I quit AOPA this past Friday and here's why

Bill Watson

Bill Watson

En-Route
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
2,704
Location
Durham NC
Display Name
Display name:
MauleDriver
Getting the lead out, AOPA Pilot magazine, July 2017
"What's not to like about the smell of spent gun powder mixed with turbine exhaust? It's an eclectic(?) and unique elixir, says AOPA Editor in Chief Tom Haines who got to experience it first hand while playing door gunner... Cue the Fill Metal Jacket soundtrack..."

Well I guess I'm just sick of casual gun play. I don't watch shoot 'em up movies and shows any longer. I don't play 1st person shooter games. I don't need magazine articles highlighting helicopter gunships and target shooting that smacks of people plinking. Just sick of it. And if this organization's editors don't get that, I don't need to be a member.

With that said, I'm okay with gun sport enthusiasts and hobbyists. Politically I come down more on the side of gun ownership and use as a privilege than a right, but we allow such disagreement in our politics.

I'm also a believer in the AOPA mission as it has to do with promotion and lobbying. I've found their pilot services valuable in the past. Maybe a bit less impressed with the organizations leadership now than 10 years ago but it is still making the decision of walking away troubling.

But I just couldn't get past the imagery and first person shooter joy conjured up by the article. I feel better now and can return to some Flying.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Bill Watson said:
Getting the lead out, AOPA Pilot magazine, July 2017
"What's not to like about the smell of spent gun powder mixed with turbine exhaust? It's an eclectic(?) and unique elixir, says AOPA Editor in Chief Tom Haines who got to experience it first hand while playing door gunner... Cue the Fill Metal Jacket soundtrack..."
Click to expand...
Thanks for bringing that up. I didn't see that, but now that you pointed it out, I might reactivate my membership.

Bang - Bang!
 
I thought that was an oddly out of tune article too. They have published a couple of those lately. But one or two magazine articles aren't enough to push me over the edge. It isn't like the magazine has had a massive change in tone or focus.
 
I read the article more as how a company has created a unique aviation business rather than a statement on firearms. The line about the smell of gunpowder and exhaust was a little strange.
 
Inspired by the feral hog hunting videos on YouTube, perhaps? I'm no longer a member and don't get the rags, er, mags anymore.
 
Bill Watson said:
Getting the lead out, AOPA Pilot magazine, July 2017
"What's not to like about the smell of spent gun powder mixed with turbine exhaust? It's an eclectic(?) and unique elixir, says AOPA Editor in Chief Tom Haines who got to experience it first hand while playing door gunner... Cue the Fill Metal Jacket soundtrack..."

Well I guess I'm just sick of casual gun play. I don't watch shoot 'em up movies and shows any longer. I don't play 1st person shooter games. I don't need magazine articles highlighting helicopter gunships and target shooting that smacks of people plinking. Just sick of it. And if this organization's editors don't get that, I don't need to be a member.

With that said, I'm okay with gun sport enthusiasts and hobbyists. Politically I come down more on the side of gun ownership and use as a privilege than a right, but we allow such disagreement in our politics.

I'm also a believer in the AOPA mission as it has to do with promotion and lobbying. I've found their pilot services valuable in the past. Maybe a bit less impressed with the organizations leadership now than 10 years ago but it is still making the decision of walking away troubling.

But I just couldn't get past the imagery and first person shooter joy conjured up by the article. I feel better now and can return to some Flying.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

caregiver-crying-300x200.jpg
 
You have to try lots of different things to write a monthly periodical. Some work better than others. And at all times, writing for a large audience, you just can't please everyone. If you don't believe me try looking up some of the comments about me on rate your professor.
 
I don't read all the articles. Some I just don't have any interest in. But I sure don't turn stupid because I don't read all the articles.
 
I eagerly clicked on the link, expecting to read about AOPA executives jet setting to the Bahamas with bikini clad interns, cavorting around with our annual dues.

Instead I get this.
 
Cluemeister said:
I eagerly clicked on the link, expecting to read about AOPA executives jet setting to the Bahamas with bikini clad interns, cavorting around with our annual dues.

Instead I get this.
Click to expand...

Cluemeister you are not ;)
 
Cluemeister said:
I eagerly clicked on the link, expecting to read about AOPA executives jet setting to the Bahamas with bikini clad interns, cavorting around with our annual dues.

Instead I get this.
Click to expand...

They were in Marathon, FL over the Memorial Day weekend. I guess we all missed the fly in and the seminars.
 
Cluemeister said:
I eagerly clicked on the link, expecting to read about AOPA executives jet setting to the Bahamas with bikini clad interns, cavorting around with our annual dues.

Instead I get this.
Click to expand...

Are they hiring?!?!?

I kid, I kid... I'll check back in the winter when it's getting cold here, then maybe I'll be in a better position to accept the offer, thanks.
 
Cluemeister said:
I eagerly clicked on the link, expecting to read about AOPA executives jet setting to the Bahamas with bikini clad interns, cavorting around with our annual dues.

Instead I get this.
Click to expand...

Sometimes, I'd rather they did that.
 
I disagree with giving up on an organization that is one of our only fighting chances at preserving our remaining aviation freedoms, because of an article or activity that does not interest me or which I dislike. Or, abandoning AOPA for any of the other reasons posted on POA.
Baby, bathwater and all that!

There is no one who is going to fill that void (I don't buy that the EAA has the interest or political connections) so we are going to be a whole lot better off in the long run to lobby AOPA to change the things we don't like.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I disagree with giving up on an organization that is one of our only fighting chances at preserving our remaining aviation freedoms, because of an article or activity that does not interest me or which I dislike. Or, abandoning AOPA for any of the other reasons posted on POA.
Baby, bathwater and all that!

There is no one who is going to fill that void (I don't buy that the EAA has the interest or political connections) so we are going to be a whole lot better off in the long run to lobby AOPA to change the things we don't like.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it is my responsibility to help to preserve aviation. In the big scheme of things, it is not that important.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, one article that mixed our shared avocation with a Constitutionally-guaranteed right, and you bail on the whole organization? Kind of thin-skinned, aren't you? Hope this post does that make you quit PoA . . . . .
 
Bill Watson said:
Politically I come down more on the side of gun ownership and use as a privilege than a right, but we allow such disagreement in our politics.
Click to expand...

Is the second amendment a "privilege" now? But I get what you are saying...did any of us really ever join or stay in aviation because "What's not to like about the smell of spent gun powder mixed with turbine exhaust?" Yes that is just bizarre. I think you have to belong to AOPA for everything BUT the magazine, because that's lame.
 
Datadriver said:
Is the second amendment a "privilege" now?
Click to expand...

Nope. It's part of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights. And they don't grant rights, they protect rights that we already have from interference by the government.

I haven't seen the article yet. Sounds like a good one. :D
 
Ghery said:
Nope. It's part of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights. And they don't grant rights, they protect rights that we already have from interference by the government.

I haven't seen the article yet. Sounds like a good one. :D
Click to expand...

An
Ghery said:
Nope. It's part of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights. And they don't grant rights, they protect rights that we already have from interference by the government.

I haven't seen the article yet. Sounds like a good one. :D
Click to expand...

I am a Article 5 type guy and had enough of the 2nd amendment.
 
Clip4 said:
I disagree that it is my responsibility to help to preserve aviation. In the big scheme of things, it is not that important.
Click to expand...

Responsibility? I suppose not.
But if a person enjoys it and has any interest in future generations enjoying it then having a national organization might be one way towards that.
 
Ghery said:
Nope. It's part of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights. And they don't grant rights, they protect rights that we already have from interference by the government.

I haven't seen the article yet. Sounds like a good one. :D
Click to expand...
Well, they're supposed to. Name another Constitutionally protected right that you have to pay fees, in many cases register, and ask permission to exercise. They've been letting us down hard on 2A.
 
mkosmo said:
Well, they're supposed to. Name another Constitutionally protected right that you have to pay fees, in many cases register, and ask permission to exercise. They've been letting us down hard on 2A.
Click to expand...

It's still to be determined which, between the 11th, 16th or the 17th, will ultimately destroy the Union.

Taken together with a weak 10th, they're the trifecta that destroys the founding principals of the country, by placing too much power in too few hands and protecting them from monetary damage controls.
 
I read the article as tongue-in-cheek. That particular line was meant to be funny.
 
mcdewey said:
I read the article as tongue-in-cheek. That particular line was meant to be funny.
Click to expand...
I thought it was. But then I have a questionable sense of humor.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk
 
denverpilot said:
It's still to be determined which, between the 11th, 16th or the 17th, will ultimately destroy the Union.

Taken together with a weak 10th, they're the trifecta that destroys the founding principals of the country, by placing too much power in too few hands and protecting them from monetary damage controls.
Click to expand...
Can you explain?
I am not following your train of thought.

Tim

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk
 
mcdewey said:
I read the article as tongue-in-cheek. That particular line was meant to be funny.
Click to expand...
ding ding ding

I was wondering when someone was going to point that out. What the hell has happened to our country? How can anyone get so hostile about a friggin joke. I just hope the OP doesn't own a gun because the way he goes off "half cocked" (pun intended), he would be extremely dangerous with one. Perhaps that's why he doesn't want the rest of us to have guns.
 
tspear said:
Voting
Click to expand...

That's a sticky one. IIRC, there is not specific "right" to vote even though what constitutes a right is debatable.

From The Atlantic:
Scholars and courts often note that the Constitution nowhere says, "All individuals have the right to vote." It simply rules out specific limitations on "the right to vote." A right not guaranteed in affirmative terms isn't really a "right" in a fundamental sense, this reading suggests.

And besides that, where do you have to pay or ask permission to vote? I've lived in 5 states and never had to do either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top