Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,260 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Or another example of giving the parasites in Washington an inch and they want a mile.
http://www.theorator.com/bills109/hr3397.html

------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Written Security Plan-

(1) SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY- The Secretary shall require each private-use and public-use airport to document its security procedures in a written security plan that is consistent with the most recent security guidelines for general aviation airports published by the Transportation Security Administration.

(2) UPDATES- The Secretary shall require an airport that submits a plan under paragraph (1) to submit to the Secretary an updated version of the plan every 3 years with the airport's renewal application for registration under subsection (b).
--------------------------------------------------------------

The best I can make out of it is I'm supposed to fence in my place and add some kind of security system that will satisfy those ******* leaches in Washington. Then I'm supposed to report to those ***holes every three years. For which they will allow me to pay them a fee, the amount of which hasn't been determined.

Those Washington idiots leave thousands of miles of US border open and they want me to fence in my heliport. :frown:

I think I'll just send them this and tell them here is my security plan, you ******* parasites.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
Just tell them it's closed if anybody asks, otherwise business as usual. Staying off the grid is getting to be more fun all the time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,713 Posts
Buck, I think I need to go into the fencing business!

This bill could not possibly (I hope) fly as written.
There are too many things left undefined, such as "secure areas".
How do you keep a log of every transient aircraft when not every FBO is open 24/7. People can come and go as they please.

As an example, the Memphis Soaring Society has a 3625 x 300 ft. grass strip with hangars and a clubhouse. It would cost a fortune to fence all that in. It would also be a hazard to student glider pilots

They would also have to create an entire new agency to constantly monitor thousands and thousands of private strips for compliance.

The man is obviously an idiot and totally ignorant about general aviation.

The numbers below are from the CIA World Fact Book. They are probably understated. The MSS strip is not even in the AOPA airport directory.


Airports:

14,893 (2005)

Airports - with paved runways:

total: 5,120

over 3,047 m: 191
2,438 to 3,047 m: 223
1,524 to 2,437 m: 1,402
914 to 1,523 m: 2,355
under 914 m: 949 (2005)

Airports - with unpaved runways:

total: 9,773

over 3,047 m: 1
2,438 to 3,047 m: 7
1,524 to 2,437 m: 156
914 to 1,523 m: 1,736
under 914 m: 7,873 (2005)

Heliports:

153 (2005)

Fencing runways would become a billion dollar business.:freak:

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,260 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Originally posted by GotGlock1917


As an example. the Memphis Soaring Society has a 3625 x 300 ft. grass strip with hangars and a clubhouse. It would cost a fortune to fence all that in. It would also be a hazard to student glider pilots

The man is obviously and idiot and totally ignorant about general aviation.
John
Exactly.

This would force thousands of airports to close.

We were talking about this at the 3,000 foot grass strip where I fly.
It's at somewhat of a retirement community and is a convenience more than anything. Few people that live there use the airport so there's no way that the community will pay anything to "secure" that airport. They would just shut it down. I know I'll close mine before I let those idiots force me to do this foolishness.


I'm afraid this "homeland security" BS has given the government a license to become a police state. God help us when the democrats are in charge again.:frown:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,713 Posts
Buck,

I wouldn't get too worried about this bill yet.

It was introduced on July 21, 2005.

Last Action: Aug 15, 2005: Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity.

Nothing has been done with it since. It has to be sent to committee (House Homeland Security Committee) and will probably never get out of committee. It hasn't moved in nearly 9 months. The AOPA will fight it vigorously.

Below is copied from AOPA's site. It is from July 25, 2005.
With no updates since then, I'm guessing this bill will never go anywhere. Sweeney is just trying to look busy and make people think he is earning his money.


From AOPA:
Mandatory written security plans, fencing for every airport, and double locks on every aircraft are just three of the provisions in the latest legislative attempt to impose onerous security standards on GA, but the measure faces a long road before it could become law.

Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY) on Thursday introduced a bill (H.R. 3397) that would impose mandatory federal security rules on every GA airport, pilot, aircraft, and hangar—a move that AOPA strongly opposes. The bill was introduced despite concerns raised by AOPA.

"The security needs of a GA airport are not the same as those of an airport served by the airlines," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mandating that they follow similar rules makes no sense."

Among other provisions, the bill would require all GA airports, including private-use airports, to be fenced; all aircraft to be double locked with an internal and an external lock; and all hangars to be locked when not in use. In addition every public- and private-use airport would have to register with the Department of Homeland Security and submit to local law enforcement agencies a written security plan to be updated every three years. Public-use airports also would have to maintain a log of every transient aircraft for five years, and pilots would be required to verify the identity of all passengers.

"Imposing specific measures like these on every airport would be ridiculously expensive, is unnecessary, and ignores the guiding principle of making investments in security based on risk," said Andy Cebula, AOPA senior vice president of government and technical affairs. "Instead airport owners should work with their local communities to determine what security measures make sense for them. The TSA developed guidelines that can help communities establish standards, but they are meant to be just that—guidelines.""

The legislation faces review by the House Homeland Security Committee. AOPA's legislative affairs staff has already initiated contact with members of that committee as well as the Transportation and Infrastructure committees to express AOPA's objections to Rep. Sweeney's bill.




John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,260 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
It kind of sounds like it will die on the vine.:)

Too bad, look at all the new government jobs it would have created.:upeyes:
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top