It is, to me a horrifying environment when major
aviation publications have a legal column and the AOPA advertises as one of
its benefits the availability of a 'lawyer Insurance" plan.

AOPA is a business, and they're all about selling their services. The
reality is that most people simply don't need it.

I would be the last person in the world to defend FAA inspectors (check
out this letter by the inspector general about the way they operate:
http://www.avweb.com/pdf/brinell_report.pdf) but the fact is that you
hardly ever need to deal with them unless you want something from the
FAA. Ramp checks are a rarity (I haven't had one in 2200+ hours of
flying), and most checkrides these days are done with examiners. Even
if you want to get an initial CFI, there are schools you can go to with
examining authority. Controllers and FSS types are not inspectors, and
while I've encountered a few assholes, most have been OK.

When you do want something from the FAA, even something you're clearly
entitled to, they can be real assholes. When I went to the FSDO with
the letter from the A&P/IA who had suervised me for the requisite 4800
hours to get authorization to take my A&P, the maintenance inspector
strongly implied that I was my IA and I were both lying, was abusive to
me, but finally did issue the authorization. I know plenty of people
who have gone to the FSDO to take initial CFI rides only to have the
plane grounded for trivial issues (illegible TSO tags on 30-year-old
seatbelts, for example) and written up for flying an unairworthy
aircraft instead of getting their checkrides. But the real solution
here is to deal with them as little as possible.

Once I even knew an FAA ops inspector who was a good guy and a great
pilot. Of course he quit in disgust after a couple of years, but
hey...

Seriously, don't let the FAA dissuade you from flying. That would be
letting the *******s win.

Michael