Replies

My reply was directed specifically at the false issue that general aviation presented such an unique risk to urban areas that they should be restricted from flying over them.

If we are going to measure risks rationally, we ought to direct our attention elsewhere. But like with firearms, a certain segment of the Ruling Class find it easy to live and breathe hyperbole that is disconnected from reality.

It's unreasonable and not my desire to restrict general aviation from flying over the greater Los Angeles area, for example, but I still think that the corridors where passenger jets vector into and out of LAX ought to be clear of general avaiation. I also don't like the idea of light private aircraft navigating through the artificial mountain range of a major city's skyscraper forest at low altitude.

Shooters face more than unreasonable restrictions on where they're allowed to shoot anymore, but I've never thought that I should be allowed to find an vacant public alley in downtown Manhattan NYC and set up a little shooting range for me to practice with an AR-15.

I don't want to burden private pilots with unnecessary restrictions on flight. Is restricting general aviation from flying through the concrete canyon of a skyscraper forest unreasonable on my part? Let me know.