PDA

View Full Version : "Interesting" TSA proposal



WTE_Galway
11-05-2008, 10:09 PM
Found this over on M4T ... typical of politicians ...

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&f...wtopic&p=37715#37715 (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&p=37715#37715)

Critical Information!
TSA Proposed Legislation
Bottom line: If this TSA Legislation passes, it will be the end of the Wings
of Freedom tour and programs similar.
We need your support. This is time sensitive. Please read below:



TSA Proposed Legislation Represents Potentially Significant Regulation of Private Aircraft Operations

RE: Docket Number TSA 2008-0021, Large Aircraft Security Program, Other Aircraft Operator Security Program and Airport Operator Security Program

On October 30, 2008, the TSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) with only a 60 day comment period (which includes several holidays and a period when, typically, Washington becomes a "Ghost Town") calling for sweeping new security requirements on the operation of all aircraft exceeding 12,500 pounds. The Collings Foundation's preliminary assessment of the proposal is that this legislation would be so cumbersome, far reaching, and virtually impossible to comply with, that our flying of historic aircraft would not be possible.

Because of the onerous requirements and encroachment on personal freedoms suggested in the NPRM, three major aircraft associations, AOPA, EAA and NBAA, have called for extending the comment period to120-days, plus public hearings to evaluate the impact and interpretation of the proposed ruling.

Industry estimates are that over 15,000 aircraft, 10,000 operators and 300 airports will be impacted by the 67-page proposal. New concepts of third party auditors, security program training and approval, and third party watch list checking firms with timely approvals-- which would allow the general aviation community to comply with these regulations do not exist, thereby resulting in a real Catch 22.

Furthermore, there seem to be no discussions of the cost vs. benefits of this huge Federal Program, and who would pay for it other than "the General Aviation Community." As it is proposed, TSA-2008-0021 would have an enormous impact on general aviation, plus violation of Constitutional Rights issues.

As to its effect on the Collings Foundation, our assessment is that, as proposed, it would be fatal to the Wings of Freedom Tour and our ability to take these historic aircraft around the country and share them with millions of Americans annually. Please note that with some concern for political correctness please use "historic aircraft" rather than "bombers" or "warbirds" in your communications and correspondence.

The bottom line is that we need your help both short-term and long-term. Short-term, we need you to support the aviation communities' request to extend the comment period by a minimum of at least 60 days. The current deadline for comments is December 29, 2008.

Official Response: You may submit comments, identified by the TSA docket number TSA 2008-0021 to the Federal Docket Management System, a government-wide electronic docket management system, using any and/or all of the following methods:

By Mail, In Person or Fax to the Docket Management Facility, US Dept. of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington DC 20590-0001. Fax 202-493-2251.
Electronically through the Federal eRulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Higher Level Responses. If any of the Aviation Committee members of either the House or Senate, are your representatives, the same appeal for extension could be even more effective. For a list of Transportation/Aviation Committee members in the House of Representatives and Senate, click the appropriate link below:

House of Representatives: transportation.house.g...mbers.aspx

Senate: commerce.senate.gov/pu...b405db5%20

D. Contacting your Senator or Representative: You can reach your Senator or Representative by calling 202-224-3121 and asking for your Congressman. Upon being connected to the office, ask for the legislative assistant in charge of transportation issues. You won't get to speak to your Senator or Representative directly, but their aides for the respective areas are the right channels to get action.

E. Your Comments may also be sent to:

1. The Honorable Edward "Kip" Hawley, Assistant Secretary, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12 th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220.

2. Branch Chief-Policy, Plans & Stakeholder Affairs, Office of General Aviation, TSNM (TSA-28), Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12 th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220.

Please join in with us now to get this comment period extended. In the longer term, we'll be updating you further on the interpretation of this proposal, discussions regarding how this might impact us and what we can do about it. Thank you very much for your support.

Please take 5 minutes and contact the above representatives! Your support is what counts!

Someone please pass this on to SimHQ and UBI as I can't access those forums right now.

WTE_Galway
11-05-2008, 10:09 PM
Found this over on M4T ... typical of politicians ...

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&f...wtopic&p=37715#37715 (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&p=37715#37715)

Critical Information!
TSA Proposed Legislation
Bottom line: If this TSA Legislation passes, it will be the end of the Wings
of Freedom tour and programs similar.
We need your support. This is time sensitive. Please read below:



TSA Proposed Legislation Represents Potentially Significant Regulation of Private Aircraft Operations

RE: Docket Number TSA 2008-0021, Large Aircraft Security Program, Other Aircraft Operator Security Program and Airport Operator Security Program

On October 30, 2008, the TSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) with only a 60 day comment period (which includes several holidays and a period when, typically, Washington becomes a "Ghost Town") calling for sweeping new security requirements on the operation of all aircraft exceeding 12,500 pounds. The Collings Foundation's preliminary assessment of the proposal is that this legislation would be so cumbersome, far reaching, and virtually impossible to comply with, that our flying of historic aircraft would not be possible.

Because of the onerous requirements and encroachment on personal freedoms suggested in the NPRM, three major aircraft associations, AOPA, EAA and NBAA, have called for extending the comment period to120-days, plus public hearings to evaluate the impact and interpretation of the proposed ruling.

Industry estimates are that over 15,000 aircraft, 10,000 operators and 300 airports will be impacted by the 67-page proposal. New concepts of third party auditors, security program training and approval, and third party watch list checking firms with timely approvals-- which would allow the general aviation community to comply with these regulations do not exist, thereby resulting in a real Catch 22.

Furthermore, there seem to be no discussions of the cost vs. benefits of this huge Federal Program, and who would pay for it other than "the General Aviation Community." As it is proposed, TSA-2008-0021 would have an enormous impact on general aviation, plus violation of Constitutional Rights issues.

As to its effect on the Collings Foundation, our assessment is that, as proposed, it would be fatal to the Wings of Freedom Tour and our ability to take these historic aircraft around the country and share them with millions of Americans annually. Please note that with some concern for political correctness please use "historic aircraft" rather than "bombers" or "warbirds" in your communications and correspondence.

The bottom line is that we need your help both short-term and long-term. Short-term, we need you to support the aviation communities' request to extend the comment period by a minimum of at least 60 days. The current deadline for comments is December 29, 2008.

Official Response: You may submit comments, identified by the TSA docket number TSA 2008-0021 to the Federal Docket Management System, a government-wide electronic docket management system, using any and/or all of the following methods:

By Mail, In Person or Fax to the Docket Management Facility, US Dept. of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington DC 20590-0001. Fax 202-493-2251.
Electronically through the Federal eRulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Higher Level Responses. If any of the Aviation Committee members of either the House or Senate, are your representatives, the same appeal for extension could be even more effective. For a list of Transportation/Aviation Committee members in the House of Representatives and Senate, click the appropriate link below:

House of Representatives: transportation.house.g...mbers.aspx

Senate: commerce.senate.gov/pu...b405db5%20

D. Contacting your Senator or Representative: You can reach your Senator or Representative by calling 202-224-3121 and asking for your Congressman. Upon being connected to the office, ask for the legislative assistant in charge of transportation issues. You won't get to speak to your Senator or Representative directly, but their aides for the respective areas are the right channels to get action.

E. Your Comments may also be sent to:

1. The Honorable Edward "Kip" Hawley, Assistant Secretary, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12 th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220.

2. Branch Chief-Policy, Plans & Stakeholder Affairs, Office of General Aviation, TSNM (TSA-28), Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12 th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220.

Please join in with us now to get this comment period extended. In the longer term, we'll be updating you further on the interpretation of this proposal, discussions regarding how this might impact us and what we can do about it. Thank you very much for your support.

Please take 5 minutes and contact the above representatives! Your support is what counts!

Someone please pass this on to SimHQ and UBI as I can't access those forums right now.

berg417448
11-05-2008, 10:15 PM
If the Federal Government is for it, I'm probably against it! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SlowBurn68
11-05-2008, 10:59 PM
Well, I guess in this post 9/11 world, we're going to have to give up some personal freedoms for the sake of our security.

WTE_Galway
11-05-2008, 11:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlowBurn68:
Well, I guess in this post 9/11 world, we're going to have to give up some personal freedoms for the sake of our security. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep true, that was the consensus in Germany in 1935 as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tts just fantastic that we now have so many efficient intelligent together competent people working away in government agencies (after all its the ambition of every high schooler to work for a federal agency) that we can pretty much hand them absolute authority and trust them to get it right. Awesome really http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I wish I was competent enough to work in a government office and be given all that authority over people.

M_Gunz
11-06-2008, 12:35 AM
As Lt or Sgt Galway you would.

K_Freddie
11-06-2008, 01:04 AM
Foul!!! shouts the ref.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

IB2EZ2C
11-06-2008, 02:00 AM
I would prefer to keep my personal freedoms and handle the security of myself and my family.

&lt;clings to guns and religion&gt;

P.FunkAdelic
11-06-2008, 02:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by IB2EZ2C:
I would prefer to keep my personal freedoms and handle the security of myself and my family.

&lt;clings to guns and religion&gt; </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yea, unless Jesus beams down into your yard with a patriot missile system you're pretty much boned if someone decides to play Allah Akbar with their Cessna.

Its insane anyway to say that we need to give up our freedom to protect us from something they can't really describe in any cogent manner. Its like saying "don't turn on that stove, theres a ghost in the attic".

As for Galway's feelings on it, you don't like the government? Well if more people turned their dissatisfaction into action rather than apathy then a lot of the system would work better. How many people actually pay attention to civic politics? Not many even though city council has so much influence over your life directly. School boards and park boards and mayors and so on. Most people can't name the person who just lessened the quality of their child's education, but they know it sucks. Time to go to Starbucks for a green tea latte and consider getting another lease vehicle.

Jaws2002
11-06-2008, 11:02 AM
This comes to mind:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=i0LvtQAQ6sc

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Bremspropeller
11-06-2008, 11:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yea, unless Jesus beams down into your yard with a patriot missile system you're pretty much boned if someone decides to play Allah Akbar with their Cessna. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Maybe Allah Akbar comes to your yard with a PAT missiles system if someone wants to play Jesus' dad.

Dude, all that "whose imaginary friend is cooler"-stuff cracks me off. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

buzzsaw1939
11-06-2008, 12:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:
This comes to mind:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=i0LvtQAQ6sc

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Very interesting! thank you, But I don't think it will matter now, as a friend of mine tells me he saw an interview of our new president elect saying he's going to do away with the constitution anyway!.. I hope he's wrong!

Stingray333
11-06-2008, 12:46 PM
Without reading the 67 page proposal or googling more, what are the proposed changes by the TSA?

WTE_Galway
11-06-2008, 04:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by P.FunkAdelic:
As for Galway's feelings on it, you don't like the government? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have spent my life working for various Government agencies including Australian Social Security of several years and NSW State Lands and Environment for 10 years. I currently work for a semi-government genetic research organisation attached ot a university.

My comments are based on a lifetime of experience working in Government agencies. There are of course some competent people around but far to often the people making decisions that effect people are incompetent and only in the public sector because they are failures elsewhere.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stingray333:
Without reading the 67 page proposal or googling more, what are the proposed changes by the TSA? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have not read the whole thing either but the industry comments suggest:

- the current proposal will probably be extended to all aircraft of any size and type eventually
- that private pilots will need to pass quite extensive (and probably expensive)security checks which need to be renewed quite often
- some sort of official security check on passengers even if you have known and flown with them for years
- the type of security surveillance currently used at major airports may become a prerequisite for all airports even little private airstrips out in the boondocks.

PhantomKira
11-06-2008, 08:05 PM
P.FunkAdelic:

Its insane anyway to say that we need to give up our freedom to protect us from something they can't really describe in any cogent manner. Its like saying "don't turn on that stove, theres a ghost in the attic".

You said it very well, sir. It's insane to have a threat that can't be pinned down. Part of the problem of the current general world conflict.

Seriously, though, who crashes little Cessnas into houses on purpose? There are better targets out there. Doesn't the proposed cover larger aircraft anyway? Still, it's one notch closer to a tightly controlled, State [meaning Federal Government] run Country with little or no say by the individual. Read: Dictatorship.

LEXX_Luthor
11-06-2008, 09:36 PM
Forever War

Everybody needs to read Joe Haldeman's novel. I have the original paperback, with timeless cover. Kinda different. Spacesuit and Sword.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/FOREVERWAR.jpg

all editions listed here ~&gt; http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/joe-w-haldeman/forever-war.htm

Kettenhunde
11-06-2008, 10:04 PM
The act is trying to make all aircraft flights subject to the kind of security found on commercial airlines. It's "change", LOL.

It would require aircraft owners to subject themselves and passengers to security inspections of the type found at major airports. If the act passes then eventually when I want to fly MY airplane, I will have to have MY bags inspected, MY body scanned for metal, and my license examined before I go fly MY plane. The cool thing is I get to pay for this but you will certainly get to share my pain as well on your tax return. We can spread the wealth.

This is like asking you to be searched every time you get into your own car. It is nothing but a blatant intent to curtail freedom and the Homeland Security to get a larger slice of the Government pie.

Guess who is the only one who can conduct the inspections? Guess who has to pay for it, taxpayer? Think of the licensing and fees we can charge too so we can increase the size of our own already bloated bureaucracy.

Well it's only about 2 billion jobs in the General Aviation sector that will be standing in the unemployment line.

Read some security studies and look at the damage a light GA plane can do. It's not much and the threat has been deemed pretty much nil. It is much more likely to a van or a truck than a light plane.

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2002/02-2-159_report.pdf

These are the security measures General Aviation requires:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2001/011212_secu...mmendations_v31.html (http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2001/011212_security_recommendations_v31.html)

If you own an aircraft, Uncle Sugar already knows a considerable amount about your background. As a pilot, I am required by law to keep the US Government informed of my current address at all times. Failure to submit the proper paperwork for a change of address within 30 days will result in punitive action against my license.


All the best,

Crumpp

P.FunkAdelic
11-06-2008, 11:57 PM
People keep talking about 'the government' as if its the complete evil. You gotta remember that in Bush's america especially government is just a proxy for private sector expansion. The same people who made money off blowing up Iraq made money off rebuilding it.

There's a business in war thats been around since Eisenhower talked about the Military Industrial Complex. I mean really, is it any surprise when the most influential figures in Bush's cabinet were former CEO's or businessmen?

There are too many jobs and too much money tied into these wars that have ingeniously been hauled under the umbrella of this generic state of permanent danger for us to have any freedom. Its not the government trying to be dictatorial for the sake of power. Its largely the profits that can be had from it. Its no different than small cities getting hooked on casino profits. There is no doubt an ideological component to it but these guys are careful to make sure they make a buck while doing it.

Government, private business, its all one thing these days. Theres tons of money to be made from regulating the skies. Hiring people to do this stuff. I guarantee you there will be private firms hired to do some part of what they want in this bill.

Jex_TE
11-07-2008, 05:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlowBurn68:
Well, I guess in this post 9/11 world, we're going to have to give up some personal freedoms for the sake of our security. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great so the more security we get, the less freedoms? Presumably then to be absolutely secure we need to become slaves since more security=less freedom and total security must equate to slavery. I'm not prepared to give up freedom but I am prepared to die for it.

WTE_Galway
11-09-2008, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jex_TE:
I'm not prepared to give up freedom but I am prepared to die for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is somewhat ironic that the men who fought and sometimes died in those old warbirds that the original post on M4T is about were fighting for freedom against just this sort of thing. One of the essences of Nazism was the idea that individual freedoms must be sacrificed for the good of the German people during "difficult times" when the Reich was under threat.

Dating back to the Magna Carta and before, historically people in power will empire build and try and manipulate the system and the people to hand them more power.

P.FunkAdelic
11-09-2008, 07:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
It is somewhat ironic that the men who fought and sometimes died in those old warbirds that the original post on M4T is about were fighting for freedom against just this sort of thing. One of the essences of Nazism was the idea that individual freedoms must be sacrificed for the good of the German people during "difficult times" when the Reich was under threat. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Now I'm not defending the Nazis in anyway but in all fairness just about any civilization has taken that generic stance in times of peril. In fact that statement on its own misses the mark simply because during the war all the allied powers also suspended the majority of what we consider basic human rights for the sake of fighting the Nazis. We sacrificed some basic freedoms to save them in the long run.

The real detail about fascism that makes your first statement important is not that the Nazis suspended rights for times of war, just like all the other nations, but that fascism believes at its core that life itself is a permanent state of war, a permanent human struggle. In effect fascism is the ultimate ideological equivalent of social darwinism.

So in many ways this perma-war that is being called Terror, not even terrorism mind you, but terror itself, a human emotional reaction that surely cannot be eliminated, is very fascist in its make up. At least the allies couldn't hide when they beat the Nazis and there was a clear place to end up (Berlin). With terror manifesting itself as just about any brown guy from another country out 'there' who's name we cannot pronounce nor remember its quite feasible to turn just about any standard, ever happening, middle east political crisis into another reason to flare up that sense of fear over something we aren't entirely sure what is or wherefore it shall arise.

So there is an ironic Nazi comment to be made after all.