Well said, Jose. Our resident troll chided me saying BTW: You have
not ever pointed out a single inconsistency in my opinions, and you
can't. But you have done just that. Your logic will have no effect
on him, as his head is firmly planted in some dark & stinky place. If
he really thinks he could shoot at low flying aircraft with a shotgun
in a libertarian society he'd have his liberties restricted rather
quickly (in jail).


Jose wrote:
On your dismissal of all studies, I disagree.

I don't dismiss all studies, just the ones with political or economic
ends behind them. "We need a study to show that cell phone use while
driving is (or is not) dangerous." Further, even well designed studies
are subject to misinterpretation by those who stand to benefit -
consider all the heart and diet studies that are done, misinterpreted,
and products sold on that basis.

Yes, many are rigged (like ALL the Economic Benefit
studies of GA airports)

... and all the noise impact studies of GA airports. I wonder how many
developers stand to benefit by getting neighbors up in arms...

Why is it that this
aviation advocacy group already has a pre-determined position on older
aircraft, especially since structural failures have been implicated in
some crashes recently??

I don't know whether either of your premises is true. But once a
government study begins, politics tends to trump science, and powerful
forces with big voices have something to misinterpret. There is no
reason to feed them. No pattern of crashes has emerged that make me
suspect that there is a general problem with "older aircraft" (a
category which spans =many= categories).

Now if a pattern were to emerge - for example, three huge jetliners
crash into big buildings in one day, then maybe there would be grounds
to study whether small aircraft should be kept away from cities.

On my politics, I do have libertarian leanings.

They are not at all evident.

I believe in decriminization of various drugs...

The ones you advocate testing pilots for?

In a fully libertarian society, I'd be able to fly kites high or shoot off
my Mossberg at fools in low flying planes.

I do not believe that libertarians would be in agreement with that
statement.

This is why I am against the self-policing of the FARs (to great extent)...

What is special about the FARs (besides your own noise issue) that make
you want to turn aviation into a police state, while espousing
libertarian views elsewhere?

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.