View Single Post
  #26  
Old July 11th 03, 12:35 AM
David Reinhart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Where I come from we sell that kind of stuff by the truckload for fertilizer.

What types of aircraft were involved in the 9/11 attacks? Airliners. What were the first aircraft back into
the air after 9/11? Airliners. Are there any airports in the U.S. today closed to airline traffic? No, only
GA. Do the presidential TFRs exclude airliners? No, only Part 91 & 135 aircraft. Did GA get any monetary
compensation from the government for losses as a result of post-9/11 restrictions? No, only the airlines.

Anybody who thinks GA hasn't been unfairly hit since 9/11 is living in a fantasy world.

Dave Reinhart


Captain Wubba wrote:

I don't think they will stand the test of time either. But that is
partly a point I was trying to make earlier. It takes time for
'appropriate' meausres to weed themselves out from the bogus ones. But
I disagree that GA is being 'unfairly' singled out. The last
significant attack on the US came from aviation. So it is quite
natural that the government will react *against* aviation. Just like
if the scumbags had destoyed the WTC with a bunch of rented U-Hauls,
we'd be seeing restrictions on renting U-Hauls. You'd go in to rent
one, and you'd need to prove you were an American citizen, provide 3
forms of picture ID, have a background check, etc. You can't protect
against every possible threat. But the natural human reaction is to
protect against *demonstrated* threats. And, like it or not, it has
been very clearly demonstrated that airplanes can be used to do great
harm. So the government over-reacted in certain ways. Over time, we
will get them to loosen those restrictions. But screaming 'That's not
fair! That's not fair! I want to be able to fly over the stadiums
again!' doesn't help our cause. It makes us look like we are more
concerned with our own toys than withe the security of the US (as
mistaken as that appearance might be). So, over time, we show how GA
benefits people. We do Angel Flights, and Young Eagle Flights, and
people will see that there isn't a threat from my Cessna 172. And the
reluctance to eliminate silly TFRs will eventually disappear.

But the reality is that planes were used to murder 3000 people. And an
airplane was stolen by a kid and flown into a skycraper. And people
are afraid. And when people are afraid, their repsentatives do what it
takes to help calm them. And if that somewhat infringes on our
*privilege* (note not 'right', but 'privilege') to fly how we want,
then the best way to fix that is to show over time how mistaken it is.
We simply must pick our battles.

Cap


(John) wrote in message . com...
Judah wrote in message ...
A suicide bomber in Jerusalem, with 30 pounds of explosives strapped to
his belt, can murder and injure dozens of innocent people in restaurants,
night clubs, markets, and bus stations. You don't believe that 500 pounds
of explosives in a suicide-bomber's Cessna is a potential security
threat?



It is a security threat, as you rightly point out. The stadium
TFRs, however, do nothing to mitigate this security threat or provide
additional safety to the stadium attendees. Absolutely nothing.

You might argue that the general public feels "better" and "more
secure" with these restrictions in place. It saves them, for example,
of having to listen to the sound of a small airplane close by and
letting their imaginations take over. i.e. - they can enjoy their
event in peace without being reminded of the terrible possibilities a
crazy person can inflict.

I believe this unfairly singles out GA as a risk factor, as other more
likely ways exist for a terrorist to deliver an explosive device. I
also believe that the government felt they "had to do something" to
protect the population, and "had to be seen" doing something regarding
the perceived aircraft threat - hence, the TFRs. This is a terrible
precedent or reason for a government restriction - an ineffective one
that is in place only because the government felt they had to do
something.

I don't think the stadium TFRs will stand the test of time, or an
objective review. I am just not sure when that review will take
place.