Greg Farris
May 25th 05, 08:38 AM
In article >,
says...
>1) Were any of these planes (in the past two weeks) close enough
>to be considered dangerous enough to shoot down?
>
Of the hundreds of planes that have illegally penetrated the ADIZ since
its creation, none have presented any danger whatsoever. But this is
only known with hindsight, and any of them "could" have presented a
danger at the time. Pilots emphasize the small load-carrying capacity of
a plane like the C-152 that caused the recent controversy, and most feel
that real terrorists would not choose an instrument of such poor
utility. But this is not guaranteed either. The FAA and the homeland
security take the restriction very seriously, and a vast majority of
pilots feel it is their responsibility to do so as well.
>2) Should the instructor of the 1st incident lose his license
>forever?
>
You should read at least a part of the extensive threads on the subject
posted here. You would learn that most private pilots favor certificate
action against this pilot - who is not an instructor - because his
actions do not represent, but denigrate the reputation that most of us
are working hard to defend. The severity of actions appropriate is a
matter of widely differing opinions - this is usenet, and all opinions
may be expressed. Personally, I feel a permanent revocation is severe -
but many here, perhaps most, feel it is appropriate.
>3) If one of these planes were shot down, in the past two weeks,
>would the Democrats go crazy and accuse Bush of being a maniac?
>
One does not have to be a Democrat to feel consternation about the
government killing US citizens who are not knowingly or intentionally
involved in a crime or willfully presenting any danger to others.
Nevertheless, the possibility is clearly expressed - all pilots know
about it, and if this threat is not enough to incite one to look
carefully at a map, then I think there's a limit to the amount of pity
that others will feel for him. Regret, yes. But it would be hard to make
a crusading cause in favor of someone who cannot look at a map even to
save his own life.
G Faris
PS You have cross-posted to several groups, of different nature. The
tenor of your inquiry suggests you are not following all of these
groups. A more constructive use of the usenet medium would be to limit
your posts to the groups you follow, and to consider the contributions
of others. I have limited my rejoinder to one group - will you see it?
says...
>1) Were any of these planes (in the past two weeks) close enough
>to be considered dangerous enough to shoot down?
>
Of the hundreds of planes that have illegally penetrated the ADIZ since
its creation, none have presented any danger whatsoever. But this is
only known with hindsight, and any of them "could" have presented a
danger at the time. Pilots emphasize the small load-carrying capacity of
a plane like the C-152 that caused the recent controversy, and most feel
that real terrorists would not choose an instrument of such poor
utility. But this is not guaranteed either. The FAA and the homeland
security take the restriction very seriously, and a vast majority of
pilots feel it is their responsibility to do so as well.
>2) Should the instructor of the 1st incident lose his license
>forever?
>
You should read at least a part of the extensive threads on the subject
posted here. You would learn that most private pilots favor certificate
action against this pilot - who is not an instructor - because his
actions do not represent, but denigrate the reputation that most of us
are working hard to defend. The severity of actions appropriate is a
matter of widely differing opinions - this is usenet, and all opinions
may be expressed. Personally, I feel a permanent revocation is severe -
but many here, perhaps most, feel it is appropriate.
>3) If one of these planes were shot down, in the past two weeks,
>would the Democrats go crazy and accuse Bush of being a maniac?
>
One does not have to be a Democrat to feel consternation about the
government killing US citizens who are not knowingly or intentionally
involved in a crime or willfully presenting any danger to others.
Nevertheless, the possibility is clearly expressed - all pilots know
about it, and if this threat is not enough to incite one to look
carefully at a map, then I think there's a limit to the amount of pity
that others will feel for him. Regret, yes. But it would be hard to make
a crusading cause in favor of someone who cannot look at a map even to
save his own life.
G Faris
PS You have cross-posted to several groups, of different nature. The
tenor of your inquiry suggests you are not following all of these
groups. A more constructive use of the usenet medium would be to limit
your posts to the groups you follow, and to consider the contributions
of others. I have limited my rejoinder to one group - will you see it?