A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ADIZ pilot's ticket revoked



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 24th 05, 08:47 PM
Montblack
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


("Peter Duniho" wrote)
Huh. I guess 91.13 really IS the "catch-all" regulation.

The guy sure did screw up. But at what point was "the life or property of
another" endangered as a direct result of his actions?

I guess if the FAA can apply 91.13 here, they can apply it practically
anywhere.



Which is why his legal team must mount the "Miracle on 34th Street" defense:

"We intend to prove there really is a Santa Clause Your Honor"

They need to make the case about the FAA, Homeland Security, TSA, the Media,
etc. But what do I know about legal matters? I thought OJ did it


Montblack
"But... but maybe he's only a little crazy like painters or composers or...
or some of those men in Washington." - Miracle on 34th Street (1947)

  #2  
Old May 25th 05, 09:04 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
Which is why his legal team must mount the "Miracle on 34th Street"
defense:

"We intend to prove there really is a Santa Clause Your Honor"


He's got no defense. The thought that he might even try to dispute most of
the charges is ludicrous, even if he does indeed go and try to do just that.

I just don't see what the point of tacking on 91.13 is.

They need to make the case about the FAA, Homeland Security, TSA, the
Media, etc. But what do I know about legal matters? I thought OJ did it


In our justice system, it is entirely possible (and even expected, at least
for a small number of cases) that someone can have done the crime, but not
be found guilty of it.

I'd love to see SOME case be turned into an indictment against the FAA, DHS,
TSA, the Media, etc. IMHO, this probably isn't the one, given how oblivious
the pilot seems to be about the whole thing. What we need is a pilot who is
clearly competent, and yet in spite of good-faith efforts to stay out of
trouble, wound up in trouble anyway. Much more media-friendly.

Pete

"But... but maybe he's only a little crazy like painters or composers
or... or some of those men in Washington." - Miracle on 34th Street
(1947)


Yes, one of the best quotes from that movie.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Light Sport Aircraft for Private Pilots (Long) Jimbob Owning 17 March 1st 05 03:01 AM
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. Bush Air Home Built 0 May 25th 04 06:18 AM
Older Pilots and Safety Bob Johnson Soaring 5 May 21st 04 01:08 AM
UK pilots - please help by completeing a questionnaire Chris Nicholas Soaring 0 September 15th 03 01:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.