Should we clamp down on general aviation?

After Wednesday's unfortunate plane crash, people are expressing surprise that small airplanes are allowed to fly near large cities. Some are saying that the "terrorist threat" calls for new flight restrictions on small planes.

A couple thoughts:

• Suppose you're a terrorist. Which of the following sounds easier? Plan A: spend months in flight training, rent a Cessna with ten pounds of Semtex plastic explosives, then fly it into the 30th floor of a building and blow yourself up. Plan B: put the plastic explosives in a backpack, take an elevator to the 30th floor, and blow yourself up. No rational terrorist (yes, terrorists are entirely rational) would use a light aircraft for any malicious purpose, because a car or a backpack would serve the same purpose at lower cost and with less training.
• Clueless quote of the week: Governor George Pataki says "It's just unfathomable that five years after September 11th, an inexperienced pilot can be circling the city and not under the control of any of the radar towers of the airports around the city." Is he trying to say that radar tower control would keep a terrorist from crashing a plane into Manhattan? How would the exchange go? "Tower to terrorist, please divert from building." "Terrorist to tower, OK, sorry about that!"

This wasn't terrorism. A guy in a plane made a wrong turn and didn't see an obstacle. Just because a terrorist could do on purpose what someone did by accident doesn't mean we should ban that activity. It makes no sense to evoke terrorism in response to this accident.