Missing from the FAA database now

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
How it works in practice (or the abuse that occurs) does not change that
the
right to records is limited to those rights that are relevant.

The right to records is NOT limited to those rights that are relevant. The
only limitation is what the person to whom the records refer permits.

I can disclose my full medical history to my auto mechanic if I want. The
fact that those records are irrelevant to them fixing my car matters not one
bit. It's still legal for them to ask, and legal for me to agree to it.

A smart person won't allow disclosure of irrelevant records, but there's no
legal requirement for them to limit disclosure to relevant records.

Pete

".Blueskies." wrote in message
. net...
The permission is usually in the form of the applicant's signature on the
application form with all the fine print....

That's right. The fine print grants explicit permission, not implicit (as
you claimed).

Jay Honeck wrote:

Honestly, why are you guys so worried about being in one of the most
obscure databases in cyberspace?

there is nothing obscure in cyberspace.

you might want to have a look at the following video to get an idea
of what some of us worry about:

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/

we are not quite there yet, but I reckon, we'll be there before
the current administration complete their third term(*)

--Sylvain

(*) I know about the 22nd amendment of the constitution, but I wonder
why it should hold any longer than the 4th (the thing about unreasonable
searches) or 5th (the thing about due process) which have gone the way of
the dodo already

On Fri, 26 May 2006 12:29:19 -0400, Stubby
wrote:

Nearly 4 years ago I disappeared from the "airmen" database. After many
phone calls to my AME who had retired and to the FAA the trouble was the
FAA had lost the record of my medical examination. I had the doc
resubmit and a few months later (!) all was fine.

Hm. So it does appear that the database serves a valid purpose!




-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

On Sat, 27 May 2006 03:37:02 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Honestly, why are you guys so worried about being in one of the most obscure
databases in cyberspace? Why would you care if you're listed? As a new
pilot, it was a "Red Badge of Courage" to see my name in that list; now,
it's just something I check from time to time, just to make sure my doctor's
silly clerk has actually mailed the damned paperwork.

My feelings exactly.

As a matter of fact, one of the downsides I see to seguing into a
recreational certificate this fall is that my listing on the database
will then say: NO CURRENT MEDICAL, just as it does with Dubya Bush.

Omigosh! Dubya isn't listed any longer!

It used to be no current medical, current address unknown.... I guess
they shook out the unknown addresses as well as delisting the opt-out
ones.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Sylvain wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:


Honestly, why are you guys so worried about being in one of the most
obscure databases in cyberspace?


there is nothing obscure in cyberspace.

you might want to have a look at the following video to get an idea
of what some of us worry about:

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/

we are not quite there yet, but I reckon, we'll be there before
the current administration complete their third term(*)

Except that the ACLU is about the only organization I trust less than
the government. They continuously oppose my most basic right of
self-protection. That is hardly a group supporting liberty. Oh, I
forgot, that the L now stands for Liberal...


Matt

Robert M. Gary wrote:
No it wasn't voluntary up until of late. I have been beating on
the FAA since 2001 to get me out of the public database. I've
already indicated my reasons smart ass.

You must not be in the club. The FAA asked me about 4 years ago if I
wanted out of the public database. They sent me a letter saying all I
needed to do was to send the reply card to opt out. I know several
people who did.

I did, and all they did was delete my mailing address.

Matt Whiting wrote:
Except that the ACLU is about the only organization I trust less than
the government.

I have some problems with the ACLU myself (for instance the fact that
they want me, and people like me, i.e., people with disabilities,
dead -- which is a bit of a snag you might agree); but this video
is worth watching nonetheless;

--Sylvain

you might want to have a look at the following video to get an idea
of what some of us worry about:

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/

Now THAT is hilarious. And well done.

I do find it pretty sadly ironic that all the computerized/automated
stuff we all dreamed of in the 1960s is perceived by a small (but
vocal) minority who believe them to be threat to our privacy.

Personally, I am happy when my pizza delivery place knows who I am --
it saves time and hassle. However, I really don't like it much when
the video place knows that we returned our last movie late, and that we
owe a $2 late fee -- but, hey, that goes with the territory.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
I do find it pretty sadly ironic that all the computerized/automated
stuff we all dreamed of in the 1960s is perceived by a small (but
vocal) minority who believe them to be threat to our privacy.

It's only a "small minority" because the number of people who actually stop
to think about the issue (or any issue, for that matter) is small. The main
reason most people don't care is because they have much more immediate
issues to deal with, such as putting food on the table.

That doesn't mean it's not a legitimate issue.

Personally, I am happy when my pizza delivery place knows who I am --
it saves time and hassle. However, I really don't like it much when
the video place knows that we returned our last movie late, and that we
owe a $2 late fee -- but, hey, that goes with the territory.

I don't think it's inappropriate for any retailer to maintain records like
that. As you say, it can greatly enhance convenience, and in many cases
allows the retailer to serve you better.

The problem is that the use of the data doesn't stop there. It can be used
by the retailer in less-than-honorable ways, including selling the data to
third party who aggregrates a lot of seemingly unrelated information and
discovers new and irritating ways to take advantage of it (and you). There
does need to be legal standards about how information collected about you
can be used.

One of the biggest problems is that those third parties who aggregate the
information are a lot better at marketing their efforts than making them
accurate. Unfortunately, a lot of other third parties, from government
officials to investigators to legal staff to businesses, believe the
information to be much more reliable than it is. The databases have lots of
errors in them, and they presume to have an accurate record of your life
when in fact they often don't. Pity the poor person who as a result of
inaccurate and negative information in these big databases winds up being
deprived of something they need, or perhaps even arrested.

Of course (to bring this back to aviation), the TSA has avoided all of these
issues by relying on just a name. After all, a person's name is unique,
right? It makes perfect sense to deny boarding or otherwise subject a
person to increased scrutiny and invasive searches if their name shows up on
a list provided by other government officials. And I'm sure that a name
never shows up on that list as a result of data that's been aggregated by
all those innocent sources you're referring to.

Right?

Pete