Posted on 11/19/2001 11:43:39 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:34 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
ATLANTA -- A man who dashed through a security checkpoint at the nation's busiest airport, forcing officials to halt flights and evacuate passengers, will not face federal charges, prosecutors said Monday.
Michael Lasseter did not violate any federal laws because he did not board an airplane, and because the screening station guards are not federal agents, said Patrick Crosby, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
The local news in Atlanta keeps saying, "He said he didn't realize that he was the cause of the ruckus" like Lasseter was telling the truth when he said that.
It was reported that he blew past a security guard who was trying to stop him, which is an indicator to me that he should have known that he was doing something wrong. He was caught slinking about the gate area and his guilty manner was part of what tipped off the pilot who caught him. The bottom line is -- he knew.
Lasseter is a MAJOR bonehead and I think he should be held responsible for the consequences of his actions.
My guess is that cosmic justice will be leveled on his head, and but soon. My guess -- within the next month, this guy is going to get a beating, have his car keyed or torched, or have something else bad happen to him as a result of his actions and the publicity his story has generated. Too many Atlantans were inconvenienced. While the South may be known for its hospitality, it will eat its own when it's necessary.
This was a very stupid person.
Not too keen on things like Federal Aviation Regulations are we? Try CFR 14 Part 107 to get educated.
And I am getting sick and tired of hearing from them on a forum that claims to represnet those who want constitutionally limited government. This thread would be pulled if I tried to say what I really think about these folks.
Get a grip. He did not slit someone's throat to hijack and airplane. Sure he is a bonehead. So what? Being a bonehead is not a felony, and the day it becomes one, a lot of other things are going to become felonies too.
Fortunatly, from the reactions here the prosecutor is going to have a hard time finding a jury to convict. If I am on it they can keep the jury locked up for a month of Sunday's and the best they will get is a mistrial.
Some of you want a straight-jacket world, you are WORSE than the leftists you claim to despise.You and the communists are racing to wipe your butts with the Constitution, all the while crying for Big Brother to "fix" everything and make us all "secure".Total dictatorship is the only total security ;I wish YOU could live under it, but let me be free.
---max
Obviously, evading airport security is quite different from blocking the freeway for running out of gas (but you can get a ticket for that, too). Running past security guards is clearly wrong, without having to know the exact law that would be broken.
1. FAR 107 and 108 were issued in response to the increasing terrorist and hijacking threat that began more than 30 years ago when self-styled revolutionaries began pirating planes to Cuba (little did they know that the Castro government took a dim view to this and they were met on the ramp by lots of men with guns).
2. The government didn't really respond, inspite of the Cuban hijacking, which were more of a nuisance than anything else, until in the period of three days in 1970 4 airplanes were hijacked and subsequently destroyed by Palestinian terrorists. The demand for the government to do something was great because this event caused major fiscal damage to the airlines - the real key to anything being done anywhere, anytime.
3. After Lockerbie (TWA 103), the White House moved to examine security and safety of air carriers and once again the government was pressed to issue a number of proclamations because of the loss of revenue suffered by the airlines and because the survivors of Lockerbie - the families of the victims - organized their efforts. The result was a greater emphasis on matching baggage to passengers, but the effect here in the U.S. was less because it was considered an overseas event.
4. In 1995 disaster was averted in the Phillippines when Ramzi Youssef, a scumbag associated with al Qaeda and one of the architects of the first WTC attack, was arrested which narrowly averted the simultaneous bombing of 12 U.S. airplanes in flight. The White House Commission on Safety and Security of Air Carriers (1995) resulted in the anti-terrorism act of 1996. Subsequently, the FAA began to address FAR 107 and 108 because of the increasing possibility of terrorism striking home here. Unfortunately, it wasn't taken seriously enough because the prevailing attitude still was it couldn't happen here.
5. Ironically, FAR 108 was reissued on July 17, 2001 with stronger language, however no one could anticipate the events of 911. My point is the following, these regulations were put in place in response to demands by the American people and industry, but Americans lacksadaisical attitude was a causal factor in the terrorists actions. The response is always the same, over-reaction, because we don't pay attention, don't stay informed, and refuse to be part of the real world. The moron who decided his little football game and his camera bag were more important than the reality of today is the one to blame.
Finally, please stop being a walking uninformed opinion. It simply gives the rest of the world a good laugh at our expense.
I certainly hope so.
I wouldn't want this idiot managing my money when he's late for lunch...
Or out to lunch... whatever.
Is that required reading to board an air plane now? Does a citizen need to know obscure aviation law and have a law degree in order to walk the streets and fly on an air plane? I really learn a lot on FR. I need to start studying aviation law so I will not get arrested at air ports.
No, but 1) the regulation is not obscure and 2) if you're going to say something at least get a background of facts before spouting an uninformed opinion.
Stupidity should be a crime, punishable by serious jail time.
Running out of gas? Yes.
Flat tire? No.
Next question?
I don't think it is meant to be a curse at all. If you inserted a curse word in the sentence I wrote, it would not make sense at all. I think it is more of a "God only knows" type of gesture, like asking out loud "What are people thinking". In fact, it would imply that Jesus knows the answer, which would be a recognition of him as the supreme being.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.