Bullying desguised (badly) as precaution

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

But under what Constitutional authority?

The same authority that allowed creation of the Department of State, the
Department of Defense, etc. My guess is it's within the realm of Article 2,
Section 2. There's also Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18.

But I'm not a Constitutional lawyer.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:iKr7f.12$0M1.11@dukeread12...

Not that I agree but I'd bet they would use an interstate commerce
argument if they had to defend it in court. They use it for just about
everything else.

Yup. That's not a valid argument.


There are really very few federal laws currently in place that would have
stood up to the Supreme Court for the first 100 years we were a nation.

The US Constitution is a little over 4600 words long. I wonder how many
words the average law passed by congress today has in it?

("Steven P. McNicoll" wrote)
But under what Constitutional authority?


My guess ...The Electoral College :-)


Montblack

Skylune opined:
I'll think about the C-150 thing. That's the little plane I did some
training in about 15 years back (or was it a 152, i don't recall). I'm
going on 49: is that to late to pick up where I left off? I think not,
especially since I did training and can probably progress to the stall
stuff pretty fast. Anyway, what's to lose?

Absolutely nothing. Mary and I have become the "Pied Pipers" of GA in
our neck of the river, and we know many people WAY older than 48 who
are just starting flight lessons.

Personally, I'd learn in a Cherokee myself, but that's a personal
preference. The 150/152 is just too danged small for a 6' guy (me) and
an instructor, IMHO.

Whichever way you go, you'll never regret it.

Big Snip

Anyway, the expansion project is on hold way due to environmental issues
(mainly water, as the airport unfortunately sits directly atop the
acquifer for the entire area). All we want is the airport to make a
better effort to enforce its existing noise abatement procedures, which
are routinely ignored by a small minority of fliers.

Ah, I understand now. Isn't it a shame when a few inconsiderate folks
ruin a good thing? Of course, I'm not there, and I don't know what
happened, but (judging by your response) it must've been pretty bad.

Did you try contacting the offending pilot(s)? (Nicely of course.) If
you spotted an "N" number, you can easily obtain the pilot's name and
address off the internet. Go to www.Landings.com and look at their
database section to see what I mean.

You might have better luck contacting the pilot to see if he will
voluntarily divert his usual flight path a bit, just to avoid
over-flying your place.

A good example of this working in our area is our local hospitals.
With three medical centers in town, we've got a LOT of very ill people
nearby -- and the airport is less than a mile south of ALL three of
them.

Needless to say, we local pilots know the location of those hospitals,
and avoid flying over them as best we can. There's nothing worse than
hearing annoyingly loud noises when you're really sick, so we do our
best to keep away. (Transient pilots, of course, couldn't know this,
so occasionally I'll hear/see one go over with the prop pitch and
throttle full-forward, and I just cringe...)

Anyway, it's just a thought. It might be more effective than beating
up all GA pilots on the internet, day after day? :-)

As for dealing with airport authorities and the FAA, I can sympathize.
Hell, dealing with those bureaucracies sucks as an airport SUPPORTER --
I can't *imagine* how bad it must be as an airport opponent.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("Steven P. McNicoll" wrote)
But under what Constitutional authority?


My guess ...The Electoral College :-)


Montblack

The way it really works is based on a number of previous rulings by the
Supreme and lower courts. It looks like this.

A. Is spelled out in the US Constitution.
B. Gets Ok'd by the court.
C.
..
..
..
..
..
..
Z. Something that if the founding fathers had thought of they would have
been laughed out of the room.

"Skylune" wrote in message

This forum is a great source of information and, yes!, entertainment for
me in my quest to SAVE THE WORLD from GA.

HAHAHAHAAA!

Here's the deal, troll. You can quest all you want. When GA wants to lure
people toward itself, it gives rides or holds airshows

Until your trolling can equal the thrill of a plane ride or an aerobatic
demonstration, you might as well **** in the ocean.

But keep trying. It's entertaining for us too.
-c

"newsgroups.comcast.net" wrote

If I was there with my daughter, and he started coming at me and my
daughter
with a baton, I would have to consider doing a double tap, and one.
Although
your way was for the best.

Enlighten the group, as to what a "double tap" is, please?
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"newsgroups.comcast.net" wrote

If I was there with my daughter, and he started coming at me and my
daughter
with a baton, I would have to consider doing a double tap, and one.
Although
your way was for the best.

Enlighten the group, as to what a "double tap" is, please?
--
Jim in NC


Double Tap: To fire two rounds in quick succession.

Jay B

Enlighten the group, as to what a "double tap" is, please?

Bijesus and Begorra,
tis obvious that yerself was never a member of the IRA!

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Jay Beckman wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"newsgroups.comcast.net" wrote


If I was there with my daughter, and he started coming at me and my

daughter

with a baton, I would have to consider doing a double tap, and one.

Although

your way was for the best.

Enlighten the group, as to what a "double tap" is, please?
--
Jim in NC



Double Tap: To fire two rounds in quick succession.

.... at the same target.

Matt