G-EMMA Wrote:
I hope you realise from this Carlile is trying very hard to clutch at straws and will therefore review your comments on this thread regard the potential of GA aircraft being used by terrorists.
No Sir, I do not see a need to review of my comments. I simply accept a need for oversight, for whatever reason, by the authorities if they deem to have identified a risk. I am happy to to at least debate the issue in an open forum and give an opinion, I cannot offer anything more than that really.
And here's something to consider, if you used any of the things you identified in a suspcious manner, in a public place, and were pinged for doing something that might lead to a view that you were up to no good, you'd be stopped and questioned. That's the bigger issue here G-EMMA and that's the issue that should be debated. If you were on the tube and were spotted concealing a battery pack inside a coke can or a bag of crisps, I expect someone would raise the alarm. And rightly so IMO because it's the environment that's the issue in addition to the act itself, the act of doing that in such an environment is open to question. GA is different because of the control one has over where one can be with the minimum of oversight. It strikes me as a bigger issue than the aircraft itself. It's a combination of things.
But then, playing devils advocate, should a photography student standing outside a tube station taking photos be stopped and searched? And so and so forth.
The cat's out of the bag now and that's the issue. How both sides of the debate deals with this issue in the future when such mindsets exist is the problem GA and the authorities have now.
I still accept the need for oversight however but that's just me, that said, I am very open to the opinions discrediting oversight and the choice of GA as a topic for such oversight.
Best,
QP