GA headed for regulatory trouble

How about returning things to normal, and NOT allowing the relatively
small number of terrorists in this world dictate how we live our lives?

If only it were so easy.

I would nominate this quote as "Wishful Thinking of the Year"...

:-(
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

How about returning things to normal, and NOT allowing the relatively
small number of terrorists in this world dictate how we live our lives?


If only it were so easy.

How is it "not so easy"?

Jose
--
You may not get what you pay for, but you sure as hell pay for what you get.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

How about returning things to normal, and NOT allowing the relatively
small number of terrorists in this world dictate how we live our lives?


If only it were so easy.

How is it "not so easy"?

It would require a major political and social sea change, on the same order
as what happened after 9/11.

I don't think we'll see that (a sudden, utter and complete change in the
social contract) happen again, maybe ever?

What we will see, hopefully, is a gradual realization that things *are* back
to normal, and that we can drop a lot of the goofier parts of our
"heightened security." Unfortunately, that happens with almost glacial
slowness, and can be instantly and irretrievably reversed at the next
terrorist threat.

:-(
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
What we will see, hopefully, is a gradual realization that things *are* back
to normal, snip

Things are certainly NOT back to normal for me (and a lot of other people
in the Mid-Atlantic states).



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

What we will see, hopefully, is a gradual realization that things *are*
back
to normal, snip

Things are certainly NOT back to normal for me (and a lot of other people
in the Mid-Atlantic states).

I know that, Jay. I was referring to things being back to normal in "the
real world" outside of our rarefied little aviation world.

If things stay calm, there are no more terrorist attacks, and stupid pilots
stop busting TFRs and ADIZ's for any length of time, the general public will
gradually come to the realization that things are "back to normal" -- and
the politicians will soon follow.

Only then will we see some of the dumber parts of our security
"preparedness" eliminated or reduced.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"How many of them, what did they look like, which way did they go? I must
follow them, for I am their leader."

(Sign on JFK's desk in the Oval Office.)

Jim



, the general public will
gradually come to the realization that things are "back to normal" -- and
the politicians will soon follow.

It would require a major political and social sea change, on the same order
as what happened after 9/11.

Yes. We are now ruled by the terrorists. And before you object, note
that your response was to that very statement a few messages up thread.

More exactly, we are ruled by fear, and our government is using this
fear against us. Not against the terrorists, but against us law-abiding
citizens of the United States, a nation that supposes itself to be free.

I don't think we'll see that (a sudden, utter and complete change in the
social contract) happen again, maybe ever?

Then you have little faith in the Constitution, which is the wedge we
have against Washington that helps us keep what freedoms we deem important.

What we will see, hopefully, is a gradual realization that things *are*
back to normal, and that we can drop a lot of the goofier parts of our
"heightened security."

We are not back to normal here on the East Coast, but at least you
recognize that this is because of our lawmakers, not because of the
terrorists. But since you don't have to live with the ADIZ all the
time, it seems to have much less importance to you.

I agree with your statement "it's not so easy" to the extent that you
mean "it's not easy to accomplish because of all the political pressures
to keep us in fear...". However, I strongly disagree with that =same=
statement ("It's not so easy") if it is taken to mean "...because there
will be significant adverse consequences if we do".

In the former case, the implication is "...therefore we need to work
hard to accopmlish it" but in the later case the implication is
"...therefore we shouldn't do it".

That's why I reacted.

Jose
--
You may not get what you pay for, but you sure as hell pay for what you get.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.