is one thing that everyone in a newsgroup is good at. Specific and viable solutions to the problem are a different matter altogether. So hop to it kontiki, hoist that sail, grab your oar, and tell us exactly how you would solve the problem..... and leave your rhetoric behind. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sport Pilot inconsistency | frustrated flier | Piloting | 19 | September 10th 04 04:53 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Piloting | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Student as PIC in IMC? | Geo. Anderson | Instrument Flight Rules | 40 | May 29th 04 05:09 PM |
definition of "dual controls" | Lee Elson | Instrument Flight Rules | 4 | April 24th 04 02:58 PM |