|
Don’t we also have to fence in all lakes
and rivers for the amphibians?
Hmmm, seems like a big job and those folks
who “used” to have waterfront property are probably going to be pissed.
From: Lancair Mailing
List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf
Of Terrence O'Neill
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011
9:13 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Airport
security?
If there are hundreds of small airports without gates, what's the logic
of having them at bigger airports? Did you ask 'What's 'logic'
mean?"
How about requiring every farmer with a strip to fence in and gate?
Or everyone with an ujltralight?
C'mon, this is an opportunity for those
in the gate business. Employ a double gate system where ones vehicle is
not allowed to pass the second gate until the first is closed. Exit must
be accomplished elsewhere with a single gate (and toll) to get out. Think
of all the people that would be employed building, installing and maintaining
these gates.
My own airport,
KARR, has fences and gates. The Sky Haven hangar complex (www.skyhaven.com) is required to operate
two gates. However, the fence at the northeast only goes 50 feet beyond
the gate and if you are willing to drive through a small swale entry, is
assured.
Interesting observations and questions.
My question is: by keeping vehicles from entering after you, are you the police
now? Are you expected to enforce a regulation, law, what ever? Is that
responsibility passed on to you because you rent space? Our airport does the
same thing and has for a long time. I think it’s to placate a local congress
person.
Jim
From:
Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of marv@lancair.net
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011
8:50 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Airport security?
Posted for "Douglas Brunner" <douglasbrunner@earthlink.net>:
Yesterday (1/14), I headed out to my airport (KMTN) to do some work on my
plane. Recently, my airport has installed a sliding gate with
a code to
control entry.
On my way in, I observed the car in front of me stop at the keypad, spend
some time sitting there and then drive away from the entry. My
inference
was that they did not know the access code to the airport. I
pulled up to
the gate, punched in the access code and pulled through the
gate. I stopped
on the other side of the gate, to limit entry to one car. The
car which had
been in front of me (and had failed to gain entry) then tried to pull
around
me and go through the gate while it was still open. I moved my
car slightly
to block their entry figuring that if they didn't know the code, they
shouldn't be coming in with me.
Well it turned out that the two men in the car, were actually police
officers, and they did not take kindly to my blocking their
entrance. In
essence they "copped an attitude" (pun intended) and gave me a
hard time
about blocking them. After a few unkind words were exchanged,
we both went
on our ways.
Normally, I am not a huge fan of the (pseudo) security procedures at
airports. And perhaps from time to time, I have been known to
let someone
follow me in through the security gate, or to follow others in. However
in
this case, it appeared to me that they had demonstrated that they did not
know the code so I treated them (not knowing they were cops) differently.
Several questions/observations:
Since the number of terrorist incidents attributable to GA aircraft both
prior to and after instituting these security precaution is ZERO, is it
logical to infer that the procedures have been a success???
Since the police appear to regard the security precautions as optional
should these security precautions should be observed religiously by non-
law
enforcement types???
Has the amount of time and money spent on airport security post 9/11,
(which
probably exceeds the GDP of some African and Latin American countries)
been
well spent???
Or are these security precautions are an expensive charade designed to
persuade gullible people that the government is making them safer???
-- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3384 - Release Date: 01/16/11
|
|