NBC News Attempt To Discredit GA

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
m...

I'm not trying to apologize for anything or to any one. Sure C.J.,
there
are some things that could be done differently, but no matter what is
done
about a problem, not everyone will be happy or satisfied. In a
representative government like ours, just because I'm not particularly
satisfied about a solution doesn't mean that it was the wrong thing to
do.
I
think way too many people are losing touch with that concept.

I think the point is that in Washington DC there is no representative
government. It appears that Federal security agencies are simply doing
whatever they like without considering the consequences to the local
populace. After all, who represents the residents of Washington?


It's kinda like the idiotic TFRs the same people pop up with no regard for
reality or reason.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
...

clipped for brevity

It's kinda like the idiotic TFRs the same people pop up with no regard for
reality or reason.


Such as where? TFRs have to have some justification or they don't exist. We
may not think the reason is good enough, but there's lots of decisions made
in this world I don't agree with. I don't believe the FAA sets up TFRs just
to keep their controllers busy.


--
Jim Carter

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

I think the point is that in Washington DC there is no representative
government. It appears that Federal security agencies are simply doing
whatever they like without considering the consequences to the local
populace. After all, who represents the residents of Washington?



Good question C.J. I am probably wrong, but I think I learned that D.C. was
a federalized district with a mayoral form of supervision. Of course this
was way-back in the mid-60s in Civics and Economics, so I may be mistaken.
If I'm not wrong however, then the federal authorities have the right and
responsibility to administer the district as they see fit to ensure the
safety of the federal government. I think the district has some special,
non-voting congressional representation, so they should have some input at
that level also.

It is an interesting question you bring up. What is more important, the
safety of the federal government or the living conditions of the private
citizens who happen to live near it?

--
Jim Carter

In article , "Jim
Carter" wrote:

It's kinda like the idiotic TFRs the same people pop up with no regard
for reality or reason.

Such as where?

such as any TFR over major sporting events.

TFRs have to have some justification or they don't exist.

sigh

[smip]
I don't believe the FAA sets up TFRs just to keep their
controllers busy.

Does the FAA have any control wrt establishing TFRs?

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 05:37:16 GMT, "Jim Carter"
wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

I think the point is that in Washington DC there is no representative
government. It appears that Federal security agencies are simply doing
whatever they like without considering the consequences to the local
populace. After all, who represents the residents of Washington?



Good question C.J. I am probably wrong, but I think I learned that D.C. was
a federalized district with a mayoral form of supervision. Of course this
was way-back in the mid-60s in Civics and Economics, so I may be mistaken.
If I'm not wrong however, then the federal authorities have the right and
responsibility to administer the district as they see fit to ensure the
safety of the federal government. I think the district has some special,
non-voting congressional representation, so they should have some input at
that level also.

It is an interesting question you bring up. What is more important, the
safety of the federal government or the living conditions of the private
citizens who happen to live near it?
]
The answer to this question should be self evident. The TFR's are
setup by the burrowcrats to protect the burrowcrats, of which 99% do
NOT have pilots licenses and most have NEVER been in one of those
"dangerous little planes". They do not pay attention to or even
care if 1% of the population (pilots) has a problem with the
bureaucrat's methods of protecting themselves.

It amazes me what the general view of the majority of non pilots are
about general aviation. I have taken many non pilots up for their
first general aviation flight and almost all ask me "who do I call to
get PERMISSION to take off". ( I fly from the back yard airport. ) I
used to say I don't have to call anybody which leads to the next
question "Is this not dangerous you could run into someone". Now I
answer the question by asking them "Did you call up the highway patrol
and get permission to drive over here today? After this there is
generally a period of silence followed by "OH".

John

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
...

clipped for brevity

It's kinda like the idiotic TFRs the same people pop up with no regard
for
reality or reason.


Such as where?

Such as TFRs over moving busses that change destinations at will with no way
for the pilot to be notified. There are hundreds of other examples also.

TFRs have to have some justification or they don't exist.

And pigs fly to the moon everynight at 11:30.

We
may not think the reason is good enough, but there's lots of decisions
made
in this world I don't agree with. I don't believe the FAA sets up TFRs
just
to keep their controllers busy.


--
Jim Carter