N965VJ

LASP is an ill-advised plan to bring Part 121 (commercial aviation) style security to General Aviation (GA) that was announced in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking two years ago. The proposal failed to recognize the inherent differences between GA and airline operations. Organizations like the National Business Aircraft Association, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Experimental Aircraft Association, etc. all rallied against the proposal. There is a misconception that GA is comprised of nothing more than “corporate fat cats” cruising around in Gulfstreams. In reality, business aircraft are utilized by well over 10,000 small and medium-sized companies flying into 5,000 public use airports around the country.

After seeing a “Geraldo” style TV newz report about how GA airports called “"Is Houston a Sitting Duck for Terrorism?” Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee asked the DHS Office of Inspector General to investigate. The OIG concluded that GA was a “limited and mostly hypothetical tool for terrorists”, and stated in a challenge to the TV report "Houston Is Not a Sitting Duck for Terrorism.” Rep. Jackson Lee was not happy with the findings of the OIG, and called them “disrespectful”. Rep. Jackson Lee is the same person that asked a NASA scientist if the Mars Pathfinder took a picture of the flag that Neil Armstrong left behind.

If you want to get an idea of the encroachment of freedom and civil liberties LASP represents, take a look at what the EAA has to say:

Personal Liberties — For the first time, the TSA’s regulatory activities would be extended to personal GA aircraft, historic and vintage aircraft, and operators, passengers, and pilots flying for personal and business use. As such, the LASP is a radical departure from anything the TSA has enacted to date. It would, in effect, require governmental review and authority before you could operate your own personal vehicle.

And it would require separate review and authority for every single flight that included passengers. Nothing like the LASP has been imposed on cars, trucks, boats, or any other privately owned, privately operated vehicles. The TSA’s proposal raises serious constitutional questions about personal liberty, privacy, and freedom of movement.

The LASP could also have a significant and chilling effect on interstate and intrastate commerce. It would place new and significant costs and restrictions on the freedom of individuals and companies to move people and goods around the country by personal, company-owned, or chartered aircraft.

(the bolding is in the original document)

You know, besides being a vital business tool, General Aviation is also a lot of fun as a recreational activity. Flying off somewhere for a “$100 hamburger”, helping a friend do an Annual on their Cessna, or even just hanging out at the airport on a weekend is a way of life. There’s no way we’re going to just stand by while the TSA sets up shop at our airports they way they have with commercial aviation.

mozgytog

I've challenged TSORon about this several times, and he told me to stop pointing out my education as if it qualified me to say anything, let alone my profession and clearances.

Also, that was a case where there was direct and significant risk. In this case, there is a vague, indirect threat from people thousands of miles away who lack the means that the British army in 1776 had.

TSORon is asking us to stipulate to there being significant risk. I would like to see him prove it. He can't, because it doesn't exist.

He's created a false dichotomy and a straw man so that he can more easily defeat us by claiming that we want thousands of dead Americans. It's disgusting.

rhino_uk

I see no mileage in trying to argue with TSORon and his ilk

Just point them in the direction of this thread where the TSA admit they are rubbish and watch the fun as they try to twist the logic of those TSA people not being the real experts

Firebug4

I don't work for TSA but I do work for CBP. I thank you for your viewpoint. It is much more on point then many here realize. I wish some of your fellow colleagues and moderators could see this.

FB

the_happiness_store

How about screening the airport workforce then this would be unnecessary?

ND Sol

Full body cavity searches would "enhance" the security of the flying public.

What would actually enhance security is to look just for credible threats. If you narrow the universe of what you are searching for, you are more likely to not miss the critical items. That has been proven time and time again. Stop the ID checks; stop looking for small knives; stop looking for liquids.

There is no factual basis to support this.

essxjay

Addendum: Apropos to no particular post or thread, I want to go on record about how heartened I am by the surge of creative response to the latest TSA screening protocols and constructive activism displayed in this forum the past few weeks. Keep it up guys! ^

TSORon

I'm quite curious, what are these "latest TSA screening protocols" you discuss? I have seen numerous guess's as to what they “might” be, but nothing really all that concrete. Care to let us in on your version?

mikemey

Why don't you tell us, since you're obviously in the know and taking way too much glee in holding it over our heads.

essxjay

http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/102810_patdown.shtm

TSORon

Pretty short on detail isn’t it. Yet the folks here are making all kinds of guess’s or outright “I know all about it” kinds of statements. Don’t you find that interesting, and of course entertaining?

I'm not holding anything over your head sir, in fact the one word I have had to say on the subject is "Nope". No glee, no holding, pretty much a non-response. Could you be confusing me with someone else?