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
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
Airport security is a mess and needs reform badly. My point was simply that having it is necessary. Maybe all airports should emulate the kind of security they have at AirVenture Oshkosh. ;-) |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message ... "Dudley Henriques" wrote: Airport security is a mess and needs reform badly. My point was simply that having it is necessary. Maybe all airports should emulate the kind of security they have at AirVenture Oshkosh. ;-) I really miss the "old days". I remember one night at OSH many years ago with Steve Whitman and a whole gang of us sitting around under the wing of my airplane eating hot dogs; drinking cold beer; and telling old war stories. No gates; no cops; no security; only good fellowship and the reflection of happy faces from the fire a few yards down the line in an empty tiedown spot......YES!!!!!!!! There actually WAS an empty tiedown spot!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-)) Dudley Henriques |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
To be fair to the FBO guy, the TSA security training enforces the view
that everyone at the airport should be treated with suspicion. He was probably following what he was told to do. Emily wrote: Kyle Boatright wrote: snip September 11 or not, customer service at flight schools and FBOs has gone down the tubes. I can't tell you the number of times I've been blown off when I go in to rent an airplane. They have no way of knowing WHO I am, and when I walk in and am just handed a rental sheet and brushed off, they might have just lost a potential student. Then there was the guy at one FBO who wouldn't let me back on the ramp to my plane because I didn't have ID. ID was in the purse, in the backseat on the airplane. I'm not sure if they wanted the airplane sitting permanently on their ramp or not. Anyway, I'm not sure anyone even cares about the survival of general aviation. I just hope the airlines survive, or I'm out of a job. Ick. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Gene Seibel" wrote in message oups.com... If you have no security, you don't want a reporter with a camera working on a "lax security at the airport story." THAT is the best reason I can think of yet, for the whole incident. I know that is not what was behind it, though. -- Jim in NC |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
john smith wrote:
In article , Emily wrote: I dunno, last I checked, you weren't required to carry ID in the United States. Still makes me angry. Cannot remember where I have seen it, but, as of sometime ago, post 9/11... if you are flying, you are required by regulation to carry your pilot's certificate and a government issued photo id. I know that. I was talking about pre-now. It was 2000/2001 when I fly four or five trips a week. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
Dudley Henriques wrote:
snip It "ain't" perfect, that's for sure. The best approach is one of quiet cooperation The best approach to unfair legislation and scare tactics is NEVER quiet cooperation. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Emily" wrote in message . .. Dudley Henriques wrote: snip It "ain't" perfect, that's for sure. The best approach is one of quiet cooperation The best approach to unfair legislation and scare tactics is NEVER quiet cooperation. That's true, but this doesn't seem to be what I'm seeing from your posts. What I'm getting from reading you is that you have a problem on the front side with authority. Your first example about the cop "hassling you" states this without question for me anyway. You state up front the following; "I once had a cop come up to me at the observation area and ask why I was taking pictures. I told him that it wasn't illegal and I wasn't under any obligation to explain myself to him." This in my opinion was an unnecessary and overly agressive response to this situation. By your own word, he simply asked you why you were taking pictures. He had every right to do that, and your response, instead of being cooperative and simply telling him what you were doing, was to "educate him" and tell him you weren't obligated in any way to explain anything to him". Then you go on to complain in your next post how "some guy" asked you for ID before letting you on the ramp to access your plane. Personally, I think you have a problem understanding that there are security issues existing in aviation at all, and that even if there are, you don't want to be bothered with them for whatever personal reasons you might have. Personally, I would suggest to you that in the future, as a working commercial pilot, you consider carrying your ID with you when leaving your airplane on the ramp, and be prepared to produce it to authority when and if its requested in the proper manner. All this having been said, I realize you and I are in complete disagreement on this issue so I'll let you take whatever shot you like at me and simply move on. :-)) Dudley Henriques |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
Dudley Henriques wrote:
"Emily" wrote in message . .. Dudley Henriques wrote: snip Then you go on to complain in your next post how "some guy" asked you for ID before letting you on the ramp to access your plane. Right. That was a quick trip to Indy Metro to drop off something for a friend. This was before the pilot ID requirement and I wasn't planning on driving anywhere once I got to the airport. I simply had NO photo ID with me and my airman certs were in the plane. So what was I supposed to do? The FBO wasn't letting me back on the ramp (even though they'd seen me walk inside) and since it was a rental, I couldn't just leave the plane there. Do YOU not see the problem with that? and that even if there are, you don't want to be bothered with them for whatever personal reasons you might have. Basically, yes. And I don't let myself be bothered by it. Personally, I would suggest to you that in the future, as a working commercial pilot, you consider carrying your ID with you when leaving your airplane on the ramp, and be prepared to produce it to authority when and if its requested in the proper manner. I'm not a working commercial pilot. I work in the industry, but not flying. I think you've misunderstood much of what I'm saying. When the cop stopped me for taking photos, I wasn't in a restricted area but a public observation area. I wasn't requested to produce ID (not that I had any with me) I was asked why I was taking pictures. I am under NO requirement to explain myself. All this having been said, I realize you and I are in complete disagreement on this issue so I'll let you take whatever shot you like at me and simply move on. Who says I'm taking shots at you? I don't reply to PEOPLE on a newsgroup, I reply to posts. Yes, I have problems with authority that shouldn't be authority in the first place. Rolling over and taking it is what gets people in trouble and I think a lot of people need to start learning from history. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"Emily" wrote: The best approach to unfair legislation and scare tactics is NEVER quiet cooperation. You state up front the following; "I once had a cop come up to me at the observation area and ask why I was taking pictures. I told him that it wasn't illegal and I wasn't under any obligation to explain myself to him." This in my opinion was an unnecessary and overly agressive response to this situation. When you consider the location (an observation area), that it was a white woman, and the question itself, most people would realize the cop was using the question as a mechanism of intimidation. Under the circumstances the cop was clearly being overly aggressive himself and Emily's response seems to have been proportionate. In my humble opinion of course. By your own word, he simply asked you why you were taking pictures. He had every right to do that, Personally, I like to avoid arguments with people carrying side-arms. :-) That said, just because someone has a right to say something doesn't make it a good idea. Cops probably expect 1 out every N people will fail to be intimidated by deliberately intimidating questions, but so long as N stays large, they'll keep using them. As N drops toward 1, they generally stop using that tactic. Being a policeman is sometimes a thankless and dirty job, despite being a large value to maintaining a civil society. So there is no reason cops should be using tools that are actually uncivil toward the innocent and fundamentally don't accomplish anything of value toward making our society civil. (I obviously have no problem with people who have an anti-authority streak. But I suppose that can sometimes make for a less-than civil society. I guess I just can't win! :-) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Why GA is Dying
"Emily" wrote in message . .. I'm not a working commercial pilot. I work in the industry, but not flying. I think you've misunderstood much of what I'm saying. When the cop stopped me for taking photos, I wasn't in a restricted area but a public observation area. I wasn't requested to produce ID (not that I had any with me) I was asked why I was taking pictures. I am under NO requirement to explain myself. No, I think I understood you perfectly. In fact, you are confirming it with this post. What you are saying is absolutely clear. You have every right of course to approach these issues as you see fit, but what I'm seeing is that because you were approached by a "cop" in a public observation area instead of a restricted area and asked why you were taking pictures, your immediate response to this instead of answering the question was to instantly revert to your conception of your "rights" instead of simply cooperating with the request. Even here, in this post, you feel the need to CAPITALIZE the word "NO" in the sentence stating "I am under NO requirement to explain myself" which is a clear indication to me at least,that your prime concern during this incident and indeed even before the incident occurred, wasn't airport security at all but the fact that you felt you were being "hassled" by this security person because of your "understanding" concerning an imagined difference between a public and a restricted area on an airport and how that difference affects security issues. Let me advise you right here and now that when it comes to a duly appointed security officer acting in that capacity anywhere on airport property, asking you why you are taking pictures on the airport, it doesn't matter where you are on that airport. That security officer has every right to approach you in a reasonable manner and ask you to explain what you are doing. At the point you are approached in this reasonable manner, it is incumbent on you to supply a reasonable answer to that security officer. Aside from the legalities involved, doing this, rather than doing what you did, is not only the right response for a person concerned with airport security, but the prudent response as well. As I said, from what I have read of your posting here, you and I are natural adversaries, at least from my point of view anyway :-)). I simply think your attitude is totally out of line on this issue. This is of course no big deal at all . Happens all the time on Usenet. Some people are just better off avoiding each other :-)) Hey......all the very best to you. Dudley Henriques |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
God Honest | Naval Aviation | 2 | July 24th 03 04:45 AM |