TSA - another indignity for permanent residents

What the TSA is trying to say is that since Immigration has done such a
shoddy job of keeping out the bad element that wish to do the country
harm that they are going to take over and re-invent the wheel. I can
only imagine the hassles some folk are going to be subjected to. I
don't think the $130 per candidate is going to cover much of the huge
bureacracy they are going to create. Yet another unfunded mandate that
the taxpayer will end up footing the bill for. You have to admire the
TSA though, they have managed to amass a uniformed staff of the same
people that let the 9/11 people get on board with their weapons and
claim that the flying public is safer. I don't believe flying
commercially is any safer than it was thanks to the TSA. I do however
think that any subsequent hijacking attempt is going to be met with a
lot more resistance from the passengers and unusual attitides from the
folks in the cockpit. People are not going to sit back and wait to be
crashed.

This is just my opinion, if presented with the scenario I'd tend to
think that a handful of hijackers would pose no challenge to a cabinload
of people lobbing full soda cans and caraffes of scalding hot coffee at
them.

Robert


David Brooks wrote:

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...

In a previous article, "David Brooks"

said:

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...

I've lived in this country for many years, paid my taxes, been a
schoolteacher and a Scout leader, and now this:


http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...=19147&searchT

ype=docket.

Amazing. I've briefly scanned it to see if there was an exemption for us
permanent residents, but everywhere I look I see "aliens", not
"non-resident aliens". Hey, I thought I passed my security checks when I
got fingerprinted and had to provide proof that I had no outstanding
warrants back in Canada.

This sucks.


There's a beautiful paragraph in the analysis.

"TSA does not expect a significant impact on the overall demand for U.S.
flight training...the IFR only impacts alien candidates for U.S. flight
training..."

False.

"...and the population of alien candidates is small relative to the number
of U.S. flight students..."

18% is small? OK, it's less than one fifth, but it is significant, and
higher than I would have expected. Where did I get that 18% number? From a
previous page of the IFR, and it comes from the FAA.

"...the impact on demand will not be significant because U.S. flight
training is considered to be the global standard, and it is comparatively
less expensive to obtain a pilot's certificate in the U.S...."

This seems to assume that all noncitizen pilots are traveling here for
training; the argument is irrelevant to people like Paul and me. I'd like to
know how many of that 18% (an FAA number) are residents versus visitors.

-- David Brooks

"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
m...
What the TSA is trying to say is that since Immigration has done such a
shoddy job of keeping out the bad element that wish to do the country
harm that they are going to take over and re-invent the wheel. I can
only imagine the hassles some folk are going to be subjected to. I
don't think the $130 per candidate is going to cover much of the huge
bureacracy they are going to create. Yet another unfunded mandate that
the taxpayer will end up footing the bill for.

Ah. Read the IFR. Where do you think they came up with $130? They have
actually calculated the recurring cost to the Federal government, and
divided it by the number of applications, and it came to $129.82. Of course
this is an estimate divided by an estimate, and the estimate of number of
fee-generating applications comes from mangling an FAA statistic, but it
looks like they are making an effort to zero-sum it. But oh, lookit, there
is a $3M startup cost that they are not attempting to recover.

They also estimate an annual average cost of $1,500 incurred by the 3,000
flight schools in the economic impact analysis.

-- David Brooks

I did read the IFR all of it, and kind of stupid having a document that
describes flight training as an IFR.. what it if it was an IFR to
describe Instrument flight training? it would be an IFR^^2 ?

I don't think you can get much bureacracy for $130 a pop.. it's gotta
cost more than that!

David Brooks wrote:

"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
m...

What the TSA is trying to say is that since Immigration has done such a
shoddy job of keeping out the bad element that wish to do the country
harm that they are going to take over and re-invent the wheel. I can
only imagine the hassles some folk are going to be subjected to. I
don't think the $130 per candidate is going to cover much of the huge
bureacracy they are going to create. Yet another unfunded mandate that
the taxpayer will end up footing the bill for.


Ah. Read the IFR. Where do you think they came up with $130? They have
actually calculated the recurring cost to the Federal government, and
divided it by the number of applications, and it came to $129.82. Of course
this is an estimate divided by an estimate, and the estimate of number of
fee-generating applications comes from mangling an FAA statistic, but it
looks like they are making an effort to zero-sum it. But oh, lookit, there
is a $3M startup cost that they are not attempting to recover.

They also estimate an annual average cost of $1,500 incurred by the 3,000
flight schools in the economic impact analysis.

-- David Brooks

"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
m...
....snip...
I do however
think that any subsequent hijacking attempt is going to be met with a
lot more resistance from the passengers and unusual attitides from the
folks in the cockpit. People are not going to sit back and wait to be
crashed.

This is just my opinion, if presented with the scenario I'd tend to
think that a handful of hijackers would pose no challenge to a cabinload
of people lobbing full soda cans and caraffes of scalding hot coffee at
them.



I wish I could share your optimism about that but I do not. People will not
"expect" to be crashed, unless they have military/police training, or were
directly involved and have their vivid memories of a prior incident.

That having been said, I AM optimistic, however, that aviation is about as
safe as it has always been. There will always be a deranged idiot or two
out there, (some of whom are not even aliens), and once in a long while one
will get through, TSA-2004-19147 notwithstanding.


--
*** A great civilization is not conquered from without until it
has destroyed itself from within. ***
- Ariel Durant 1898-1981

("Icebound" wrote)
...snip...
I do however
think that any subsequent hijacking attempt is going to be met with a
lot more resistance from the passengers and unusual attitides from the
folks in the cockpit. People are not going to sit back and wait to be
crashed.

This is just my opinion, if presented with the scenario I'd tend to
think that a handful of hijackers would pose no challenge to a cabinload
of people lobbing full soda cans and caraffes of scalding hot coffee at
them.


I wish I could share your optimism about that but I do not. People will
not
"expect" to be crashed, unless they have military/police training, or were
directly involved and have their vivid memories of a prior incident.

That having been said, I AM optimistic, however, that aviation is about as
safe as it has always been. There will always be a deranged idiot or two
out there, (some of whom are not even aliens), and once in a long while
one
will get through, TSA-2004-19147 notwithstanding.


Saving so much from the previous two post seemed OK in this
instance.

Want to read something frightening? It's about how we all *might*
respond (post 9/11) to an airline terrorist hijacking?

Read this...

The deeper you get into it, the more troubling it becomes.
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

(Same link as above ...wait for it)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J548230D8


Montblack

"Montblack" wrote in message
...

I wish I could share your optimism about that but I do not. People will
not
"expect" to be crashed, unless they have military/police training, or
were
directly involved and have their vivid memories of a prior incident.

That having been said, I AM optimistic, however, that aviation is about
as
safe as it has always been. There will always be a deranged idiot or two
out there, (some of whom are not even aliens), and once in a long while
one
will get through, TSA-2004-19147 notwithstanding.


Saving so much from the previous two post seemed OK in this
instance.

Want to read something frightening? It's about how we all *might*
respond (post 9/11) to an airline terrorist hijacking?

Read this...

The deeper you get into it, the more troubling it becomes.
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

(Same link as above ...wait for it)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J548230D8


Montblack

Sorry but this article has been done to death and IMO, the author is a glory
seeking crackpot who was / is paranoid.

Jay Beckman
Chandler, AZ

("Jay Beckman" wrote)
The deeper you get into it, the more troubling it becomes.

http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

(Same link as above ...wait for it)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J548230D8

Sorry but this article has been done to death and IMO, the author is a
glory
seeking crackpot who was / is paranoid.


I've been ...away... for a spell, so I'll just mosey on over and untie my
rope from those four big legs sticking up in the air. Well Old Paint, looks
like no more trips around the corral for you tonight.


Montblack

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:38:00 -0700, Jay Beckman wrote:

Sorry but this article has been done to death and IMO, the author is a glory
seeking crackpot who was / is paranoid.

Agreed.

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...t95/index.html

--
Steve
E-mail: steve at flyingtigerwebdesign dot com
Hong Kong, 23/09/2004 15:24:23