Federal statutes for legally drunk pilots

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
It is not a crime for a pilot to violate the FARs. Violations of
the FARsare handled administratively. Consequently, pilots cannot
expect the same rights as those charged with crimes. Pilots may be
required to testify against themselves, may not be allowed to
confront witnesses, or avail themselves of many other Constitutional
rights. Thus, no level of drunkenness will allow a pilot to be charged
with a Federal crime. [...]

Okay, I think I see where you're getting the .04 from.

I'm pretty sure you are incorrect that there is "no level of drunkennes
[that] will allow a pilot to be charged with a Federal crime". The news
coverage of the two pilots who were just acquitted made it clear that there
IS a law, but that they simply didn't meet the standard. They weren't drunk
enough.

Had they had a higher BAC, they would have been guilty of, and probably
convicted of, breaking the federal law.

I'm not talking FAR here...I'm talking federal criminal law. I believe the
original poster is too (though I suppose he could be equally confused about
the difference between FAR and criminal law).

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
The federal BAC limit is .04.

Huh? The news report that I'm recalling indicated that the federal
criminal
limit was *higher* than the local (state) limit.

I could be misremembering the article, or the article could have been
mistaken. But .04 doesn't sound right to me. I remember when I read
about
the pilots' acquittal that the federal limit seemed unreasonably high.

Do you have a source for your .04?

FAR 91.17

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
FAR 91.17

See my other posts. That's not where the BAC limit for criminal prosecution
is found. It is *a* federal limit, not *the* federal limit.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 00:00:23 -0400, "anon" wrote:

Could someone please clarify what the legal FEDERAL minimum a pilot
must blow to be charged with a crime? also, could someone please confirm
that state or police have no jurisdiction over this offense if the accused
does NOT live within the same state or city?

You don't fly from around Philly, PA do you?

I'm pretty sure you are incorrect that there is "no level of
drunkennes
[that] will allow a pilot to be charged with a Federal crime". The
news
coverage of the two pilots who were just acquitted made it clear
that there
IS a law, but that they simply didn't meet the standard. They
weren't drunk
enough.

Had they had a higher BAC, they would have been guilty of, and
probably
convicted of, breaking the federal law.

Pete

Federal criminal law is 18 USC 343, but it applies only to "operation
of a common carrier." I.e., including airline pilot. There the BAC
presumption is .10, and max sentence is 15 years. There's no federal
criminal law, however, for drunken Part 91 ops. However, the
majority of states which have a criminal statute apply it to all
aircraft operations while intoxicated, with a BAC presumption mostly
..04, same as federal civil (the "FARs"). Also, in those states, it is
a only misdemenanor.

Fred F.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:32:04 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
The federal BAC limit is .04.

Huh? The news report that I'm recalling indicated that the federal criminal
limit was *higher* than the local (state) limit.

I could be misremembering the article, or the article could have been
mistaken. But .04 doesn't sound right to me. I remember when I read about
the pilots' acquittal that the federal limit seemed unreasonably high.

Do you have a source for your .04?

Are you thinking 18 USC 17A sec 342 "Operation of a common carrier
under the influence of alcohol or drugs"?

"Whoever operates or directs the operation of a common carrier while
under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance (as defined
in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)),
shall be imprisoned not more than fifteen years or fined under this
title, or both"

17A sec 343 defines blood alcohol of .10 as the alcohol limit.

"Peter Clark" wrote in message
...
Are you thinking 18 USC 17A sec 342 "Operation of a common carrier
under the influence of alcohol or drugs"?

"Whoever operates or directs the operation of a common carrier while
under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance (as defined
in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)),
shall be imprisoned not more than fifteen years or fined under this
title, or both"

17A sec 343 defines blood alcohol of .10 as the alcohol limit.

Yes, that sounds about right.

Thanks for looking that up!

Pete

"TaxSrv" wrote in message
...
Federal criminal law is 18 USC 343, but it applies only to "operation
of a common carrier." I.e., including airline pilot. There the BAC
presumption is .10, and max sentence is 15 years. There's no federal
criminal law, however, for drunken Part 91 ops.

Okay, thanks for clarifying that. I'd forgotten that the federal statute
applied only to airline pilots.

"Newps" wrote in message
...

"anon" wrote in message
...
Could someone please clarify what the legal FEDERAL minimum a pilot
must blow to be charged with a crime?

The FAR is less than .04 and also no drinking at least 12 hours prior to
flying. Break either one and you are illegal.


It's 8 hours and even if you are under .04 but under the influence you are
not fit to fly. Any one of the three will do you in.

Peter Duniho wrote:

I do not recall the exact figures, but it's my vague recollection that the
federal BAC limit is .10 or .12, while most states are at .08 these days.

IIRC, the news said the Federal limit is .10 and Florida is .08.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.