More evidence of weak security at GA airports

[Skylune]

From AV Web:
"Seneca Stripped While Parked

By Russ Niles
Newswriter, Editor

A Cedar Falls, Iowa, man who local media reports say is an officer of his
local EAA chapter has been charged with systematically stripping parts from
a disabled Piper Seneca to be used in his own homebuilt project. John M.
Norcero was arrested last Tuesday and charged with first-degree theft. The
Seneca, owned by Jerry Dwyer, of Clear Lake, has been sitting at the
Waterloo Airport since it landed there after an engine failure about five
years ago. Dwyer told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier he noticed an
engine and prop missing in August of 2004. Now, both engines, the landing
gear, instrument panel, autopilot and seats are gone. "It's just sitting
there on the ground ... flat on its belly," Dwyer said. Dwyer, who owns an
aircraft sales company, said he left the plane in Waterloo because he was
having a hard time finding a replacement engine. Even with the blown
engine, he estimated the plane to be worth $100,000 and he figures it will
cost at least $50,000 to reinstall the missing parts and fix damage caused
during their removal. "[The thief] chopped a hole in the side of the damn
thing to get the autopilot out," he said. Norcero was booked at the local
jail and then set free on a pre-trial release a few hours later."

At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really apalling.
Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the tanks
down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.

It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law or
common courtesy.

[sfb]

If the thief had a legal right to be inside the fence, then you are
leaping to a false conclusion that this incident is evidence of weak
security at GA airports.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> From AV Web:
> "Seneca Stripped While Parked
>
> By Russ Niles
> Newswriter, Editor
>
> A Cedar Falls, Iowa, man who local media reports say is an officer of
> his
> local EAA chapter has been charged with systematically stripping parts
> from
> a disabled Piper Seneca to be used in his own homebuilt project. John
> M.
> Norcero was arrested last Tuesday and charged with first-degree theft.
> The
> Seneca, owned by Jerry Dwyer, of Clear Lake, has been sitting at the
> Waterloo Airport since it landed there after an engine failure about
> five
> years ago. Dwyer told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier he noticed an
> engine and prop missing in August of 2004. Now, both engines, the
> landing
> gear, instrument panel, autopilot and seats are gone. "It's just
> sitting
> there on the ground ... flat on its belly," Dwyer said. Dwyer, who
> owns an
> aircraft sales company, said he left the plane in Waterloo because he
> was
> having a hard time finding a replacement engine. Even with the blown
> engine, he estimated the plane to be worth $100,000 and he figures it
> will
> cost at least $50,000 to reinstall the missing parts and fix damage
> caused
> during their removal. "[The thief] chopped a hole in the side of the
> damn
> thing to get the autopilot out," he said. Norcero was booked at the
> local
> jail and then set free on a pre-trial release a few hours later."
>
> At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
> happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really
> apalling.
> Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
> abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the
> tanks
> down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.
>
> It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
> INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law
> or
> common courtesy.
>
>

[Newps]

Having a hard time finding an engine? Lamest excuse ever. What do you
expect is going to happen if you leave something valuable unattended for
five years?



Skylune wrote:

> From AV Web:
> "Seneca Stripped While Parked
>
> By Russ Niles
> Newswriter, Editor
>
> A Cedar Falls, Iowa, man who local media reports say is an officer of his
> local EAA chapter has been charged with systematically stripping parts from
> a disabled Piper Seneca to be used in his own homebuilt project. John M.
> Norcero was arrested last Tuesday and charged with first-degree theft. The
> Seneca, owned by Jerry Dwyer, of Clear Lake, has been sitting at the
> Waterloo Airport since it landed there after an engine failure about five
> years ago. Dwyer told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier he noticed an
> engine and prop missing in August of 2004. Now, both engines, the landing
> gear, instrument panel, autopilot and seats are gone. "It's just sitting
> there on the ground ... flat on its belly," Dwyer said. Dwyer, who owns an
> aircraft sales company, said he left the plane in Waterloo because he was
> having a hard time finding a replacement engine. Even with the blown
> engine, he estimated the plane to be worth $100,000 and he figures it will
> cost at least $50,000 to reinstall the missing parts and fix damage caused
> during their removal. "[The thief] chopped a hole in the side of the damn
> thing to get the autopilot out," he said. Norcero was booked at the local
> jail and then set free on a pre-trial release a few hours later."
>
> At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
> happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really apalling.
> Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
> abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the tanks
> down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.
>
> It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
> INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law or
> common courtesy.
>
>

[Skylune]

Newps:
"Having a hard time finding an engine? Lamest excuse ever. What do you
expect is going to happen if you leave something valuable unattended for
five years?"

Well, I guess calling a disabled plane parked at an airport while awaiting
parts "unattended." Of course, I would take that to indicate there is
insufficient security, even though the EAA member/thief obviously had
acess to the facility. How in the heck can you steal an airplane engine
with no one noticing a thing??? And then cutting a hole in the fuelage to
steal the autopilot? This must have taken some time, and no one noticed???

[sfb]

If the guy kept his mouth shut and regularly worked on planes, nobody
would have been suspicious.

My money is on him bragging to somebody who blew the whistle.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>
> Newps:
> "Having a hard time finding an engine? Lamest excuse ever. What do
> you
> expect is going to happen if you leave something valuable unattended
> for
> five years?"
>
> Well, I guess calling a disabled plane parked at an airport while
> awaiting
> parts "unattended." Of course, I would take that to indicate there is
> insufficient security, even though the EAA member/thief obviously had
> acess to the facility. How in the heck can you steal an airplane
> engine
> with no one noticing a thing??? And then cutting a hole in the
> fuelage to
> steal the autopilot? This must have taken some time, and no one
> noticed???
>
>
>
>
>

[Steve Foley]

Hmmm... Northwest flies our of Waterloo, so I guess that makes it an air
carrier airport, not a GA airport.

That makes it the realm of the TSA, doesn't it?

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> From AV Web:
> "Seneca Stripped While Parked

[Bill]

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:08:16 -0500, "Skylune"
> wrote:

>
>Newps:
>"Having a hard time finding an engine? Lamest excuse ever. What do you
>expect is going to happen if you leave something valuable unattended for
>five years?"
>
>Well, I guess calling a disabled plane parked at an airport while awaiting
>parts "unattended." Of course, I would take that to indicate there is
>insufficient security, even though the EAA member/thief obviously had
>acess to the facility. How in the heck can you steal an airplane engine
>with no one noticing a thing??? And then cutting a hole in the fuelage to
>steal the autopilot? This must have taken some time, and no one noticed???
>
>
>
>

Oh come on! If you park your car in your driveway, and someone breaks
into it and takes the radio, does that mean you have insufficient
security? I suppose if your standard for "sufficient" means that
nothing undesirable EVER happens, then yes, that's insufficient.

If, on the other hand, a case like this tends to make the news, then
that in itself might just point out that IT'S THE EXCEPTION!

Sheesh, how many cars were broken into last night? Stolen for
joyrides? How many homes? And is that making the headlines?

The reason this story is getting the coverage it is getting is because
it is an anomaly.

So perhaps what you can take from this is that GA security is so good
that when something like this actually happens it's so out of the
ordinary that it makes headlines. Yeah, sounds good to me.

Besides GA security just needs to be good enough for the airplane
owners at the airport to bo okay with it. What more is required?

Bill Strahan
------------
Find a new reason to fly
www.adventurepilot.com

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Darkwing]

"Bill" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:08:16 -0500, "Skylune"
> > wrote:
>
> Sheesh, how many cars were broken into last night? Stolen for
> joyrides? How many homes? And is that making the headlines?


Ever seen COPS?

---------------------------------------------
DW

[Skylune]

Steve Foley:
"Hmmm... Northwest flies our of Waterloo, so I guess that makes it an air
carrier airport, not a GA airport.

That makes it the realm of the TSA, doesn't it?"

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> From AV Web:
> "Seneca Stripped While Parked


I think that TSA just does passenger screening, etc. for the commercial
fliers, and the airport itself provides site security. So, at this
combined commercial/GA airport, I still think that security is
questionable.

[Sylvain]

Skylune wrote:
> I think that TSA just does passenger screening, etc. for the commercial
> fliers, and the airport itself provides site security. So, at this
> combined commercial/GA airport, I still think that security is
> questionable.

if I understand the story correctly, it was a guy that had
a legitimate reason to be there, i.e., an 'insider job'
so to speak; regardless of the setup, I mean airport,
commercial building, bank, gvt, even the White House it
seems, there isn't much you can do against someone already
in going bad...

--Sylvain

[Bill]

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:55:10 -0500, "Darkwing"
<theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Bill" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:08:16 -0500, "Skylune"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> Sheesh, how many cars were broken into last night? Stolen for
>> joyrides? How many homes? And is that making the headlines?
>
>
>Ever seen COPS?
>
>---------------------------------------------
>DW
>

Yes. And your point is?

Bill Strahan
------------
Find a new reason to fly
www.adventurepilot.com

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[John T]

Bill wrote:
>
> Besides GA security just needs to be good enough for the airplane
> owners at the airport to bo okay with it. What more is required?

For you, me and the pilots at the airport, that statement makes sense.
However, to those opposed to the airport or aviation, it is simply fuel for
their arguments.

"See? *ANY*body can steal a plane from Bupkiss Airport and use it for
terrorism!"

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[tom418]

Since when does someone need an "excuse" to leave something of value
unattended?
"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> Having a hard time finding an engine? Lamest excuse ever. What do you
> expect is going to happen if you leave something valuable unattended for
> five years?
>
>
>
> Skylune wrote:
>
> > From AV Web:
> > "Seneca Stripped While Parked
> >
> > By Russ Niles
> > Newswriter, Editor
> >
> > A Cedar Falls, Iowa, man who local media reports say is an officer of
his
> > local EAA chapter has been charged with systematically stripping parts
from
> > a disabled Piper Seneca to be used in his own homebuilt project. John M.
> > Norcero was arrested last Tuesday and charged with first-degree theft.
The
> > Seneca, owned by Jerry Dwyer, of Clear Lake, has been sitting at the
> > Waterloo Airport since it landed there after an engine failure about
five
> > years ago. Dwyer told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier he noticed an
> > engine and prop missing in August of 2004. Now, both engines, the
landing
> > gear, instrument panel, autopilot and seats are gone. "It's just sitting
> > there on the ground ... flat on its belly," Dwyer said. Dwyer, who owns
an
> > aircraft sales company, said he left the plane in Waterloo because he
was
> > having a hard time finding a replacement engine. Even with the blown
> > engine, he estimated the plane to be worth $100,000 and he figures it
will
> > cost at least $50,000 to reinstall the missing parts and fix damage
caused
> > during their removal. "[The thief] chopped a hole in the side of the
damn
> > thing to get the autopilot out," he said. Norcero was booked at the
local
> > jail and then set free on a pre-trial release a few hours later."
> >
> > At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
> > happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really apalling.
> > Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
> > abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the
tanks
> > down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.
> >
> > It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
> > INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law or
> > common courtesy.
> >
> >

[Bill]

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 17:13:28 -0500, "John T" > wrote:

>Bill wrote:
>>
>> Besides GA security just needs to be good enough for the airplane
>> owners at the airport to bo okay with it. What more is required?
>
>For you, me and the pilots at the airport, that statement makes sense.
>However, to those opposed to the airport or aviation, it is simply fuel for
>their arguments.
>
>"See? *ANY*body can steal a plane from Bupkiss Airport and use it for
>terrorism!"

And that's what we need to start addressing.

My standard response these days is

"Yeah, and they can steal radio control planes as well. And paper
planes. But the reason they stole big, giant, super-humongous,
freaking enormous airplanes is so they could use the fuel (the
majority of the energy by far!) to do damage. So I suppose they could
steal my plane and commit terrorism with it, but they'd be more
effective buidling a catapult that threw a 55 gallon drum of gasoline,
and that doesn't even require pilot training!"

"If the terrorists start using private planes for attacks on our
country, then we're on the downhill side of the war on terror because
they've all become morons."



Bill Strahan
------------
Find a new reason to fly
www.adventurepilot.com

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Steve Foley]

That's not what your subject line claims.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> So, at this combined commercial/GA airport, I still think that security is
questionable.

[Brian]

I agree let see if I remember correctly a couple Terrist Acts committed
with GA aircraft, The Head lines I remember are:

1. Man Crashes airplane into White house Pilot killed, Wakes up those
sleeping inside..

2. Kid steals airplane crashes into skyscraper, Pilot killed, Windows
Broken.

I am sure we can find some more if we look...

GA has a great track record for Terrist attacks:), Face It Ga Security
is just to make the Public Feel safer, it does very little to actually
make them safer. They were not in danger to begin with.

Brian

[Blanche]

Skylune > wrote:
[snip]
>At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
>happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really apalling.
>Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
>abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the tanks
>down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.
>
>It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
>INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law or
>common courtesy.

So, is this really any different than car stripping? It's based on
volume. So many cars get stripped that it's no longer news nor of
interest to anyone other than the victim.

As for lack of security -- if your car is not in a locked garage,
guess what? Same thing can happen as what happened to the airplane.

[BTIZ]

how many times have you been on the airport and saw someone working on an
airplane.
1) you don't know who owns the airplane (it landed from out of town)
2) you don't know the mechanic (the out of town owner shipped him in)

and you don't approach the individual to ask what is going on
for all most people knew, the owner had decided to scrap the Seneca and was
selling it for parts

BT

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> From AV Web:
> "Seneca Stripped While Parked
>
> By Russ Niles
> Newswriter, Editor
>
> A Cedar Falls, Iowa, man who local media reports say is an officer of his
> local EAA chapter has been charged with systematically stripping parts
> from
> a disabled Piper Seneca to be used in his own homebuilt project. John M.
> Norcero was arrested last Tuesday and charged with first-degree theft. The
> Seneca, owned by Jerry Dwyer, of Clear Lake, has been sitting at the
> Waterloo Airport since it landed there after an engine failure about five
> years ago. Dwyer told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier he noticed an
> engine and prop missing in August of 2004. Now, both engines, the landing
> gear, instrument panel, autopilot and seats are gone. "It's just sitting
> there on the ground ... flat on its belly," Dwyer said. Dwyer, who owns an
> aircraft sales company, said he left the plane in Waterloo because he was
> having a hard time finding a replacement engine. Even with the blown
> engine, he estimated the plane to be worth $100,000 and he figures it will
> cost at least $50,000 to reinstall the missing parts and fix damage caused
> during their removal. "[The thief] chopped a hole in the side of the damn
> thing to get the autopilot out," he said. Norcero was booked at the local
> jail and then set free on a pre-trial release a few hours later."
>
> At least they caught the thief/pilot. How can this type of stuff keep
> happening? The lack of security at most GA airports is really apalling.
> Its pilots like the above mentioned clown, the morons who ignore noise
> abatement, who (attempt) to take off from freeways after running the tanks
> down to fumes, etc. that are gonna ruin it.
>
> It really is amazing. Mostly all of the bad press GA gets is SELF
> INFLICTED by the few cowboys who refuse to abide by any rules of law or
> common courtesy.
>
>

[George Patterson]

Brian wrote:

> GA has a great track record for Terrist attacks:), Face It Ga Security
> is just to make the Public Feel safer, it does very little to actually
> make them safer. They were not in danger to begin with.

First off, it's "terrorist". More importantly, there have been numerous
accidents over the years that have killed people on the ground; sometimes quite
a few. Although that doesn't hold a candle to what you can accomplish with a
loaded airliner and a skyscraper during business hours, it's not a non-issue either.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[beavis]

In article <lJA9f.10331$UW5.2381@trndny09>, George Patterson
> wrote:

> > GA has a great track record for Terrist attacks

> First off, it's "terrorist".

If you're going to correct his grammar, you might want to check your
punctuation first.

[George Patterson]

beavis wrote:

> If you're going to correct his grammar, you might want to check your
> punctuation first.

Insert as desired .,"';:?

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[sfb]

If #2 was in Tampa, wasn't the kid was working around the FBO for
lessons?

"Brian" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I agree let see if I remember correctly a couple Terrist Acts committed
> with GA aircraft, The Head lines I remember are:
>
> 1. Man Crashes airplane into White house Pilot killed, Wakes up those
> sleeping inside..
>
> 2. Kid steals airplane crashes into skyscraper, Pilot killed, Windows
> Broken.
>
> I am sure we can find some more if we look...
>
> GA has a great track record for Terrist attacks:), Face It Ga Security
> is just to make the Public Feel safer, it does very little to actually
> make them safer. They were not in danger to begin with.
>
> Brian
>

[cjcampbell]

If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?

[beavis]

In article <k%A9f.2176$HQ5.1045@trndny06>, George Patterson
> wrote:

> beavis wrote:
>
> > If you're going to correct his grammar, you might want to check your
> > punctuation first.
>
> Insert as desired .,"';:?

The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.

Correcting another poster's spelling and grammar is a slippery slope.
Yours better be perfect. :-)

[Jose]

> The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.

That's stylistic more than grammatic. It is in fact logically incorrect
in this instance, where the quoted part is not itself a sentence; the
period is put (by some publishers) inside for looks primarily.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[George Patterson]

beavis wrote:
> In article <k%A9f.2176$HQ5.1045@trndny06>, George Patterson
> > wrote:

>>Insert as desired .,"';:?
>
> The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.

I'm aware of that. I was quoting Mark Twain, who issued that reply to a
publisher who complained about his punctuation.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[beavis]

In article >, Jose
> wrote:

> > The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.
>
> That's stylistic more than grammatic. It is in fact logically incorrect
> in this instance, where the quoted part is not itself a sentence; the
> period is put (by some publishers) inside for looks primarily.

If you're discussing American English, you're incorrect. In England,
you're correct. But since the original poster and I are both posting
from the United States, that's the frame of reference I'm using. And
in the U.S., that's how it's done -- it isn't simply "for looks," as
you suggest.

Here's one of many references that concur:
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp


Feel free to point me at any that disagree. :-)

[beavis]

In article <byB9f.10458$bD.5276@trndny01>, George Patterson
> wrote:

> I'm aware of that. I was quoting Mark Twain, who issued that reply to a
> publisher who complained about his punctuation.

Touché. :-)

[Gary Drescher]

"beavis" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Jose
> > wrote:
>
>> > The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.
>>
>> That's stylistic more than grammatic. It is in fact logically incorrect
>> in this instance, where the quoted part is not itself a sentence; the
>> period is put (by some publishers) inside for looks primarily.
>
> If you're discussing American English, you're incorrect. In England,
> you're correct.

The Chicago Manual of Style, widely regarded as the definitive reference for
standard written American English, refers to a "traditional style" which is
as you describe, and an "alternative system" in which (more logically) the
period goes outside the closing quote. Although the CMS mentions that the
alternative system "is sometimes called the British style", it makes no
assertion that the alternative system is incorrect for American English.

--Gary

[Steve Foley]

Skylune would simply close the airports and crush all the planes.

"cjcampbell" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?
>

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article . com>,
cjcampbell > wrote:
>If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?
>
Based on your preposition, he couldn't have.

yours,
Michael

--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/wwap/

[gatt]

"Jose" > wrote in message news:xvB9f.4312

>> The period goes inside the quotation marks. That was my point.
>
> That's stylistic more than grammatic. It is in fact logically incorrect
> in this instance, where the quoted part is not itself a sentence; the
> period is put (by some publishers) inside for looks primarily.

Trivia: The period is put inside the quotation marks because in the old
mechanical printing presses, the metal type piece for a period was almost
half as thin (but still as tall) as the double-quote ["]. At the end of
paragraphs, the [.] would generally be the last type piece, but it was very
fragile. If there was any slop in the machine, the type piece could wiggle
or lean out of alignment and break off. For that reason, typesetters
preferred to tuck he period inside the thicker doublequote metal type piece,
and that practice filtered up to publishers and editors until it became
standard convention.

So it goes. Editors still generally tuck he period inside the doublequote
because it has become familiar to the eye.

-Chris
PP/ASEL/IA

[Gary Drescher]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
> Trivia: The period is put inside the quotation marks because in the old
> mechanical printing presses, the metal type piece for a period was almost
> half as thin (but still as tall) as the double-quote ["]. At the end of
> paragraphs, the [.] would generally be the last type piece, but it was
> very fragile. If there was any slop in the machine, the type piece could
> wiggle or lean out of alignment and break off. For that reason,
> typesetters preferred to tuck he period inside the thicker doublequote
> metal type piece, and that practice filtered up to publishers and editors
> until it became standard convention.

Hm, that story sounds suspiciously apocryphal. Do you have a source for it?

The vast majority of paragraphs end with a period and no quote, so the trick
you describe would seldom be available. Moreover, if the slimness of the
period type piece were really a problem at the end of a paragraph, the
obvious solution would just be to use a wider piece there that includes a
space after the period, or to place a separate space piece after the period
piece.

--Gary

[Montblack]

("Gary Drescher" wrote)
> The vast majority of paragraphs end with a period and no quote, so the
> trick you describe would seldom be available. Moreover, if the slimness of
> the period type piece were really a problem at the end of a paragraph, the
> obvious solution would just be to use a wider piece there that includes a
> space after the period, or to place a separate space piece after the
> period piece.


7th grade Shop class in 1972 - Typesetting. One of my favorite shop
projects.


kcalbtnoM

[Skylune]

by "Brian" > Oct 31, 2005 at 04:09 PM


I agree let see if I remember correctly a couple Terrist Acts committed
with GA aircraft, The Head lines I remember are:

1. Man Crashes airplane into White house Pilot killed, Wakes up those
sleeping inside..

2. Kid steals airplane crashes into skyscraper, Pilot killed, Windows
Broken.

I am sure we can find some more if we look...

GA has a great track record for Terrist attacks:), Face It Ga Security
is just to make the Public Feel safer, it does very little to actually
make them safer. They were not in danger to begin with.

Brian"

Very good. We should wait until a terrorist seizes an "unattended" GA
light jet at an airport and does destruction before improving security at
the airports. Great.

[Skylune]

Well, the only problem is: a car is not an airplane. (At least not yet.)

You seem to be proposing identical security measures for all modes of
transportation? Ok. Then why do airports even need fences?

[Skylune]

by "Steve Foley" > Nov 1, 2005 at 01:15 PM


Skylune would simply close the airports and crush all the planes.

"cjcampbell" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?
>

For starters, I would hire baton-wielding security guards from the local
mall to check IDs and beat the hell out of trespassers or thieves. Such a
guard could have asked the pilot/thief for a registration to prove
ownership of the plane he was tearing down (or proof that he was
performing authorized repairs).

(I would of course demand that the FAA fund these security agents from
general taxpayer funds because of the vital economic benefits of GA to the
entire nation.)

Then, I would empower the security guards to take all reasonable measures
to enforce noise abatement procedures, in close contact with tower
personnel of course, so that only pilots that have unmistakenly been
identified as violators would be beaten.

Since most everyone obeys the rules, I would expect very few beatings to
occur.

[George Patterson]

Skylune wrote:

> Then why do airports even need fences?

To keep livestock and wildlife off the runway.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Skylune]

Oh. That makes sense. Like the electified gate to keep moose off the
runway at an AK airport.

Maybe opening up the areas surrounding the airport to hunting could help
here? The surrounding residents would benefit in several ways. First,
the rifle blasts would blend in with the whine of the engines/props, thus
reducing any noise complaints. Second, the presence of armed citizens
roaming around the periphery of the airport would discourage would-be
terrorists, thereby lessening the airport's security funding needs. Of
course NOTAMs would need to be issued by airports proposing peripheral
hunting, and the hunters would need to be instructed to voluntarily aim
low, in the event of poor aim.

[Steve Foley]

I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Second, the presence of armed citizens
> roaming around the periphery of the airport would discourage would-be
> terrorists, thereby lessening the airport's security funding needs.

[Skylune]

by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM


I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Second, the presence of armed citizens
> roaming around the periphery of the airport would discourage would-be
> terrorists, thereby lessening the airport's security funding needs.

They definitely should. When I was up there this summer, I went on a few
outings with locals (kayaking and river rafting). All armed. My kind of
people. Guns to them are tools, not some vile instrument to wreak havoc
on city streets. (Like here in NH)
Necessary tools due to the brown and black bear population (the wimpish
bear spray isn't as reliable).


Most pilots there probably do carry guns. If forced to ditch somewhere,
you would want the tools to protect yourself.

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:

> Oh. That makes sense. Like the electified gate to keep moose off the
> runway at an AK airport.
>
> Maybe opening up the areas surrounding the airport to hunting could help
> here? The surrounding residents would benefit in several ways. First,
> the rifle blasts would blend in with the whine of the engines/props, thus
> reducing any noise complaints. Second, the presence of armed citizens
> roaming around the periphery of the airport would discourage would-be
> terrorists, thereby lessening the airport's security funding needs. Of
> course NOTAMs would need to be issued by airports proposing peripheral
> hunting, and the hunters would need to be instructed to voluntarily aim
> low, in the event of poor aim.

Look at the ****ty place you live in. You already know that the general
population is not armed where you live. Around here you have to assume
everybody is armed. They might be, they might not be. Crime is not a
problem

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:


>
>
> Most pilots there probably do carry guns. If forced to ditch somewhere,
> you would want the tools to protect yourself.

The gun isn't to protect yourself. It is a means to eat.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <1W6af.2587$Ar5.235@trndny01>,
George Patterson > wrote:

> Skylune wrote:
>
> > Then why do airports even need fences?
>
> To keep livestock and wildlife off the runway.
>
To keep the likes of "Skyloon" and "jgrove" out. :>)

[Montblack]

("Newps" wrote)
> The gun isn't to protect yourself. It is a means to eat.


To be clear, you're not advocating 'eating' your gun - IYKWIM. <g>


Montblack

[cjcampbell]

Skylune wrote:
> by "Steve Foley" > Nov 1, 2005 at 01:15 PM
>
>
> Skylune would simply close the airports and crush all the planes.
>
> "cjcampbell" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?
> >
>
> For starters, I would hire baton-wielding security guards from the local
> mall to check IDs and beat the hell out of trespassers or thieves. Such a
> guard could have asked the pilot/thief for a registration to prove
> ownership of the plane he was tearing down (or proof that he was
> performing authorized repairs).

Since most airplanes are owned by corporations then the guard is going
to have some difficulty with that.

"Hey! Who are you?"

"John Smith"

"Let's see the registration of that plane. Says it is owned by Sky
Loons." (Beats John Smith, the CEO and sole owner of Sky Loons, Inc.,
half to death.)

Smith sues the security guard, the airport, the FAA, and everybody else
he can think of. The guard goes to prison for assault with a deadly
weapon. Alternatively, Smith shoots the guard and is found to have
acted in self defense.

>
> (I would of course demand that the FAA fund these security agents from
> general taxpayer funds because of the vital economic benefits of GA to the
> entire nation.)
>
> Then, I would empower the security guards to take all reasonable measures
> to enforce noise abatement procedures, in close contact with tower
> personnel of course, so that only pilots that have unmistakenly been
> identified as violators would be beaten.

If there is a tower. You going to have the guard carry a decibel meter?
Laser rangefinder? (Guard is arrested as terrorist for shining laser on
airplane.) "Unmistakenly," eh? So you are going to institute cruel and
unusual punishment, completely unconstitutional, and you are going to
have one guy, a mall guard, be cop, judge, jury and executioner, with
no due process or appeal.

Since when does noise abatement improve airport security?

Sky Loon, sounds like you would be much happier in some totalitarian
state rather than in the United States of America. In the USA, people
have rights. They are presumed innocent until proven guilty. They
cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.
They may not be beaten or tortured in any way. People are allowed to
travel freely despite the fact that some others might be annoyed by it.
People who buy homes next to airports are presumed to be smart enough
to know that airports are noisy. Freeways are even noisier. Are you
next going to buy a home next to the freeway, impose noise restrictions
on it, and beat all the truck drivers with batons?

Now then, let us see if you can come up with something to improve
security that would actually work without locking everybody up in
detention centers.

[Skylune]

by "cjcampbell" > Nov 2, 2005 at 10:49 PM


Skylune wrote:
> by "Steve Foley" > Nov 1, 2005 at 01:15 PM
>
>
> Skylune would simply close the airports and crush all the planes.
>
> "cjcampbell" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > If you're so smart, how would you have prevented this crime?
> >
>
> For starters, I would hire baton-wielding security guards from the
local
> mall to check IDs and beat the hell out of trespassers or thieves. Such
a
> guard could have asked the pilot/thief for a registration to prove
> ownership of the plane he was tearing down (or proof that he was
> performing authorized repairs).

Since most airplanes are owned by corporations then the guard is going
to have some difficulty with that.

"Hey! Who are you?"

"John Smith"

"Let's see the registration of that plane. Says it is owned by Sky
Loons." (Beats John Smith, the CEO and sole owner of Sky Loons, Inc.,
half to death.)

Smith sues the security guard, the airport, the FAA, and everybody else
he can think of. The guard goes to prison for assault with a deadly
weapon. Alternatively, Smith shoots the guard and is found to have
acted in self defense.

>
> (I would of course demand that the FAA fund these security agents from
> general taxpayer funds because of the vital economic benefits of GA to
the
> entire nation.)
>
> Then, I would empower the security guards to take all reasonable
measures
> to enforce noise abatement procedures, in close contact with tower
> personnel of course, so that only pilots that have unmistakenly been
> identified as violators would be beaten.

If there is a tower. You going to have the guard carry a decibel meter?
Laser rangefinder? (Guard is arrested as terrorist for shining laser on
airplane.) "Unmistakenly," eh? So you are going to institute cruel and
unusual punishment, completely unconstitutional, and you are going to
have one guy, a mall guard, be cop, judge, jury and executioner, with
no due process or appeal.

Since when does noise abatement improve airport security?

Sky Loon, sounds like you would be much happier in some totalitarian
state rather than in the United States of America. In the USA, people
have rights. They are presumed innocent until proven guilty. They
cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.
They may not be beaten or tortured in any way. People are allowed to
travel freely despite the fact that some others might be annoyed by it.
People who buy homes next to airports are presumed to be smart enough
to know that airports are noisy. Freeways are even noisier. Are you
next going to buy a home next to the freeway, impose noise restrictions
on it, and beat all the truck drivers with batons?

Now then, let us see if you can come up with something to improve
security that would actually work without locking everybody up in
detention centers.



It was just a joke...

[Gary Drescher]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> by "cjcampbell" > Nov 2, 2005 at 10:49 PM
>...
> Now then, let us see if you can come up with something to improve
> security that would actually work without locking everybody up in
> detention centers.
>
>
>
> It was just a joke...

It's good that you're now quoting the post you're replying to, but your
method is confusing--you don't indent the quoted material, so it's hard to
distinguish the quoted material from the new content of your post. As you've
probably noticed by looking at everyone else's posts, the Usenet convention
is to use '>' characters in the left margin, one for each level of embedded
quoting. If you use any standard news reader (whether standalone or
web-based), just hitting the reply button will automatically paste the text
you're replying to into the post you're composing, complete with the '>'
characters. (This is meant as a constructive suggestion, not a personal
criticism.)

--Gary

[Allen]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM
>
>
> I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska
>

Just make sure it is not a handgun!

Allen

[George Patterson]

Allen wrote:
> "Skylune" > wrote in message
> lkaboutaviation.com...
>
>>by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM
>>
>>I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska
>
> Just make sure it is not a handgun!

Not that I would prefer a handgun as a survival tool, but I thought it was
Canada that prohibits handguns.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Skylune]

In fact, the people I was hanging with in AK all had handguns. And they
weren't 22 caliber pea shooters either.

[Skylune]

Tell that to the two residents I met who had to fend off bear attacks.

[Allen]

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:xfOaf.23$Y97.10@trndny05...
> Allen wrote:
>> "Skylune" > wrote in message
>> lkaboutaviation.com...
>>
>>>by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM
>>>
>>>I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska
>> Just make sure it is not a handgun!
>
> Not that I would prefer a handgun as a survival tool, but I thought it was
> Canada that prohibits handguns.
>
> George Patterson
> Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
> neighbor.
> It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

I'm wrong - you are right George! I brought a Cessna 182 to New Mexico from
Anchorage and was required to carry a firearm but it could not be a handgun
(because of Canadian laws).

Allen

[Matt Whiting]

Allen wrote:
> "George Patterson" > wrote in message
> news:xfOaf.23$Y97.10@trndny05...
>
>>Allen wrote:
>>
>>>"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM
>>>>
>>>>I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska
>>>
>>> Just make sure it is not a handgun!
>>
>>Not that I would prefer a handgun as a survival tool, but I thought it was
>>Canada that prohibits handguns.
>>
>>George Patterson
>> Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
>>neighbor.
>> It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.
>
>
> I'm wrong - you are right George! I brought a Cessna 182 to New Mexico from
> Anchorage and was required to carry a firearm but it could not be a handgun
> (because of Canadian laws).

Yes, Canada has some really idiotic firearms laws. I think they are
even dumber than NY state. And that takes real effort!


Matt

[Skylune]

by Matt Whiting > Nov 4, 2005 at 09:54 PM


Allen wrote:
> "George Patterson" > wrote in message
> news:xfOaf.23$Y97.10@trndny05...
>
>>Allen wrote:
>>
>>>"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>by "Steve Foley" > Nov 2, 2005 at 08:01 PM
>>>>
>>>>I'm pretty sure pilots are required to carry firearms in Alaska
>>>
>>> Just make sure it is not a handgun!
>>
>>Not that I would prefer a handgun as a survival tool, but I thought it
was
>>Canada that prohibits handguns.
>>
>>George Patterson
>> Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
>>neighbor.
>> It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.
>
>
> I'm wrong - you are right George! I brought a Cessna 182 to New Mexico
from
> Anchorage and was required to carry a firearm but it could not be a
handgun
> (because of Canadian laws).

Yes, Canada has some really idiotic firearms laws. I think they are
even dumber than NY state. And that takes real effort!"

Absolutely true. In NY, only criminals now have access to firearms.
Canada should restrict firearms purchases only in the province of Quebec.
Those of French extraction have proven that they are incapable of using a
gun properly.

[Skylune]

by "Morgans" > Nov 4, 2005 at 06:03 PM


"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Tell that to the two residents I met who had to fend off bear attacks.

In which case, you eat bear, and you have protected yourself!
--
Jim in NC


Precisely Jim! Bear spray, assuming it works (its really just pepper
spray), would not provide a meal. Large caliber pistols are the way to go
in Alaska. I certainly wouldn't go off into the woods unarmed (here or in
AK). Bears can be every bit as unreasonable as pilots, and nearly as
dangerous!

[Morgans]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Tell that to the two residents I met who had to fend off bear attacks.

In which case, you eat bear, and you have protected yourself!
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Somerset]

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:09:47 -0500, "Skylune" >
wrote:

> In fact, the people I was hanging with in AK all had handguns. And they
> weren't 22 caliber pea shooters either.

I would have thought a shotgun with alternating slugs and heavy-grade shot
would be more effective than any handgun. If you re faced with a charging
bear, you need to cripple it by taking out one or both forelegs. Even with
a shotgun slug, a body shot won't stop a charging bear instantly.
--
Jay.
(remove dashes for legal email address)

[Montblack]

("Skylune's" posting system)
> I'm wrong - you are right George! I brought a Cessna 182 to New Mexico
> from Anchorage and was required to carry a firearm but it could not be a
> handgun (because of Canadian laws).

Yes, Canada has some really idiotic firearms laws. I think they are even
dumber than NY state. And that takes real effort!"

Absolutely true. In NY, only criminals now have access to firearms. Canada
should restrict firearms purchases only in the province of Quebec. Those of
French extraction have proven that they are incapable of using a gun
properly.

This is what your posts look like S-Loon. You are mixing your post with the
previous post - like I have just done [Montblack here].


If you tell people what newsreader you are using they might be able to help
you get it configured correctly.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Montblack

[George Patterson]

Jay Somerset wrote:

> I would have thought a shotgun with alternating slugs and heavy-grade shot
> would be more effective than any handgun.

If you saw it off and have a high capacity magazine, the shotgun is better. The
handgun handles more easily than a standard shotgun.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Tom Conner]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Skylune's" posting system)
> > I'm wrong - you are right George! I brought a Cessna 182 to New Mexico
> > from Anchorage and was required to carry a firearm but it could not be a
> > handgun (because of Canadian laws).
>
> Yes, Canada has some really idiotic firearms laws. I think they are even
> dumber than NY state. And that takes real effort!"
>
> Absolutely true. In NY, only criminals now have access to firearms.
Canada
> should restrict firearms purchases only in the province of Quebec. Those
of
> French extraction have proven that they are incapable of using a gun
> properly.
>
> This is what your posts look like S-Loon. You are mixing your post with
the
> previous post - like I have just done [Montblack here].
>
>
> If you tell people what newsreader you are using they might be able to
help
> you get it configured correctly.


Apparently, Mr. Loon is unaware of the newsreader concept. He posts via
some web-site that leeches off this news group.

[cjcampbell]

Jay Somerset wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:09:47 -0500, "Skylune" >
> wrote:
>
> > In fact, the people I was hanging with in AK all had handguns. And they
> > weren't 22 caliber pea shooters either.
>
> I would have thought a shotgun with alternating slugs and heavy-grade shot
> would be more effective than any handgun.

While that is true, a shotgun can be inconvenient to carry in a small
plane that is already loaded to the gills with everything else. Plus,
you can't wear it around your waist while flying, and as the saying
goes, there is survival gear, which you carry on your person, and
camping gear, which is everything else in the airplane. A heavy caliber
revolver might stop a bear if you shoot it in the forelegs.

I knew a guy who claimed he carried a .45 ACP Derringer in Alaska,
which made me wonder: if he fired it, would it hurt him more than it
hurt the bear?

[Roger]

On 8 Nov 2005 22:36:35 -0800, "cjcampbell"
> wrote:

>
>Jay Somerset wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:09:47 -0500, "Skylune" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In fact, the people I was hanging with in AK all had handguns. And they
>> > weren't 22 caliber pea shooters either.
>>
>> I would have thought a shotgun with alternating slugs and heavy-grade shot
>> would be more effective than any handgun.
>
>While that is true, a shotgun can be inconvenient to carry in a small
>plane that is already loaded to the gills with everything else. Plus,
>you can't wear it around your waist while flying, and as the saying
>goes, there is survival gear, which you carry on your person, and
>camping gear, which is everything else in the airplane. A heavy caliber
>revolver might stop a bear if you shoot it in the forelegs.
>
>I knew a guy who claimed he carried a .45 ACP Derringer in Alaska,
>which made me wonder: if he fired it, would it hurt him more than it
>hurt the bear?

Many years ago when I was a gun runner, I carried a little ultralight
5 shot 38 with hollow base wad cutters loaded backwards and the powder
equivalent of ++P loads. I could cover it with one hand and my hands
are not large. Shooting that thing with any ++P load hurt! I think
throwing that big 45 slug out of a derringer would be far worse.

Quite some years back (actually a lot of years back like the mid 70's)
I was doing quite a bit of competitive trap shooting. One of our
members (Saginaw Gun Club) went hunting up in Alaska. They were
headed up the side of a mountain on one of those trails where it's
mountain on ones side and... well...nothing but wind on the other.
Coming around a bend the met a bear headed the other way who didn't
take kindly to intruders in his territory blocking his trail.

Jim was carrying a 44 Mag (I don't know the make). He had a chance to
get off one shot as the bear reared up to take him off the horse. By
pure luck it took the bear right in the eye at just the right angle.
It made the Boon and Crocket record books at something like #3 as I
recall.

However the horse did not take kindly to either the bear or a 44
magnum being fired next to its ear. All including the horse survived.
Well, with the exception of the bear and I think Jim ended up with a
broken arm.

He said he had only hoped to get a bear, let alone one in the record
books and had no desire to get up so close and personal to one.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[George Patterson]

cjcampbell wrote:

> I knew a guy who claimed he carried a .45 ACP Derringer in Alaska,
> which made me wonder: if he fired it, would it hurt him more than it
> hurt the bear?

I met a man once who had one of these things. He called it "Baby Doll." He said
it didn't kick badly at all; not very accurate, though. He was about 6' and 190.
A guy my size might have a different opinion of how it kicked. As far as
accuracy goes, I owned a .22 with a 1" barrel once. At 25', it threw the slug
about 6" in some random direction from the point of aim. I think a derringer is
likely to be worse.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Matt Whiting]

George Patterson wrote:

> cjcampbell wrote:
>
>> I knew a guy who claimed he carried a .45 ACP Derringer in Alaska,
>> which made me wonder: if he fired it, would it hurt him more than it
>> hurt the bear?
>
>
> I met a man once who had one of these things. He called it "Baby Doll."
> He said it didn't kick badly at all; not very accurate, though. He was
> about 6' and 190. A guy my size might have a different opinion of how it
> kicked. As far as accuracy goes, I owned a .22 with a 1" barrel once. At
> 25', it threw the slug about 6" in some random direction from the point
> of aim. I think a derringer is likely to be worse.

Derringer's aren't designed for shooting 25'.

Most poker tables are only 6' or so in diameter. :-)

Also, accuracy isn't a function solely of barrel length. A
short-barreled gun can be fairly accurate and some with long barrels are
terrible.


Matt