Previous poll Next poll

Would you be willing to pay higher taxes for increased security at airports that serve small planes?

Response Percent Votes
88% 1567
6% 121
Not sure
4% 87
Total 1775


heybluekc 8 years ago

People mention the word taxes anymore and right away its NO. My question is how would the 48 that voted know pay for small plane security? Bet I get no answers but NO.

William McCauley 8 years ago

For one thing the biggest danger is not an american nut case such as the Austin Tx even, the real danger is from outside the borders, so why don't you tell us all how your going to stop people, bombs, drugs and those who seek to attack us from walking across the border, after how many billions of tax dollars spend just on the "war on drugs" alone to try to keep drugs from crossing the borders, yet I bet we could score all the blow you could do in downtown if we knew where to look for it, so clearly that border thing is not working out so well for "increase security".

So how are you going to stop the real danger? You think fence is going to stop them from taking a small plane? Get real! Second point is while a small plane can do some damage, it's not going to be the target of choice for an attack due to the lack of any major damage from impact.

Third the federal funded AIP program has funding for fencing to help increase security at GA airports, having seen a major fence system put in after 9-11 on RID, I can tell you the only thing that fence is keeping out is deer and not some flake trying to steal an airplane for wnat ever reason.

Sure as hell wouldn't have stopped this weeks nutcase, he would have had the fencing codes to access the flight line., maybe you tell us how your going to fix that, Mr. Answer man?

blackfox 8 years ago

American people are "over secured" right now. Does everyone want the government to protect them? We are greatly loosing our freedoms just so we are SECURE.

trvlronda 8 years ago

A tax for small plane airports? Give me a break! Who gets this money? As it stands, the average "security tax" on an international ticket is $280.00, each direction. Traveling is cumbersome, but not due to security, but rather the LINES. For most, actual interaction with security is generally about 3 minutes. Is that worth $280.00? The airlines have charged a security tax since the 1980's (although it was under $5), but has security increased so much to justify the huge increase? It's just another money maker for the airlines. Nobody wants to say no to security, so they are willing to endure it. It's just a scam. I don't believe the folks working in security are getting rich in their positiion, so where is the security tax money being spent?

So, heck ya I say no to another tax.

gl0ck0wn3r 8 years ago

Seriously? This "problem" is as old as general aviation. If you want to kill aviation in this country then institute positive control for VFR.

texburgh 8 years ago

This is not a tax issue. How would "more security" at these airports have stopped this guy in Austin? He got in his own plane, flew off and crashed it into a building. While it's true he apparently did not file a flight plan, he could have simply said he was off to San Antonio and then crashed his plane into the IRS building. And even if he had filed the plan, would anyone have noticed his decision in time to stop him? Security would have done nothing to stop this guy.

I have no problem with paying my taxes and I'm even willing to pay more if I get something in return - like well-funded schools, services for seniors and the disabled, help for the unemployed, good roads, etc. Don't ask me to pay for something that won't accomplish anything.

Randy Leonard 8 years ago

I am not one who automatically says no to new taxes. I would gladly support a tax increase for highways, education, and yes, even healthcare. I think we are overly secured now. If we keep going and let the paranoia run away with us the bad guys will have won. We have to accept that as long as there are nut cases out there who want to hurt us they will find a way. We can do things to reduce the risks but never completely stop them.

nekansan 8 years ago

Odd that one person files a GA airplane in to a building and people are freaking out for more security. But when a person blows up an entire federal building with a truck there is no suggestion of "more security" on the road. Things happen, they are tragic, but we can not stop every nut job. Trying to is a massive waste of money, time and resources, not to mention freedom.

feeble 8 years ago

No, you are still about a 100,000x more likely to die from a heart attack or automobile accident.

blackfox 8 years ago

AMEN, "nekansan" IF people would just stop and look at how many freedoms we have lost since 9/11. Its getting to the point that America is starting to loose what America was founded on. Governmnet by the people, for the people. I may have that backwards, but you get the point.

Kim Gouge 8 years ago

I am one who automatically says no to more taxes. Why? Because current taxes are not spent responsibly and there is no accountability. Not enough money?...just raise the taxes. Yes, I am against that.

beatrice 8 years ago

If more security is needed at small airports, why don't those who use the airports pay for the security themselves?

blackfox, please list the freedoms you have lost since 9-11.

tomatogrower 8 years ago

I will pay more taxes for schools, but not for this. You can only do so much to stop terrorists, domestic or foreign. Education keeps people from believing any fools that come along and tell you that you don't have to pay your taxes.

KU_cynic 8 years ago

I think people that own and operate small planes should pay for enhanced security at small airports, not the general public.

bmboyer 8 years ago

This nut job could have done more damage with a pickup than he did with his little airplane so maybe we should require all drivers to pass background checks and undergo enhanced security not to mention file a registerd route before they leave their garage. A pickup can carry more fuel and or other nasty stuff than a light GA aircraft. While we are at it we should eliminate all rental trucks too due to what another nut job did in OKC a few years ago.

BTW I had to go through an FBI background check and pass a physica/ psych exam that included drug test in order to get a private pilot certificate already.

chasmo 8 years ago

Security = loss of freedom. Fear = loss of freedom. Taxes = loss of freedom. There is no way to stop some nut who wants to commit suicide from taking someone else with him if that is what he wants to do. I would rather die free.

Jeremy DeBoard 8 years ago

I said no because, like most people have already stated, it won't help the matter. Why not tax us for more security at schools, more security in universities, more security at the post office, etc etc blah blah.

As the great Ben Franklin put it, Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.

newmedia 8 years ago

Would love to see a poll just once that asks "Would you be willing to pay LESS taxes to put more money in your own pockets to spur consumer spending, help the economy, and put people back to work". Ask the question LJW. We would probably all be surprised at the result.

RoeDapple 8 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

jumpin_catfish 8 years ago

Would you pay more taxes to __ Fill in the blank


Sunny Parker 8 years ago

I pay enough taxes. How about get a hold of the 'over 40%' of americans who do not pay taxes and let them begin paying for something!

Bladerunner 8 years ago

Im with Sunny. Start taxing renters.

Flap Doodle 7 years, 12 months ago

To prevent crimes like this, all airplanes should be registered with the federal government. All pilots should have to take training and be licensed. What, those conditions already exist? And this still happened? Those are the actions that we are told will eliminate crime committed with firearms. Maybe it's all a bunch of hooey.

GardenMomma 7 years, 12 months ago

How would a tax for "increased security at airports that serve small planes" have served any purpose in this case? Wasn't it the guy's OWN plane?

Bruce Liddel 7 years, 12 months ago

I agree with BackFox, who said: "American people are "over secured" right now. Does everyone want the government to protect them? We are greatly loosing our freedoms just so we are SECURE."

Truth is, no government can protect you from all risk. Furthermore, attempting to eliminate all risk is tantamount to eliminating all rewards.

Centerville 7 years, 12 months ago

NewMedia: That is an excellent suggestion. How about it, LJW?

ralphralph 7 years, 12 months ago

How would I pay for it? Fees on the people who use the small planes. Duh. General aviation facilities get HUGE bucks from federal grants (i.e., taxpayer dollars), etc., already. While much of the activity is legitimate and beneficial commerce, a lot of it is part of the play-land for the affluent. Let them pay to play.

PhilPell 7 years, 12 months ago

Why would I pay more for more security theater that does nothing to increase the safety, security or efficacy of our transportation systems? We're afraid of the wrong things, people. Our kids have a 100% chance of being outcompeted in the global market because we underfund our schools and we have a 0.000000001% chance of being killed by a terrorist. And yet we spend more on national security than THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.