Government intrusion in hobby flying
03-08-2011, 10:14 AM
#401
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: newbury,
OH
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Kidepoxy,
where is the logic in stopping drones that might hit a people aircraft,
but continue allowing the LOS that have hit people aircraft (hi colorado )
where is the logic in stopping drones that might hit a people aircraft,
but continue allowing the LOS that have hit people aircraft (hi colorado )
Besides, did any of the instances you cite now or in the past get the FAA to put restrictions on modelers? The answer is NO. Did the current increase in drones, FPV and RPV? The answer is YES? Nuff said...
03-08-2011, 10:28 AM
#402
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
You may be pleased to know the FAA Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which recently passed the Senate, includes a ''Special Rule for Model Aircraft'' amendment that exempts model aircraft from the proposed legislation.
03-08-2011, 10:44 AM
#403
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R
BTW - the worse case scenario of rules looks like this:
400 foot altitude limit
1,500 foot lateral limit
100 mph max speed
No turbines
55 pound max weight
No flying within 5 NM of any airport
None of us knows for sure what will actually be in the rule, but everything we have seen or heard makes it very clear that we will ALL be touched by it.
BTW - the worse case scenario of rules looks like this:
400 foot altitude limit
1,500 foot lateral limit
100 mph max speed
No turbines
55 pound max weight
No flying within 5 NM of any airport
None of us knows for sure what will actually be in the rule, but everything we have seen or heard makes it very clear that we will ALL be touched by it.
400 foot altitude limit
The same limit that FAA has asked modelers to abide by for decades. It has a legitimate purpose, to provide a 100 foot buffer zone between model airplanes and regulated aircraft, and clearly is within FAA's responsibility to provide for safe navigation in the national airspace. What does AMA think it should be? Should FAA delegate their responsibility for safety in the airways to AMA and whatever AMA thinks it should be?
1,500 foot lateral limit
That limit is probably beyond the distance to flyover boundaries of the vast majority of AMA chartered clubs flying sites. Modelers with the freedom to roam over more than a quarter mile from the flight station are probably far enough out in the boonies that nobody is going see it happening anyway.
100 mph max speed
Derives from AMA's definition of 'high performance' model aircraft in a rule prohibiting night flying of same. A self-inflicted foot bullet. Not an air traffic safety issue, so should not be difficult to may a case for removing this constraint. Did AMA argue against it when it was discussed at the sUAS ARC?
No turbines
Same as the speed limit thing. Not an air traffic safety issue IF it doesn't increase the likelihood of model aircraft getting into the same airspace occupied by regulated aircraft. The record is spotty.........on the plus side, turbines are flown at the approach end of MCAS Miramar where a 200 foot altitude limit has been imposed by the CO, so it can be done. On the minus side is an incident of a Mooney pilot on approach to a nearby airport and finding himself surrounded by model turbine powered jets in all directions including above that were participating in an AMA sanctioned event at Prado Dam near Chino, CA. The event survives, relocated to patch of desert not far from a USMC base where marines are sent to train and become acclimated to an environment similar to what they will have to live with while deployed to Iraq. Is that AMA's general plan to accommodate turbine fliers to mitigate air traffic safety concerns?
55 pound max weight
What the rest of the world lives with, per ICAO definition of model aircraft. The US is a member nation of ICAO, and FAA is the designated US representative. Is AMA going to displace FAA in that role? Other countries allow larger models by waiver, similar to a program AMA already has in place to waive its own rules. What hardship is involved in meeting FAA vs. AMA waiver requirements?
No flying within 5 NM of any airport
Current FAA guidance says 3 NM, and it isn't a hard requirement. Models are allowed within 3 NM with notification and consent of airport operators. Certainly not a showstopper if modelers now operating from 3 to 5 mi out from the airport have to do the same coordination now required of those operating within 3NM.
What of these potential threats to model aviation is delegating regulation thereof to a CBO going to mitigate, and how?
03-08-2011, 12:11 PM
#406
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
I would rather see a LOS plane inadvertantly hit ONE individual than a drone bring down a plane with many more.
I would rather see a FPV plane inadvertantly hit ONE individual than a LOS bring down a plane with many more.
wow, see how easy that was,
and what I said required absolutely no reference to reality in any way,
just like your line
Being LOS didnt stop that collision,
so it is easy to say if that were a FPV model then we wouldnt blame the model pilot then either... right?
Cause it sure looks like a failure on the modelers part to See & Avoid, which is the hang up folks are having with FPV. The model pilot didnt SEE the other plane which is exactly the fear you guys hang on the FPV models- that the pilots cant see enough.
03-08-2011, 12:16 PM
#407
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Lets have a sticky somewhere that has all of these acronyms in it. I cant keep track of all of'em anymore. How about that Big Ken?
03-08-2011, 12:24 PM
#408
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
FPV First Person Video, fly by video link with perspective as if an onboard pilot
its the not-autonomous style of hobby models under fire from AMA members and org
its the not-autonomous style of hobby models under fire from AMA members and org
03-08-2011, 12:39 PM
#409
Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Saint Augustine,
FL
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
I have just received a reply message from our senator regarding this issue....
Dear Mr. Atkinson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the possibility of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issuing regulations governing the use of model aircraft.
On February 17, I voted to pass S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which includes a provision protecting model aircraft from FAA regulation provided they are under 55 pounds and used exclusively for recreation or educational purposes. The bill is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives. As the FAA works to integrate more unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System, its primary focus will be on safety and security. However, reasonable accommodations can be made for those who wish to participate in a safe recreational activity.
Be assured that I will monitor this situation and keep your views in mind as Congress works on FAA reauthorization. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.
Sincerely,
Senator Bill Nelson
I guess we will see what happens...[8D]
Dear Mr. Atkinson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the possibility of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issuing regulations governing the use of model aircraft.
On February 17, I voted to pass S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which includes a provision protecting model aircraft from FAA regulation provided they are under 55 pounds and used exclusively for recreation or educational purposes. The bill is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives. As the FAA works to integrate more unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System, its primary focus will be on safety and security. However, reasonable accommodations can be made for those who wish to participate in a safe recreational activity.
Be assured that I will monitor this situation and keep your views in mind as Congress works on FAA reauthorization. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.
Sincerely,
Senator Bill Nelson
I guess we will see what happens...[8D]
03-08-2011, 01:32 PM
#410
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: tinner1
I am NOT reluctant about airing ''FACTS'' about what the AMA has done for ''non-members''. I just get tired of people who know NOTHING of what the AMA has done over the years, and refuse to look up the history of the AMA, say the AMA does nothing. And I can almost bet you and others will comment how wrong I am about the frequency thing I'm about to mention, AND have lived through. It ALWAYS happens and usually it is refuted with ''hearsay'' information that has only opinions as backing and NOT ''fact''. I will answer your question with this question/statement...
Don't the non-AMA people who fly planes and run cars and boats etc, use the same frequencies that the AMA helped acquire? In the early 60's to early 70's we used to fly on 27 mhz and had to put up with the CBers interference so the AMA helped secure the 72 mhz freqs. Sure individuals like Phil Kraft and Fred Marks had a vested interest in advancing RC, but the AMA was just as involved. They were on the AMA's committee that worked with the FCC. Those individuals, who were AMA members by the way, provided the research to make the new freqs workable. ...............
I am NOT reluctant about airing ''FACTS'' about what the AMA has done for ''non-members''. I just get tired of people who know NOTHING of what the AMA has done over the years, and refuse to look up the history of the AMA, say the AMA does nothing. And I can almost bet you and others will comment how wrong I am about the frequency thing I'm about to mention, AND have lived through. It ALWAYS happens and usually it is refuted with ''hearsay'' information that has only opinions as backing and NOT ''fact''. I will answer your question with this question/statement...
Don't the non-AMA people who fly planes and run cars and boats etc, use the same frequencies that the AMA helped acquire? In the early 60's to early 70's we used to fly on 27 mhz and had to put up with the CBers interference so the AMA helped secure the 72 mhz freqs. Sure individuals like Phil Kraft and Fred Marks had a vested interest in advancing RC, but the AMA was just as involved. They were on the AMA's committee that worked with the FCC. Those individuals, who were AMA members by the way, provided the research to make the new freqs workable. ...............
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Actually I've an AMA member for decades and I'm pretty well up the history of AMA and what it has done, and appreciate that non members got benefits from some of that work. You lose the bet that I will comment how wrong you are about the frequency thing you recalled. It was and remains a good thing for AMA members and non-AMA modelers as well. It cost AMA members $10 grand off the record to make that happen..........along with the grit of a senior statesman for modeling and AMA that often often posts here, who had his neck stuck out a long ways to make that 'purchase.' That was a couple of decades ago, however, and your post that prompted my query concerns what is being done currently by AMA and in particular the FACT that non AMA members will benefit that you alluded to but did not state. Here is the exchange as a refresher:
ORIGINAL: tinner1
The real shame of all this bickering is a simple FACT that whether you are an AMA member or not you will benefit from its work at protecting our hobby.
Simple question: how do modelers that are not AMA members benefit from AMA's lobbying to prevent regulation of the activities of only their own members?
03-08-2011, 01:50 PM
#411
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
I guess everybody thats been here over a year or so, except tinner1, knows who the feller was (he posts here often) that got the freq's for ama back then.
03-08-2011, 02:57 PM
#413
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: newbury,
OH
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
This could go on forever, but I won't continue it. I predicted a rebuttal to my post which you gave, saying it had no bases in "fact". Ronnie even chimed in with his personal put down about me not knowing who got the frequencies, a topic that always gets an argument going about who really did what. Accordingly I'm not going to play games with you children anymore. You can have at it without me!
Lets just face the facts...You and others think the AMA is the bad guy doing nothing for the modeling community as a whole, but only the AMA members and the AMA itself. I don't agree with you and am not going to waste my time or the readers time trying to prove to you and other AMA haters what it has done. If you want to think or post that you are right and have won so to speak, go right ahead. Actually we will ALL lose in the end if you guys win. You, Kid, Ronnie and others all feel and post continually how the AMA is out to get everyone but AMA members, and that is your right. But PLEASE don't say you don't "hate" the AMA...I won't believe you anyway! There are too many posts proving otherwise...
Lets just face the facts...You and others think the AMA is the bad guy doing nothing for the modeling community as a whole, but only the AMA members and the AMA itself. I don't agree with you and am not going to waste my time or the readers time trying to prove to you and other AMA haters what it has done. If you want to think or post that you are right and have won so to speak, go right ahead. Actually we will ALL lose in the end if you guys win. You, Kid, Ronnie and others all feel and post continually how the AMA is out to get everyone but AMA members, and that is your right. But PLEASE don't say you don't "hate" the AMA...I won't believe you anyway! There are too many posts proving otherwise...
03-08-2011, 03:11 PM
#414
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Hey tinner I really dont hate the ama like you think. I just don't have much use for several of the people there, an don't trust'em any farther than I could throw'em, thats what my gripe with'em is.
They may be doing everything in the world to help the modelers, but I think other things are going on there also.
They may be doing everything in the world to help the modelers, but I think other things are going on there also.
03-08-2011, 03:17 PM
#415
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: newbury,
OH
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Sorry to be so rough on you Ronnie. We do have common interests, and I let my rant out at you. Sorry [&o]I have nothing against you, I just get weary of all the AMA put downs. I will be the first to admit it isn't perfect, but the only thing I see on these forums is criticizing it, but NO ONE is doing anything but that. No organizing just complaints. I have said in the past that I contact the AMA directly with complaints. I have NEVER not been satisfied with the service/answers they have provided, which is more than some on these forums can say. Good Day to You Ron. And an aside, I got my "N" Gauge down and Am working up a layout. Cheers...
03-08-2011, 03:42 PM
#416
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: tinner1
Read it again, Don. I didn't say your post had no basis in fact. I simply asked you to state the fact that you apparently (and incorrectly) presumed everybody knew......"simple FACT" in your words.[/quote]
See, it's not that hard for you to spell what you presume to be facts.
This could go on forever, but I won't continue it. I predicted a rebuttal to my post which you gave, saying it had no bases in ''fact''.
Lets just face the facts...You and others think the AMA is the bad guy doing nothing for the modeling community as a whole, but only the AMA members and the AMA itself.
03-08-2011, 04:17 PM
#417
My Feedback: (9)
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Dear Mr. Forbus:
Thanks very much for getting in touch with me and letting me know what's on your mind regarding model airplanes and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill.
A House-Senate Conference Committee is currently working out the differences in the FAA Reauthorization bills that passed through both houses of Congress in February 2011. I understand your concerns regarding the exemption of model airplanes from federal regulations. I supported Senator Jim Inhofe's amendment to the Senate-passed version of this bill which would exempt model and recreational use airplanes weighing less than 55 pounds from regulations contained in the FAA Reauthorization.
I'm grateful you took the time to let me know where you stand. Although I am not a member of the conference committee, I will keep your thoughts in mind when the final version of the FAA Reauthorization comes before the Senate for approval.
Sincerely,
Lamar
From Lamar Alexander Tn
Thanks very much for getting in touch with me and letting me know what's on your mind regarding model airplanes and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill.
A House-Senate Conference Committee is currently working out the differences in the FAA Reauthorization bills that passed through both houses of Congress in February 2011. I understand your concerns regarding the exemption of model airplanes from federal regulations. I supported Senator Jim Inhofe's amendment to the Senate-passed version of this bill which would exempt model and recreational use airplanes weighing less than 55 pounds from regulations contained in the FAA Reauthorization.
I'm grateful you took the time to let me know where you stand. Although I am not a member of the conference committee, I will keep your thoughts in mind when the final version of the FAA Reauthorization comes before the Senate for approval.
Sincerely,
Lamar
From Lamar Alexander Tn
03-08-2011, 06:33 PM
#418
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lakeland,
FL
Posts: 7,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Well I can say someone read at least one of my letters, sent via the AMA.
I got this today via email.
Dear Mr. Mitchell:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the possibility of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issuing regulations governing the use of model aircraft.
On February 17, I voted to pass S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which includes a provision protecting model aircraft from FAA regulation provided they are under 55 pounds and used exclusively for recreation or educational purposes. The bill is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives. As the FAA works to integrate more unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System, its primary focus will be on safety and security. However, reasonable accommodations can be made for those who wish to participate in a safe recreational activity.
Be assured that I will monitor this situation and keep your views in mind as Congress works on FAA reauthorization. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.
Sincerely,
Senator Bill Nelson
I got this today via email.
Dear Mr. Mitchell:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the possibility of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issuing regulations governing the use of model aircraft.
On February 17, I voted to pass S. 223, the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act, which includes a provision protecting model aircraft from FAA regulation provided they are under 55 pounds and used exclusively for recreation or educational purposes. The bill is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives. As the FAA works to integrate more unmanned aircraft into the National Airspace System, its primary focus will be on safety and security. However, reasonable accommodations can be made for those who wish to participate in a safe recreational activity.
Be assured that I will monitor this situation and keep your views in mind as Congress works on FAA reauthorization. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.
Sincerely,
Senator Bill Nelson
03-08-2011, 06:41 PM
#419
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: yard-dart
You guys are freakin' killing me! Is this what you get up for every day, to get on RCU and rant about the AMA, FAA, or Federal Government. This is a joke guys. Like I said before, there are many more other things out there to really worry about besides this. I love this hobby too, just as much,if not more, than the rest of you. But....I'm not going to dwell in this "crap", like so many of you obviously are.
First off, I couldn't give a rats ass if the AMA existed. I'm a member because I have to be, and my club has to be chartered in order to have a legitimate event. Sure, I could choose to not be a member, all fine and good, but I'd not be able to fly at other clubs. Sure, I could choose to not charter the club "I" started, but when it comes time to have an event, nobody out side the local area would come. That's just how it is! Take it or leave it!
As for the magazine, I can live with it or without it. I usually just flip through it the first day it arrives, then it goes by the crapper. I mainly enjoy the ads. Every now and then they'll have an article that grabs my attention, but for the most part, it doesn't pertain to me.
Like I said before, there's not one mention of this hobby being banned. I can't see it happening, but if it does, then you can call me a fool. It seems to me the only ones of you who seem to be worried about this are the ones flying turbines, have giant scale planes (larger than 55lbs), or fly Drones. Well......I hate to say this, but the FAA and Feds may have a point. Don't get me wrong, I think those aspects of the hobby are cool, but they are a tad "extreme", and that's how the FAA is looking at it. So, if any of you are involved in that aspect of the hobby, looks like you have big problems coming down the road. It is what it is.
You guys are freakin' killing me! Is this what you get up for every day, to get on RCU and rant about the AMA, FAA, or Federal Government. This is a joke guys. Like I said before, there are many more other things out there to really worry about besides this. I love this hobby too, just as much,if not more, than the rest of you. But....I'm not going to dwell in this "crap", like so many of you obviously are.
First off, I couldn't give a rats ass if the AMA existed. I'm a member because I have to be, and my club has to be chartered in order to have a legitimate event. Sure, I could choose to not be a member, all fine and good, but I'd not be able to fly at other clubs. Sure, I could choose to not charter the club "I" started, but when it comes time to have an event, nobody out side the local area would come. That's just how it is! Take it or leave it!
As for the magazine, I can live with it or without it. I usually just flip through it the first day it arrives, then it goes by the crapper. I mainly enjoy the ads. Every now and then they'll have an article that grabs my attention, but for the most part, it doesn't pertain to me.
Like I said before, there's not one mention of this hobby being banned. I can't see it happening, but if it does, then you can call me a fool. It seems to me the only ones of you who seem to be worried about this are the ones flying turbines, have giant scale planes (larger than 55lbs), or fly Drones. Well......I hate to say this, but the FAA and Feds may have a point. Don't get me wrong, I think those aspects of the hobby are cool, but they are a tad "extreme", and that's how the FAA is looking at it. So, if any of you are involved in that aspect of the hobby, looks like you have big problems coming down the road. It is what it is.
I think the only ones (who are a minority) having any problems are the ones that rant, and post in here at no end about how AMAis wrong by not advocating for them too but they dont belong to AMA
They want help and protection without paying a dime for it.
03-08-2011, 09:39 PM
#421
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
My letters were #266 in Oklahoma last evening and as of 5 pm today it was up to #277. Of course Senator Jim Inhoff from Oklahoma is the sponsor of the amendment for us r c modelers to be exempt and he is an airplane guy. He pilots his own plane (small 2 seat Tiger) and has a love for avaition with us.
Thanks for all the people that have sent in letters (emailed)....
Thanks for all the people that have sent in letters (emailed)....
03-09-2011, 05:33 AM
#422
My Feedback: (35)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West Monroe,
LA
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: The Toolman
His senator just doesn't quite tell the whole thing, but enough to appease (?sp) yard-dart
His senator just doesn't quite tell the whole thing, but enough to appease (?sp) yard-dart
I must agree with some other posters. It's pretty obvious to see those of you who will "really" be affected by all of this. It's pretty obvious that you have nothing for the AMA. So, let's see here.....there's a pattern evolving. If you have nothing for the AMA, you've contacted your Senators and have gotten replies back that they are working on it, but your still pissing and moaning, you are probably the minority.
I keep getting singled out by a few of you. You think that I'm on the side of the AMA. Wrong. I'm as neutral as can be when it comes to the AMA. Don't love 'em, and don't hate 'em. But, I've got to support 'em to fly the way I want. You think that since I'm happy with the response I've gotten from my Senator, that I'm against what you want to happen. Wrong. I'm neutral on this also. The outcome will probably not affect me all that much, but it will definately affect some of you. Do I feel sorry for you? Sorta. After all, you are in the same hobby I'm in, so we have common interests. But..... I'll be damned if I allow you to make me out to be a bad guy simply because I'm not backing "your aspect of the hobby". Right now, all I'm concerned about is keeping my aspect of the hobby alive. I come first. I think that the majority of the modelers out there are just like me. They don't have that much to worry about. But, for those of you who fall outside of that majority, good luck to you. Stop complaining and downing those of us who aren't 100% in support of "your" hobby.
It's obvious that several of you are Democrats! LOL
03-09-2011, 05:37 AM
#423
My Feedback: (35)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West Monroe,
LA
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
It's good that I've finally found someone replying that feels the same way I do. Some people simply can't be pleased, no matter how much is being put forth to help.
03-09-2011, 05:59 AM
#424
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
Don't shoot the messenger dude ! The Senate amendment doesn't change the fact that the FAA gets to write our Safety Code now.
Deal with it !
Deal with it !
03-09-2011, 06:05 AM
#425
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Government intrusion in hobby flying
ORIGINAL: yard-dart
He, along with the other Senators who've responded, told me everything that ''I'' want to hear. For the rest of you, who will be affected by the outcome, I'll say it again.....IT SUCKS TO BE YOU!
I must agree with some other posters. It's pretty obvious to see those of you who will ''really'' be affected by all of this. It's pretty obvious that you have nothing for the AMA. So, let's see here.....there's a pattern evolving. If you have nothing for the AMA, you've contacted your Senators and have gotten replies back that they are working on it, but your still pissing and moaning, you are probably the minority.
I keep getting singled out by a few of you. You think that I'm on the side of the AMA. Wrong. I'm as neutral as can be when it comes to the AMA. Don't love 'em, and don't hate 'em. But, I've got to support 'em to fly the way I want. You think that since I'm happy with the response I've gotten from my Senator, that I'm against what you want to happen. Wrong. I'm neutral on this also. The outcome will probably not affect me all that much, but it will definately affect some of you. Do I feel sorry for you? Sorta. After all, you are in the same hobby I'm in, so we have common interests. But..... I'll be damned if I allow you to make me out to be a bad guy simply because I'm not backing ''your aspect of the hobby''. Right now, all I'm concerned about is keeping my aspect of the hobby alive. I come first. I think that the majority of the modelers out there are just like me. They don't have that much to worry about. But, for those of you who fall outside of that majority, good luck to you. Stop complaining and downing those of us who aren't 100% in support of ''your'' hobby.
It's obvious that several of you are Democrats! LOL
ORIGINAL: The Toolman
His senator just doesn't quite tell the whole thing, but enough to appease (?sp) yard-dart
His senator just doesn't quite tell the whole thing, but enough to appease (?sp) yard-dart
I must agree with some other posters. It's pretty obvious to see those of you who will ''really'' be affected by all of this. It's pretty obvious that you have nothing for the AMA. So, let's see here.....there's a pattern evolving. If you have nothing for the AMA, you've contacted your Senators and have gotten replies back that they are working on it, but your still pissing and moaning, you are probably the minority.
I keep getting singled out by a few of you. You think that I'm on the side of the AMA. Wrong. I'm as neutral as can be when it comes to the AMA. Don't love 'em, and don't hate 'em. But, I've got to support 'em to fly the way I want. You think that since I'm happy with the response I've gotten from my Senator, that I'm against what you want to happen. Wrong. I'm neutral on this also. The outcome will probably not affect me all that much, but it will definately affect some of you. Do I feel sorry for you? Sorta. After all, you are in the same hobby I'm in, so we have common interests. But..... I'll be damned if I allow you to make me out to be a bad guy simply because I'm not backing ''your aspect of the hobby''. Right now, all I'm concerned about is keeping my aspect of the hobby alive. I come first. I think that the majority of the modelers out there are just like me. They don't have that much to worry about. But, for those of you who fall outside of that majority, good luck to you. Stop complaining and downing those of us who aren't 100% in support of ''your'' hobby.
It's obvious that several of you are Democrats! LOL
All of us really appreciate your comment toward us. Only could a comment like that come from a lib. Us conservatives want everybody in govt outta the rc biz. He77, we want'em outta most everything.
By the way slick, I'm a Proud Tea Party, gun carrying, white, christian, guy from down in the Missouri Ozarks.