billvon 2,396 #26 September 13, 2011 >I clearly stated that you would have a big problem if pilot certificates were being >issued by the states on a county by county basis, and people in certain areas were >being denied certificates despite meeting all of the requirements of apptitude, health, >training, and background. Why? That's how driver's licenses are issued, and are denied based on age, criminal history and a host of administrative reasons - and those criteria vary from state to state. Pilot's licenses are issued by the FAA, and thus are pretty uniform. But if they were done by state, and had different criteria by state, I have no reason to believe they'd be any more onerous than driver's licenses. >So you would be OK this scenario playing out for you personally: you have a valid >medical, you meet the flight currency requirements, have plenty of experince, but you >can't fly you plane into CA's LA county because LA is restricting county pilot licenses >on a basis that is not requirement based. Happens all the time. Many places do not allow pilots with sport or recreational certificates, or who fly LSA's, to land at their airports. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #27 September 13, 2011 Quote Why? That's how driver's licenses are issued, and are denied based on age, criminal history and a host of administrative reasons - and those criteria vary from state to state. That isn't even close... criminal history, age, etc are all quantified and specific criteria. If you don't meet the specified criteria that is a no brainer. You are honestly telling me that you think losing your drivers license because of a DUI is the same as being arbitarily denied a driver license despite meeting all of the state's specified requirments, and having no disqualifying characteristics, just because that county only wants to issue drivers licenses to a select chosen few?"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #28 September 13, 2011 Quote Sucks for you that the judge agreed with me Sucks for you that the judge also agreed with me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #29 September 13, 2011 QuoteIf a state says you have to do "X" to get one, then do "X" rather than whine about it And if the State said you had to know a judge to be able to get a pilots license.... Would you support that as well? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #30 September 13, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Typical Kallend. If this was a thread about restricting private pilots licenses you would be bawling like a baby about your rights. When it comes to others rights fuckem! Or toy rocket motors. Don't forget that horrible travesty of justice, when the BATF wanted to regulate really big toy rocket motors. Oh the horror! Sucks for you that the judge agreed with me. Sucks for you that the Supreme Court agrees with the 2nd Amendment. No, I agree with the SCOTUS interpretation of the not unlimited rights bestowed by the 2nd.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #31 September 13, 2011 Quote Quote Sucks for you that the judge agreed with me Sucks for you that the judge also agreed with me. Since it seems, then, that United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton agreed with both of us, why would it suck for me? You are being illogical (as usual)... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #32 September 13, 2011 QuoteQuoteIf a state says you have to do "X" to get one, then do "X" rather than whine about it And if the State said you had to know a judge to be able to get a pilots license.... Would you support that as well? Moot as well as stupid. See post #5 this thread. CA does not require a judge's consent for a CCW permit.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #33 September 13, 2011 QuoteYou are being illogical (as usual) Seems that once you run out of facts to back up your positions.... You start the insults...... You would not support having to know a judge to get a pilots license. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #34 September 13, 2011 QuoteQuoteYou are being illogical (as usual) Seems that once you run out of facts to back up your positions.... You start the insults...... You would not support having to know a judge to get a pilots license. Why not start a thread on that subject, since it has nothing to do with this thread (judges NOT being required to approve CCW permits in CA and no-one has suggested that they should). Do try to keep up.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #35 September 13, 2011 QuoteWhy not start a thread on that subject, since it has nothing to do with this thread (judges NOT being required to approve CCW permits in CA and no-one has suggested that they should). Do try to keep up. Oh look.... A dodge.... How, normal for you. When stated that you had to know a judge of be famous... You claimed people should try harder. Don't blame anyone but YOU for bringing that into the discussion. Fact is that you are up in arms anytime that someone tries to step on your rights.... But you are quick to try and stomp on others rights you don't like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #36 September 13, 2011 Quote Quote Why not start a thread on that subject, since it has nothing to do with this thread (judges NOT being required to approve CCW permits in CA and no-one has suggested that they should). Do try to keep up. Oh look.... A dodge.... How, normal for you. When stated that you had to know a judge of be famous... You claimed people should try harder. Don't blame anyone but YOU for bringing that into the discussion. Fact is that you are up in arms anytime that someone tries to step on your rights.... But you are quick to try and stomp on others rights you don't like. But people don't have to know a judge, hence my SARCASTIC comment. You do know what sarcasm is, right? I didn't bring judges into the thread, rhaig did. Do try to keep up, dear boy.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #37 September 13, 2011 QuoteBut people don't have to know a judge, hence my SARCASTIC comment. You do know what sarcasm is, right? Yes, I also know what a hypocrite is. When stated that you had to know a judge of be famous... You claimed people should try harder. Don't blame anyone but YOU for bringing that into the discussion. Fact is that you are up in arms anytime that someone tries to step on your rights.... But you are quick to try and stomp on others rights you don't like. QuoteI didn't bring judges into the thread, rhaig did. Do try to keep up, dear boy. And you replied that people should try harder, thus owning your position... I am here, I don't know where you are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #38 September 13, 2011 Quote QuoteBut people don't have to know a judge, hence my SARCASTIC comment. You do know what sarcasm is, right? Yes, I also know what a hypocrite is. When stated that you had to know a judge of be famous... You claimed people should try harder. Don't blame anyone but YOU for bringing that into the discussion. Fact is that you are up in arms anytime that someone tries to step on your rights.... But you are quick to try and stomp on others rights you don't like. QuoteI didn't bring judges into the thread, rhaig did. Do try to keep up, dear boy. And you replied that people should try harder, thus owning your position... I am here, I don't know where you are. I guess I overestimated you, you don't know what sarcasm is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #39 September 13, 2011 Care to address what I wrote, or are you going to continue attacking posters, and dismissing peoples arguments as stupid without actually considering them. You would think that an academik like yourself would display a little more integrity in the way they debated things. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 September 14, 2011 Quote You would think that an academik like yourself would display a little more integrity in the way they debated things. really? how many academics have you debated with? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #41 September 14, 2011 QuoteI guess I overestimated you, you don't know what sarcasm is. Yes, it is hard to tell when you say something and then when called out on it later claim it to have been a joke because you can't defend your earlier position. So, a simple question. Should a non-prohibited person in CA be allowed to carry a concealed weapon? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #42 September 14, 2011 Quote Quote You would think that an academik like yourself would display a little more integrity in the way they debated things. really? how many academics have you debated with? ROFLMAO I would also have accepted "You would think so but you'd be wrong" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
