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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Very well said,
Sometimes we only see the part of history we chose to see. Lincoln had the entire Maryland State Legislature arrested and never charged with a crime....just to keep them from voting for or against secession. Numerous newspaper owner/editors were arrested because they expressed the thought that the Constitution allowed for secession..as a few northestern states had threathened many a time. I didn't agree with Lincoln throwing the Constitution out of the window then, and I don't agree with doing it now either. Lincoln started a very bad trend of the Federal Government having all of the power,...and to this day we are at the mercy of the Federal Government. I'm pretty sure the founding fathers have been disgusted at us since 1861 . We really would not need a Patriot Act, if the Federals would do there number one job...protect the borders of this country. I will be the first to admit during times of war, extra measures have to be taken....but I have not seen a Declaration of War since Dec. 1941. Patrick student SPL aircraft structural mech "Alan" wrote in message ... I'm kind of tired of the Nazi card being continuously played by those who disagree with the Patriot Act, George Bush and the government in general. Read your history, what we have in the here and now in this country bears no resemblance to Nazi Germany. Or, for Wilsonian America from 1917-1919 during WWI. This Democrat President implemented draconian policies and curbs on speech and liberty that went far beyond anything the current Republican administration is doing. Prison sentences of over 10 years were handed out for publicly opposing the US entry into the war. Not just the USA but the history of the human race has a record of over-responding to threats or danger. Another Democrat put American citizens of Japanese descent into concentration camps. The Chinese kind of over did it on a wall. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus among other things. Even the human body's immune system over reacts when faced with invaders. I'm not worried about school children crossing a line in a playground and getting arrested for sedition. I'm more concerned about clue-less pilots who either operate in a vacuum or are two stupid/arrogant to check the airspace and plan accordingly. That kind of behavior will trigger an over reaction to general aviation that affects us all. So stop telling me we have become Nazi Germany and that Bush is Hitler. It does a real disservice to the millions who perished opposing the real thing. Alan Bloom Dogs can Fly. http://www.flyingmutts.com |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
1. There are terrorist groups that wish to carry out attacks in the
domestic US. You sure? How high a risk is that, exactly? How high to be worth how much of a restriction of constitutional freedom? 2. Government buildings in DC are likely to be preferred targets of such attacks. It happened once. Once. 3. Light aircraft are a possible means of delivering a weapon of some kind. Many other things are more possible means. Way more. Yet they are totally unrestricted. In the end, it comes down to weighing the desire for security against the amount of freedom you restrict. Do you really think the current restrictions on GA flying around DC do much to reduce the risk? With airliners flying out of Reagan? With trucks going through the city? Or is the more likely theory that GA pilots are a group so small that politicians can easily restrict their freedom without too much resistance while appearing to do something really effective in the eye of the public, even it doesn't do much? EFFECTIVE reductions of terror attack risk in the DC area would look WAY different than this. And Joe Dumb Voter would feel them every day of his life. And that's exactly why they aren't done. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Christopher,
I think the Secret Service showed considerable restraint. Because the "collateral damage" of shooting the plane down would have been way higher than any damage inflicted by the plane itself. Simple as that. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
1. There are terrorist groups that wish to carry out attacks in the
domestic US. 2. Government buildings in DC are likely to be preferred targets of such attacks. 3. Light aircraft are a possible means of delivering a weapon of some kind. Which of these three propositions would you disagree with? I don't disagree with any of them. I disagree that they are significant statements, and that they form the basis for a "good, clear, and well defined" reason for the giant restricted area over DC. To put it in perspective, suppose all the highways into and out of DC were blockaded, and one needed prior authorization to enter or leave the DC area - perhaps mediated by EZ-Pass and a RFID tag on driver licenses (actually, not very farfetched at all). Since rental vans were used for prior attacks, they are allowed to travel freely (so long as they belong to one of the larger rental companies). However, every subcompact car is suspect, since it can carry a bomb in the trunk. The restrictions are set up for very clear, well defined reasons, and every driver knows it. 1. There are terrorist groups that wish to carry out attacks in the domestic US. 2. Government buildings in DC are likely to be preferred targets of such attacks. 3. Small cars are a possible means of delivering a weapon of some kind. Which of these three propositions would you disagree with? Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Marco Leon" mmleon(at)yahoo.com wrote:
Well, he's still flying and was flying within a week after this happened. Unless someone knows something specific my anecdotal evidence shows that a front-page news grabber screw-up does not guarantee certificate action. I'm glad that the news coverage will have no impact on the penalty; why should it? But the TSA has been mandating 30 day suspensions for ADIZ violations. Even if the FAA wanted to resist this (not that there's any reason to do so), they can do nothing for the TSA but ask "how far over do you want me to bend?" The one wildcard in this is the NASA form. But I'm sure that issue already arisen, as *some* previous ADIZ violators must have completed one. I just don't know the outcome. In the case of the NYC tourist, he "only" violated class B airspace. That's a dramatically different thing from violating the useless ADIZ, at least in the minds of those hunkering down. I *am* surprised that he was flying again w/in a week, but I've no idea what other circumstances surrounded that. Perhaps he NASA-formed his way out. Perhaps he was given a remedial checkride instead of a suspension? I simply don't know. - Andrew |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On 13 May 2005 04:18:29 -0700, "Denny" wrote:
Now they are willing to kill people who get lost and cross invisible lines in the sky so that the powerful and the politically connected can feel safe... Will they next start shooting our children because they ride their bikes across an invisible line on the ground? The Patriot Act, is not... denny But yet we have very visible lines at our borders where people are crossing them everyday in droves but we cant seem to stop them. Scott D To email remove spamcatcher's |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
W P Dixon wrote:
We really would not need a Patriot Act, if the Federals would do there number one job...protect the borders of this country. That's not quite correct. Have you an alarm in your home or office? Does it include interior sensors (ie. motion or IR detectors) or just periphery detectors? Odds are you've both. And there's good reason: layered security is an improvement. That said, the entire Patriot act isn't about security. The new driver license rules being pushed by the TSA are about security. Compare the two, and you'll see a significant difference. Further, interior security must always be balanced against the use of the interior. Someone with large pets, for example, cannot use most motion or IR detectors. While the person could simply get rid of the pets, that's a price at least some are unwilling to pay. Similarly, we could easily achieve perfect internal security in this country. At what price, however? - Andrew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Close call with engine failure in IMC | G. Sylvester | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | March 16th 05 05:57 AM |
Comming close | Tony | Owning | 17 | May 18th 04 06:22 AM |
RAF Boulmer (England) to close | Peter Ure | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 29th 04 05:02 AM |
D.A.: Pilot flew close to airliner | John R | Piloting | 8 | February 3rd 04 11:03 AM |
Veteran fighter pilots try to help close training gap | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 2nd 03 10:09 PM |