Quote:
Originally Posted by Cranberry
If the founding fathers wanted there to be an FAA, they’d have put it in the constitution. We didn’t fight Queen Elizabeth for this.
On a scale of 10 to dumbass, with dumbass being a negative number, this assertion that the founding fathers should have memorialized aviation is absolutely idiotic. Setting aside the fact that the constitution is a living document, the creation of the FAA as an Act of Congress, starting with the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 did not need to be a constitutional amendment. The Constitution, which recognizes rights, doesn't need to be amended with a Federal Aviation organization; flying is not a right. Moreover, there wasn't any aviation at the time of the drafting of the constitution, and certainly not any technology or aviation to regulate at that time. Of course the founding fathers didn't create an aviation agency under the original constitution. The assertion that they should is bonkers.
The Federal Aviation Act created the Federal Aviation Agency (replacing the CAA), and as amended, became the FAA. This act was an act of congress. The FAA is authorized, and legitimate.
If you don't like the proposed notice of rule making, then enter your comments during the comment period. That's what it's for. If you don't like the proposed rule and you say nothing, then you've not a leg to stand upon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by idontknoworcare
just like "privileges and limitations" there are no privileges.
This is a lie, perhaps made in ignorance, but it's a lie. You do not have a right to fly, and your pilot certificate is a privilege. That privilege can be revoked. How much you spent to get it is irrelevant; that was your choice in attempting to secure privilege.
Quote:
Originally Posted by idontknoworcare
i wouldnt say its a right either but the amount of time and money that is required to get from zero to atp and to still call it a privilege is ridiculous to me.
Whether it's ridiculous to you doesn't change a thing, nor does it turn a privilege into a right. Holding pilot certification is a privilege, not a right. That you spent money to get the ATP is your choice, but does not become a right simply because you chose to shell out a few dollars to obtain ATP privileges on your pilot certificate. Your privileges can be suspended or revoked. The amount of time it took you to get from zero to ATP is likewise irrelevant. That time does not change your privilege to a right, because airman privileges are not rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by idontknoworcare
of course people dont do any research and dont realize you dont need a drivers license to drive a car. why? because its a RIGHT not a privilege. you dont need permission. you only need a dl if its for commercial purposes.
This is jurisdictional, but is also a lie. Driving is a privilege. You may drive a car on your private property without a license. You do not have a right to drive on another's private property, or on public property. To drive on someone else's property, or on public property (eg, roadways, etc), you are required to be licensed as your jurisdiction may stipulate. On someone else's property, you might have permission to drive, and in that case, you may not be required to hold a driver license, if authorized to drive on that property without a license. You do not have a right to drive, but it is a privilege accorded you so long as you obey the traffic and vehicle laws, and act in a safe manner. Public roads are government roads, and are regulated by the government.
All of this is getting far afield. The topic is a notice of proposed rule making, and the FAA's comment period. The FAA i s not out to get JSX. The regulation is not about JSX, but about removing an exemption that was created for operations of a much smaller scope and scale. JSX (et al) has outgrown the intent and purpose of the exemption, and the FAA proposes to alter or end the exemption, placing those operating under that exemption under Part 121, instead of under Part 135.
If you don't like it, there's a comment period. Don't waffle on about nutty fringe ideas, however. The sovereign citizen notion won't buy you much traction. You have privileges, not a right. The operating certificate held by JSX is a privilege, not a right, and certainly not an inalienable right.
One may start out as a single pilot 135 operator, but upon growing, one becomes subject to relevant regulation; one can't simply continue operator certification as a one-man band. As an operation grows, the operations to which it is beholden change. This is no less true for JSX.
There are essentially four different broad classifications of operators ("airlines") under Part 121. Not all of those who will move to 121, from exemption 380, will be under the same classification.