X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:22:53 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma01.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c1) with ESMTP id 4790817 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:23:29 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.39; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com Received: from mtaout-db03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-db03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.195]) by imr-ma01.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p0J2Mgf6012128 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:22:42 -0500 Received: from [10.122.85.54] (mobile-166-137-141-056.mycingular.net [166.137.141.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mtaout-db03.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id 659B3E000401; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:22:38 -0500 (EST) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8C148) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5--731022235 X-Original-Message-Id: <3DD0CCB8-7E63-4165-B07D-CB909577F64C@aol.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8C148) From: vtailjeff@aol.com Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Airport security? X-Original-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:22:27 -0600 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:421088000:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33c34d364aee2535 X-AOL-IP: 166.137.141.56 --Apple-Mail-5--731022235 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Death by a thousand cuts. Sent from my iPad On Jan 18, 2011, at 8:13 PM, Terrence O'Neill wrote: > 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? > What sillyness. > terrence > LNC2=20 >=20 >=20 > On Jan 18, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote: >=20 >> C'mon, this is an opportunity for those in the gate business. Employ a d= ouble gate system where ones vehicle is not allowed to pass the second gate u= ntil 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. >> =20 >> 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 d= rive through a small swale entry, is assured. >> =20 >> Grayhawk >> =20 >> In a message dated 1/18/2011 9:11:28 A.M. Central Standard Time, panelmak= er@earthlink.net writes: >> Interesting observations and questions.=20 >> My question is: by keeping vehicles from entering after you, are you the p= olice 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 th= e same thing and has for a long time. I think it=E2=80=99s to placate a loca= l congress person. >>=20 >> Jim >>=20 >> =20 >> From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of ma= rv@lancair.net >> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 8:50 AM >> To: lml@lancaironline.net >> Subject: [LML] Airport security? >>=20 >> =20 >> Posted for "Douglas Brunner" : >>=20 >> =20 >> Yesterday (1/14), I headed out to my airport (KMTN) to do some work on m= y >> plane. Recently, my airport has installed a sliding gate with a code to= >> control entry. >> =20 >> On my way in, I observed the car in front of me stop at the keypad, spen= d >> some time sitting there and then drive away from the entry. My inferenc= e >> was that they did not know the access code to the airport. I pulled up t= o >> the gate, punched in the access code and pulled through the gate. I sto= pped >> 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 ar= ound >> me and go through the gate while it was still open. I moved my car slig= htly >> to block their entry figuring that if they didn't know the code, they >> shouldn't be coming in with me. >> =20 >> 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. I= n >> 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 w= ent >> on our ways. >> =20 >> 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 someo= ne >> follow me in through the security gate, or to follow others in. However i= n >> this case, it appeared to me that they had demonstrated that they did no= t >> know the code so I treated them (not knowing they were cops) differently= . >> =20 >> Several questions/observations: >> =20 >> 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??? >> =20 >> Since the police appear to regard the security precautions as optional >> should these security precautions should be observed religiously by non-= law >> enforcement types??? >> =20 >> Has the amount of time and money spent on airport security post 9/11, (w= hich >> probably exceeds the GDP of some African and Latin American countries) b= een >> well spent??? >> =20 >> Or are these security precautions are an expensive charade designed to >> persuade gullible people that the government is making them safer??? >> =20 >>=20 >> -- >> =20 >> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.ht= ml >> 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 >>=20 >=20 > =3D --Apple-Mail-5--731022235 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Death by a thousand cuts.

Sent f= rom my iPad

On Jan 18, 2011, at 8:13 PM, Terrence O'Neill <= troneill@charter.net> wrote:<= br>
If there are hundreds= of small airports without gates, what's the logic of having them at bigger a= irports?  Did you ask 'What's 'logic' mean?"
How about requiring ev= ery farmer with a strip to fence in and gate?
Or everyone with an u= jltralight?
What sillyness.
terrence
LNC2 = ;


On Jan 18, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Sky2high@aol.co= m wrote:

C'mon, this is an opportunity for those in the gate business.  Emp= loy=20 a double gate system where ones vehicle is not allowed to pass the second ga= te=20 until the first is closed.  Exit must be accomplished elsewhere with a=20= single gate (and toll) to get out.  Think of all the people that would b= e=20 employed building, installing and maintaining these gates.
 
My own airport, KARR, has fences and gates.  The Sk= y=20 Haven hangar complex (www.skyhaven.com) is=20 required to operate two gates.  However, the fence at the northeast onl= y=20 goes 50 feet beyond the gate and if you are willing to drive through a small= =20 swale entry, is assured.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 1/18/2011 9:11:28 A.M. Central Standard Time,=20 panelmaker@earthlink.net writes:

I= nteresting observations=20 and questions.
My question is: by keeping vehicles from entering after= =20 you, are you the police now? Are you expected to enforce a regulation, law= ,=20 what ever? Is that responsibility passed on to you because you rent space?= Our=20 airport does the same thing and has for a long time. I think it=E2=80=99s t= o placate a=20 local congress person.

Jim

 

From: Lancair=20 Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of marv@lancair.net
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 8:50=20 AM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
 

Posted= for "Douglas Brunner"=20 <douglasbrunner@earthlink.net>:

&= nbsp;
 Yesterday (1/14),=20 I headed out to my airport (KMTN) to do some work on=20 my
 plane.  Recently, my airport has installed a sliding= =20 gate with a code to
 control entry.
 
 On my way i= n, I=20 observed the car in front of me stop at the keypad, spend
 some ti= me=20 sitting there and then drive away from the entry.  My=20 inference
 was that they did not know the access code to the=20 airport.  I pulled up to
 the gate, punched in the acces= s=20 code and pulled through the gate.  I stopped
 on the oth= er=20 side of the gate, to limit entry to one car.  The car which=20 had
 been in front of me (and had failed to gain entry) then tried= to=20 pull around
 me and go through the gate while it was still=20 open.  I moved my car slightly
 to block their entry=20 figuring that if they didn't know the code, they
 shouldn't be com= ing=20 in with me.
 
 Well it turned out that the two men in the c= ar,=20 were actually police
 officers, and they did not take kindly to my= =20 blocking their entrance.  In
 essence they "copped an=20= attitude" (pun intended) and gave me a hard time
 about blocking=20= them.  After a few unkind words were exchanged, we both=20 went
 on our ways.
 
 Normally, I am not a huge f= an=20 of the (pseudo) security procedures at
 airports.  And=20= perhaps from time to time, I have been known to let someone
 follo= w me=20 in through the security gate, or to follow others in. However in
 = this=20 case, it appeared to me that they had demonstrated that they did=20 not
 know the code so I treated them (not knowing they were cops)=20= differently.
 
 Several=20 questions/observations:
 
 Since the number of terrorist=20= incidents attributable to GA aircraft both
 prior to and after=20 instituting these security precaution is ZERO, is it
 logical to i= nfer=20 that the procedures have been a success???
 
 Since the po= lice=20 appear to regard the security precautions as optional
 should thes= e=20 security precautions should be observed religiously by non-=20 law
 enforcement types???
 
 Has the amount of tim= e=20 and money spent on airport security post 9/11, (which
 probably=20= exceeds the GDP of some African and Latin American countries)=20 been
 well spent???
 
 Or are these security=20 precautions are an expensive charade designed to
 persuade gullibl= e=20 people that the government is making them=20 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
V= ersion: 10.0.1191 / Virus=20 Database: 1435/3384 - Release Date:=20 01/16/11


=3D
= --Apple-Mail-5--731022235--