It may be true that a compromise is better than losing the battle
completely, but we are not negotiating here. We don't get to say "yes"
or "no".

Rather, we are making a point - that point being that restrictions in
the DC area do nothing to enhance security and do a lot to adversely
affect pilots and those they deal with. This point needs to be made
clearly and convincingly.

I assure you as a military man who has watched very carefully how these "critters" operate, it's a very real threat.

Is it a threat that can actually be defended against? I think not.

...A small plane in itself may not carry enough to do alot of damage, but in that area it would not take alot of damage to do what the bad guys want...to show they can hit wherever they want when they want.

I can think up a hundred scenarios of this nature, and I'm not even a
terrorist. For example, dropping a stick of dynamite down a gas
station's storage tank, coordinated over a hundred gas stations, would
make the same point. How easy is it for a terrorist to get a job
pumping gas? There isn't a good way of defending against this either
without virtually erasing the constitution first (after which it no
longer matters).

They ALL care about a vote, not your freedom. We must bend...

but not bend over.

Bending comes into play when we get to choose among alternatives - not
when we show (or show up) justification for alternatives.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.