Re: Drunk America West pilots cannot be prosecuted

[Neil Gould]

Hi all,

"news" > wrote:
> Judge: State cannot prosecute pilots accused of drunkenness
> By The Associated Press
> (mostly snipped)
>
> The pilots were fired and stripped of their commercial licenses. As a
> bail condition, they were barred from recreational flying as well.
>
OK... this is the part that puzzles me. No surprise that they were fired.
Did the FAA strip them of their license? And, how could a bail condition
be upheld if the State had no authority? Since their blood alcohol level
was below that required for Federal criminal charges, and the State has no
case, shouldn't any bail be recinded?

Neil

[kevin]

Neil Gould wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> "news" > wrote:
>
>>Judge: State cannot prosecute pilots accused of drunkenness
>>By The Associated Press
>>(mostly snipped)
>>
>>The pilots were fired and stripped of their commercial licenses. As a
>>bail condition, they were barred from recreational flying as well.
>>
>
> OK... this is the part that puzzles me. No surprise that they were fired.
> Did the FAA strip them of their license? And, how could a bail condition
> be upheld if the State had no authority? Since their blood alcohol level
> was below that required for Federal criminal charges, and the State has no
> case, shouldn't any bail be recinded?
>
> Neil
>
>
>
No State has the authority to revoke a pilots license, regardless of
what the local bureacrats might think. Only the FAA has authority over
pilots license , and any matters dealing with flight.

[kevin]

Roger Tracy wrote:
> Sounds like she left the door open to the states to screw with us
> private types.
>
> "news" > wrote in message
> news:uso0jvgm3q7l1topue4h0rj027kko4vf7e@news...
>
>>Judge: State cannot prosecute pilots accused of drunkenness
>>By The Associated Press
>>
>>But she noted her decision was a ''narrow holding'' based on the
>>circumstances of the pilots' case and did not apply to anything
>>besides regularly scheduled commercial flights.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
A state judge is powerless to suspend, or revoke a pilots license. Only
the FAA can do this. If she thinks she can she is sadly mistaken, and
the Feds will not let some power hungry state judge undermind their
authority. She is dreaming.

[John Galban]

kevin > wrote in message news:<gn8Ya.79676$Ho3.11153@sccrnsc03>...
> >
> A state judge is powerless to suspend, or revoke a pilots license. Only
> the FAA can do this. If she thinks she can she is sadly mistaken, and
> the Feds will not let some power hungry state judge undermind their
> authority. She is dreaming.

The FAA has a good record of allowing state and local governments to
undermine their authority.

Several years ago, Las Cruces, NM enacted city ordinances about the
use of radios and traffic patterns at the (non-towered) local airport.
You could get a ticket for not using the radio and not flying the
traffic pattern like the airport manager wanted you to. The FAA
refused to get involved. Fortunately, an influential local pilot
convinced the city council to repeal the ordinance after a year or so.

Also a few years ago, the city of Mesa, AZ had an ordinance that
mandated all aircraft over the city maintain 1000 AGL or more. They
actually had city police helicopters chasing down airplanes and giving
out tickets. The FAA again showed zero interest and chose not to
challenge the ordinance.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Neil Gould wrote:
>
> OK... this is the part that puzzles me. No surprise that they were fired.
> Did the FAA strip them of their license?

Yep.

> And, how could a bail condition
> be upheld if the State had no authority? Since their blood alcohol level
> was below that required for Federal criminal charges, and the State has no
> case, shouldn't any bail be recinded?

The State is appealing. Charges will remain placed until the State exhausts
all appeals. The State can still require bail until then.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

[kevin]

John Galban wrote:
> kevin > wrote in message news:<gn8Ya.79676$Ho3.11153@sccrnsc03>...
>
>>A state judge is powerless to suspend, or revoke a pilots license. Only
>>the FAA can do this. If she thinks she can she is sadly mistaken, and
>>the Feds will not let some power hungry state judge undermind their
>>authority. She is dreaming.
>
>
> The FAA has a good record of allowing state and local governments to
> undermine their authority.
>
> Several years ago, Las Cruces, NM enacted city ordinances about the
> use of radios and traffic patterns at the (non-towered) local airport.
> You could get a ticket for not using the radio and not flying the
> traffic pattern like the airport manager wanted you to. The FAA
> refused to get involved. Fortunately, an influential local pilot
> convinced the city council to repeal the ordinance after a year or so.
>
> Also a few years ago, the city of Mesa, AZ had an ordinance that
> mandated all aircraft over the city maintain 1000 AGL or more. They
> actually had city police helicopters chasing down airplanes and giving
> out tickets. The FAA again showed zero interest and chose not to
> challenge the ordinance.
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)


That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or state
police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .

[jcoulter]

"Neil Gould" > wrote in
:

> Hi all,
>
> "news" > wrote:
>> Judge: State cannot prosecute pilots accused of drunkenness
>> By The Associated Press
>> (mostly snipped)
>>
>> The pilots were fired and stripped of their commercial licenses. As a
>> bail condition, they were barred from recreational flying as well.
>>
> OK... this is the part that puzzles me. No surprise that they were
> fired. Did the FAA strip them of their license? And, how could a bail
> condition be upheld if the State had no authority?

the state is appealing and bail is likely to be continued pending the
apeal.

Since their blood
> alcohol level was below that required for Federal criminal charges,
> and the State has no case, shouldn't any bail be recinded?
>
> Neil
>
>
>

[Capt. Doug]

>kevin wrote in message > That does not sound good. I did not think local
authorities , >or state police had the authority to even ask to see your
pilots licence .

In the US, you are required to show your airman certificate to ANY law
enforcement officer who asks. You don't have to surrender it, but you must
show it. Additionally, now you must accompany your airman certificate with
another government issued photo identification.

D.

[Robert Perkins]

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 22:18:51 GMT, kevin > wrote:

>That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or state
>police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .

I was told that they do. I seem to recall such questions arising on
the Private ASEL written test.

Rob

[John Godwin]

kevin > wrote in news:f9fYa.55301$cF.19245@rwcrnsc53:

> That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or state
> police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .

14 CFR 61.3 (L)(3)

(I used capital letter "L" to avoid confusion with the number "1")

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

[Tarver Engineering]

"John Godwin" > wrote in message
...
> kevin > wrote in news:f9fYa.55301$cF.19245@rwcrnsc53:
>
> > That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or state
> > police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .
>
> 14 CFR 61.3 (L)(3)
>
> (I used capital letter "L" to avoid confusion with the number "1")

In addition, as long as there is no Federal primacy issue, the State can
prosecute.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in :

>
> "John Godwin" > wrote in message
> ...
>> kevin > wrote in news:f9fYa.55301$cF.19245@rwcrnsc53:
>>
>> > That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or state
>> > police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .
>>
>> 14 CFR 61.3 (L)(3)
>>
>> (I used capital letter "L" to avoid confusion with the number "1")
>
> In addition, as long as there is no Federal primacy issue, the State can
> prosecute.
>

Rico!

bertie

[Tarver Engineering]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:
>
> >
> > "John Godwin" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> kevin > wrote in news:f9fYa.55301$cF.19245@rwcrnsc53:
> >>
> >> > That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or
state
> >> > police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence .
> >>
> >> 14 CFR 61.3 (L)(3)
> >>
> >> (I used capital letter "L" to avoid confusion with the number "1")
> >
> > In addition, as long as there is no Federal primacy issue, the State can
> > prosecute.
> >
>
> Rico!

RIVO is a Federal statute, sill poultry rodent.

[Big John]

Bertie

They are talking about RICO for the Democrats who left Austin and went
to New Mexico to stop redistricting in TX.

Hope they file.

Big John


On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:55:42 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

----clip----
>
>Rico!
>
>bertie

[John Godwin]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in :

> Perhaps you should read the header.

Perhaps you ought not to reference my post.

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT from email address)

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> :
>>
>> >
>> > "John Godwin" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> kevin > wrote in news:f9fYa.55301$cF.19245@rwcrnsc53:
>> >>
>> >> > That does not sound good. I did not think local authorities , or
> state
>> >> > police had the authority to even ask to see your pilots licence
>> >> > .
>> >>
>> >> 14 CFR 61.3 (L)(3)
>> >>
>> >> (I used capital letter "L" to avoid confusion with the number "1")
>> >
>> > In addition, as long as there is no Federal primacy issue, the
>> > State can prosecute.
>> >
>>
>> Rico!
>
> RIVO is a Federal statute, sill poultry rodent.


No, he's one of the untouchables, Splaps boy.

Bertie

[Tarver Engineering]

"John Godwin" > wrote in message
. 3.44...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:
>
> > Perhaps you should read the header.
>
> Perhaps you ought not to reference my post.

You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time you are
looking for airplane parts.

[John Godwin]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:

> You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time
> you are looking for airplane parts.

Everyone appreciates it when you don't post.

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT from email address)

[Tarver Engineering]

"John Godwin" > wrote in message
. 3.44...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> :
>
> > You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time
> > you are looking for airplane parts.
>
> Everyone appreciates it when you don't post.

Everyone you know being hampsters, I expect that is what you have heard.

[Tom S.]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "John Godwin" > wrote in message
> . 3.44...
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > :
> >
> > > You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time
> > > you are looking for airplane parts.
> >
> > Everyone appreciates it when you don't post.
>
> Everyone you know being hampsters, I expect that is what you have heard.
>
And his father smelled of elderberries.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Tom S." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "John Godwin" > wrote in message
> > . 3.44...
> > > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > :
> > >
> > > > You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time
> > > > you are looking for airplane parts.
> > >
> > > Everyone appreciates it when you don't post.
> >
> > Everyone you know being hampsters, I expect that is what you have heard.

> And his father smelled of elderberries.

Godwin is not a bad guy, just ignorant.

[Limey Dave]

"Tom S." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "John Godwin" > wrote in message
> > . 3.44...
> > > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > :
> > >
> > > > You should be nice Godwin and then I might not ignore you next time
> > > > you are looking for airplane parts.
> > >
> > > Everyone appreciates it when you don't post.
> >
> > Everyone you know being hampsters, I expect that is what you have heard.
> >
> And his father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
Still, when Splappy popped out, his old man yelled, "We suck again!"

Limey Dave.