Taking newbies flying...

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:12:40 -0500, TxSrv wrote:

Oh, my. A private aircraft flight, not involving terrorism? A
federal criminal statute may exist, so if so, please cite it for
us, to prove you know how to research and understand the law.
Cite two numbers with "USC" in the middle. Forget state law; a
generic statute should fit, but it has nothing specifically to do
with pilots, airplanes, or maritime law.

Just to ask, is 49 USC 46504 restricted to commercial ops?

Peter Clark wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:12:40 -0500, TxSrv wrote:


Oh, my. A private aircraft flight, not involving terrorism? A
federal criminal statute may exist, so if so, please cite it for
us, to prove you know how to research and understand the law.
Cite two numbers with "USC" in the middle. Forget state law; a
generic statute should fit, but it has nothing specifically to do
with pilots, airplanes, or maritime law.


Just to ask, is 49 USC 46504 restricted to commercial ops?

It would appear to apply to "any civil aircraft"

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia...9/crm01405.htm

Peter Clark wrote:

Just to ask, is 49 USC 46504 restricted to commercial ops?

No, and apparently that one's a winner, as long as the
"interference" can be proven. However, a prosecution guideline
document on DOJ's web site is worded such that airline or at
least charter aircraft are the target of this statute. If indeed
Congressional intent is airlines, an indictment might be tossed
by the Court. It's further not a federal crime if DOJ won't
prosecute. If only the pilot and offending pax are on board,
prosecution will be difficult w/o witnesses. If witnesses and
the pilot regains control and lands like a C-172 safely, federal
prosecution doesn't seem called for nor is jail sentence assured.
State law can likely prosecute also, preferably if an assault on
the pilot, or a crash, or dangerous buzzing flight occurred.

F--

Peter Clark writes:

Just to ask, is 49 USC 46504 restricted to commercial ops?

No.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

TxSrv writes:

Oh, my. A private aircraft flight, not involving terrorism?

A private aircraft is not special in this respect.

A federal criminal statute may exist, so if so, please cite it for
us, to prove you know how to research and understand the law.

49 USC 46504 defines interference with the flight crew of an aircraft
as a felony (maximum of 20 years, unless a weapon is involved, in
which case the maximum is life).

49 USC 46318 provides a civil penalty for similar actions.

49 USC 46502 defines exercising control of an aircraft by force as a
felony (air piracy), here again it's 20 years maximum, or
life/execution if a death occurs.

Cite two numbers with "USC" in the middle.

Done.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.