[LeGrande]

Did they know who they were? Who the passenger was?

I have never flown in NYC. But I have flown in a lot of class B airspace, and the normal procedure even outside of Class B, is to utilize flight following. Then the ATC knows who you are and where you are going. They may not know exactly who is on board, but are you likely going to tell them that you are a terrorist?

I would say that 1 protected place is better than 0...5 protected places is better than 1.

It is simply sad that you think that it is important to put a couple of phlanxes around the Statue of Liberty so that sight see'ers (sp) can't enjoy it.

I think personal entertainment is one area probably worth giving up a little of for the security of your country...but thats just me I guess.

Hopefully it's just you. I fear that way to many people are willing to give up too much for a little perceived "safety."

To me the idea of protecting the Statue of liberty with a missile system or phalanx is repugnant on many different levels. Restricting freedom to protect a symbol that stands for freedom is idiotic. I would rather see a terrorist blow it up than lose any iota of freedom because of it.

The day America takes our freedom away to protect the symbol of freedom is the day I am no longer an American.

[Arkinsaw]

They may not know exactly who is on board

Then thats an obvious problem. If you have people able to fly around the Statue of Liberty at will without any ability to know who they are...thats a problem.

It is simply sad that you think that it is important to put a couple of phlanxes around the Statue of Liberty so that sight see'ers (sp) can't enjoy it.

There you go again. Sightseers can purchase a ticket on an authorized tourist plane with known pilots and security. Another fallacious argument. I put forward restrictions on aircraft in the airspace...you twist to be a restriction on tourists seeing the Statue of Liberty. Twisty, but not logic.

Hopefully it's just you. I fear that way to many people are willing to give up too much for a little perceived "safety."

And again, your personal entertainment at being able to fly around potential terrorist targets of national importance is not some huge assault on liberty and not too much to give up for protecting those icons. Buy a ticket if you want to see it. If you want to fly, do it elsewhere. Not a huge burden on liberty despite your wish to zoom the Statue.

To me the idea of protecting the Statue of liberty with a missile system or phalanx is repugnant on many different levels. Restricting freedom to protect a symbol that stands for freedom is idiotic. I would rather see a terrorist blow it up than lose any iota of freedom because of it.

I would prefer that you fly for fun elsewhere rather than see the Statue of Liberty blown up. Other readers will have to decide for themselves which is more important to them.

The day America takes our freedom away to protect the symbol of freedom is the day I am no longer an American.

This might make sense if the liberty we were talking about was you freedom to speak here or your freedom of religion or something actually critical. But the freedom we are talking about here is your ability to fly around the Statue of Liberty for fun. You are right now restricted from landing a helicopter for fun on the White House lawn. I do not consider that a huge imposition leading to the destruction of our glorious nation. You might characterize it that way, but it wouldn't be so.