I don't think banning them is necessarily effective. For starters it doesn't get rid of them and secondly it isn't dealing with the behavior - just the tool. But it is hard to understand the logic of someone doing this when they know the risk is crashing a plane into a suburb.
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob Calco Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2009 3:21 PM To: 'ProFox Email List' Subject: RE: [OT] Fighting your credit report blotches > I think the chance is remote but at 100 feet coming in to land it is > much > easier and extremely dangerous. Say the chances of blinding a pilot is > 0.1%. > given the potential outcome that is still a high risk. Just needs a few > jail > sentences to let the loons and nutjobs know that it's not on. On a serious note, that kind of thing should be severely punished. A sincere argument could be made that it's attempted homicide, and the dweeb that did it should be made an example of. But of course, the bureaucrat's first impulse is to regulate the mouse pointers instead. I'm glad actually you don't support that nonsense, Geoff. - Bob [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
