Pilot charged with Manslaughter

[Gig 601XL Builder]

PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
appear to have drowned.

[Kingfish]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
> (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
> A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
> crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
> killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
> manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
> never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
> accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
> 15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
> from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
> producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
> appear to have drowned.

I just saw this on AvWeb and it made me sick. You have to wonder how
can one individual harness enough stupidity to fly a plane without a
license, with passengers, while sh!tfaced. My guess is that OK law
doesn't allow for a murder charge due to the circumstances - I think
it's warranted here. JMHO.

[Jim Macklin]

A license is not required to fly or own an airplane. It is
required to legally fly an airplane. Training is required
to get the license.
How much dope was in the airplane?



"Kingfish" > wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
| > PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
| >
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
| > A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super
Viking when it
| > crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday
night,
| > killing all three passengers, has been charged with
three counts of
| > manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor,
Okla., apparently
| > never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the
time of the
| > accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were
Mariano Carlos,
| > 15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos
Gonzalez, 33, both
| > from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine
was not
| > producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the
passengers
| > appear to have drowned.
|
| I just saw this on AvWeb and it made me sick. You have to
wonder how
| can one individual harness enough stupidity to fly a plane
without a
| license, with passengers, while sh!tfaced. My guess is
that OK law
| doesn't allow for a murder charge due to the
circumstances - I think
| it's warranted here. JMHO.
|

[Kingfish]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> A license is not required to fly or own an airplane. It is
> required to legally fly an airplane. Training is required
> to get the license.
> How much dope was in the airplane?
>

I'd say just the one in the left seat

[Christopher Campbell[_1_]]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:41:18 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
(in article >):

> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH

How terribly unfortunate.

[Ross]

Kingfish wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>>PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>>(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
>>A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
>>crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
>>killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
>>manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
>>never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
>>accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
>>15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
>>from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
>>producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
>>appear to have drowned.
>
>
> I just saw this on AvWeb and it made me sick. You have to wonder how
> can one individual harness enough stupidity to fly a plane without a
> license, with passengers, while sh!tfaced. My guess is that OK law
> doesn't allow for a murder charge due to the circumstances - I think
> it's warranted here. JMHO.
>

Do you know of any state that had a law that drunk drivers/flyers should
be charged with murder. IMO it should be a capital crime. Just last
Sunday and Fort Worth, TX policeman helping a motorist was killed by a
drunk driver going too fast.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:41:18 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>
> How terribly unfortunate.

Unfortunate for who? If you mean the passengers (assuming they A. Didn't
know he didn't have a license and B. Didn't know he was drunk) or all the
legally licensed, safely aviators out there who have what we do lessened
somewhat in the eyes of the general public then I agree.

If you mean for that asshole then well...

[Robert M. Gary]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
> (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
> A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
> crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
> killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
> manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
> never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
> accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
> 15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
> from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
> producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
> appear to have drowned.

By pilot I assume you are talking about the guy who was flying the
plane? There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Investigators said it appears the engine was not
> producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
> appear to have drowned.

He crashed the plane into the water and let the passengers drown!
Perhaps he should ask Ted Kennedy for a referal for a good attorney.

-Robert

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>> (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
>> A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
>> crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
>> killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
>> manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
>> never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
>> accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
>> 15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
>> from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
>> producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
>> appear to have drowned.
>
> By pilot I assume you are talking about the guy who was flying the
> plane? There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>
> -Robert
>

You may assume AVWEB was talking about that.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
> (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
> A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
> crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
> killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
> manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
> never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
> accident, authorities said.


I haven't looked at a Bellanca in a while. Doesn't it have just the right front
door like a Cherokee? If that's so, he had to crawl over the other front seat
passenger to get out. It's a pity he didn't join them.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[NW_Pilot]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...

> How much dope was in the airplane?
>


They wont tell becuse the cops are selling it as we all discuss this!

[mad8]

and formula 1 and indy cart drivers are often referred to as pilots
technically, it all came from sailing, with a meaning similar to
"guide"
i guess he was in a way piloting. just not um *well* (to say the least)


not quoting the dictionary to make any point, just quoting as an FYI

pilot
A noun
5 pilot, airplane pilot
someone who is licensed to operate an aircraft in flight

6 pilot
a person qualified to guide ships through difficult waters going
into or out of a harbor

B verb
1 navigate, pilot
act as the navigator in a car, plane, or vessel and plan, direct,
plot the path and position of the conveyance; "Is anyone volunteering
to navigate during the trip?"; "Who was navigating the ship during the
accident?"






T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
>
> >There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>
> The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
> the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
> by many years.
>
> --
> Do not spin this aircraft. If the aircraft does enter a spin it will return to earth without further attention on the part of the aeronaut.
>
> (first handbook issued with the Curtis-Wright flyer)

[Larry Dighera]

On 21 Dec 2006 14:45:01 -0600, T o d d P a t t i s t
> wrote in
>:

>"Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
>
>>There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>
>The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
>the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
>by many years.

So, while the person at the controls of the aircraft may be considered
to have been piloting it, he was not an airman. :-)

[Christopher Campbell[_1_]]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:50:39 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
(in article >):

>
> "Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
> e.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:41:18 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>>
>> How terribly unfortunate.
>
> Unfortunate for who? If you mean the passengers (assuming they A. Didn't
> know he didn't have a license and B. Didn't know he was drunk) or all the
> legally licensed, safely aviators out there who have what we do lessened
> somewhat in the eyes of the general public then I agree.
>
> If you mean for that asshole then well...
>
>

Flying without a license did not kill his passengers, any more than flying
without a flight plan kills anyone. Having a license does not make you a
better pilot.

There are guys who have flown for many years without a license, even filing
and flying IFR in multi-engine aircraft. I do not approve of breaking the
law, of course, but I have been around long enough to know that someone who
is flying illegally may not be any more dangerous than those who are flying
legally.

Drunk, of course, is another matter.

I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because he
did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment for
daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
murder if he was drunk.

[Matt Whiting]

Christopher Campbell wrote:

> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because he
> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment for
> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
> murder if he was drunk.

So if someone who had never been to medical school posed as a surgeon
and operated on your wife or child and killed them, you'd be OK if they
weren't charged with murder? After all, a medical license is just a
piece of paper from the government.

Matt

[Gig 601XL Builder]

First definition from answer.com via Google definition link.

1.. One who operates or is licensed to operate an aircraft in flight.

"mad8" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> and formula 1 and indy cart drivers are often referred to as pilots
> technically, it all came from sailing, with a meaning similar to
> "guide"
> i guess he was in a way piloting. just not um *well* (to say the least)
>
>
> not quoting the dictionary to make any point, just quoting as an FYI
>
> pilot
> A noun
> 5 pilot, airplane pilot
> someone who is licensed to operate an aircraft in flight
>
> 6 pilot
> a person qualified to guide ships through difficult waters going
> into or out of a harbor
>
> B verb
> 1 navigate, pilot
> act as the navigator in a car, plane, or vessel and plan, direct,
> plot the path and position of the conveyance; "Is anyone volunteering
> to navigate during the trip?"; "Who was navigating the ship during the
> accident?"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
>> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
>>
>> >There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>>
>> The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
>> the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
>> by many years.
>>
>> --
>> Do not spin this aircraft. If the aircraft does enter a spin it will
>> return to earth without further attention on the part of the aeronaut.
>>
>> (first handbook issued with the Curtis-Wright flyer)
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:50:39 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
> (in article >):
>
>>
>> "Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
>> e.com...
>>> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:41:18 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
>>> (in article >):
>>>
>>>> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>>>
>>> How terribly unfortunate.
>>
>> Unfortunate for who? If you mean the passengers (assuming they A. Didn't
>> know he didn't have a license and B. Didn't know he was drunk) or all the
>> legally licensed, safely aviators out there who have what we do lessened
>> somewhat in the eyes of the general public then I agree.
>>
>> If you mean for that asshole then well...
>>
>>
>
> Flying without a license did not kill his passengers, any more than flying
> without a flight plan kills anyone. Having a license does not make you a
> better pilot.
>
> There are guys who have flown for many years without a license, even
> filing
> and flying IFR in multi-engine aircraft. I do not approve of breaking the
> law, of course, but I have been around long enough to know that someone
> who
> is flying illegally may not be any more dangerous than those who are
> flying
> legally.
>
> Drunk, of course, is another matter.
>
> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because
> he
> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
> for
> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
> murder if he was drunk.
>



Well they said he had been drinking so I would assume they took that into
account. But in these United States and most other countries you are not
assumed to be capable of safely commanding an aircraft unless you have a
little card from the government that says so. So since charging someone with
manslaughter is a legal matter you are going to have to take whether or not
he was legally qualified to do what he was doing when the folks in his care
got killed. According to the story he NEVER had a certificate so this is not
a case where a guy lost his medical because his BP was too high.

[Robert M. Gary]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
> > By pilot I assume you are talking about the guy who was flying the
> > plane? There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
> >
> > -Robert
> >
>
> You may assume AVWEB was talking about that.

I know, I was being funny.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
>
> >There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>
> The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
> the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
> by many years.

Ok, so it seems my joke wasn't well understood. I probably spend more
time than most reading NTSB reports because I'm a CFI and like to pass
that information on to students.
When the NTSB issues a final cause for an accident they usually use
pre-canned reasons for the accident so they are easily searchable. In
this type of accident it would be typical for one cause of the accident
to be listed...
Pilot In Command - No qualified PIC on board
So, when Steve Woz (founder of Apple) crashed his Bonanza there was not
PIC on board according to the NTSB.

-Robert

[Christopher Campbell[_1_]]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:51:55 -0800, Matt Whiting wrote
(in article >):

> Christopher Campbell wrote:
>
>> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because he
>> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
>> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
>> for
>> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
>> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
>> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
>> murder if he was drunk.
>
> So if someone who had never been to medical school posed as a surgeon
> and operated on your wife or child and killed them, you'd be OK if they
> weren't charged with murder? After all, a medical license is just a
> piece of paper from the government.

He should be charged for murder if he made mistakes in procedure that would
not be expected of a licensed surgeon. He should not be charged with murder
simply because he did not have a license. He should be charged with murder
because of actual reckless behavior, not for simple non-compliance with a
government regulation.

[Christopher Campbell[_1_]]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 14:08:46 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
(in article >):

>
> "Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
> e.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:50:39 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>>
>>> "Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
>>> e.com...
>>>> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:41:18 -0800, Gig 601XL Builder wrote
>>>> (in article >):
>>>>
>>>>> PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
>>>>
>>>> How terribly unfortunate.
>>>
>>> Unfortunate for who? If you mean the passengers (assuming they A. Didn't
>>> know he didn't have a license and B. Didn't know he was drunk) or all the
>>> legally licensed, safely aviators out there who have what we do lessened
>>> somewhat in the eyes of the general public then I agree.
>>>
>>> If you mean for that asshole then well...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Flying without a license did not kill his passengers, any more than flying
>> without a flight plan kills anyone. Having a license does not make you a
>> better pilot.
>>
>> There are guys who have flown for many years without a license, even
>> filing
>> and flying IFR in multi-engine aircraft. I do not approve of breaking the
>> law, of course, but I have been around long enough to know that someone
>> who
>> is flying illegally may not be any more dangerous than those who are
>> flying
>> legally.
>>
>> Drunk, of course, is another matter.
>>
>> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because
>> he
>> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
>> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
>> for
>> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
>> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
>> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
>> murder if he was drunk.
>>
>
>
>
> Well they said he had been drinking so I would assume they took that into
> account. But in these United States and most other countries you are not
> assumed to be capable of safely commanding an aircraft unless you have a
> little card from the government that says so. So since charging someone with
> manslaughter is a legal matter you are going to have to take whether or not
> he was legally qualified to do what he was doing when the folks in his care
> got killed. According to the story he NEVER had a certificate so this is not
> a case where a guy lost his medical because his BP was too high.
>
>

I know too many guys who have licenses who are no safer (and, in fact,
considerably less safe) than guys who do.

[Matt Whiting]

Christopher Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:51:55 -0800, Matt Whiting wrote
> (in article >):
>
>
>>Christopher Campbell wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because he
>>>did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
>>>murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
>>>for
>>>daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
>>>without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
>>>reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
>>>murder if he was drunk.
>>
>>So if someone who had never been to medical school posed as a surgeon
>>and operated on your wife or child and killed them, you'd be OK if they
>>weren't charged with murder? After all, a medical license is just a
>>piece of paper from the government.
>
>
> He should be charged for murder if he made mistakes in procedure that would
> not be expected of a licensed surgeon. He should not be charged with murder
> simply because he did not have a license. He should be charged with murder
> because of actual reckless behavior, not for simple non-compliance with a
> government regulation.

Then why have licenses at all?

[Christopher Campbell[_1_]]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:59:30 -0800, Robert M. Gary wrote
(in article m>):

>
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> Investigators said it appears the engine was not
>> producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
>> appear to have drowned.
>
> He crashed the plane into the water and let the passengers drown!
> Perhaps he should ask Ted Kennedy for a referal for a good attorney.

Kennedy never did that! All stories of Democrat politicians' lying,
corruption, or other criminal activity are made up out of whole cloth by Rush
Limbaugh.

Seriously -- Google any story of a Democrat's corruption, especially in the
last 30 years. You will find thousands of people attesting that it never
happened, that it was blown out of proportion by dittoheads, and, anyway, it
was not nearly as bad as anything George Bush has done.

Things are little or no better on the Republican side.

Reason has entirely disappeared from American politics.

[Peter Dohm]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> > "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
> >
> > >There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
> >
> > The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
> > the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
> > by many years.
>
> Ok, so it seems my joke wasn't well understood. I probably spend more
> time than most reading NTSB reports because I'm a CFI and like to pass
> that information on to students.
> When the NTSB issues a final cause for an accident they usually use
> pre-canned reasons for the accident so they are easily searchable. In
> this type of accident it would be typical for one cause of the accident
> to be listed...
> Pilot In Command - No qualified PIC on board
> So, when Steve Woz (founder of Apple) crashed his Bonanza there was not
> PIC on board according to the NTSB.
>
> -Robert
>

That's an interesting point, and makes perfect sense once explained.

Thanks,
Peter

[Jose[_1_]]

> Pilot In Command - No qualified PIC on board
> So, when Steve Woz (founder of Apple) crashed his Bonanza there was not
> PIC on board according to the NTSB.

"No, all we can derive is that in Scotland, there is at least one sheep,
which is black, on at least one side".

No -qualified- PIC on board.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Mxsmanic]

Kingfish writes:

> My guess is that OK law doesn't allow for a murder charge
> due to the circumstances ...

A murder charge requires that you show he killed them deliberately.
That's the major distinction between murder and manslaughter. Just
being stupid normally leads to manslaughter.

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

[Mxsmanic]

Matt Whiting writes:

> So if someone who had never been to medical school posed as a surgeon
> and operated on your wife or child and killed them, you'd be OK if they
> weren't charged with murder?

If he knew what he was doing, they wouldn't be killed. If he didn't
know what he was doing, they'd be killed. Either way, his attendance
at medical school (or lack thereof) would be irrelevant.

> After all, a medical license is just a piece of paper from the government.

Quite so.

It's important not to overestimate the utility of credentials.

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

[Mxsmanic]

Matt Whiting writes:

> Then why have licenses at all?

Two reasons come to mind: (1) they can serve to restrict employment in
a given field (all too common, unfortunately); and (2) they can serve
as a cheap but very inferior substitute for individual competency
testing.

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

[Kingfish]

Christopher Campbell wrote:
>
> I know too many guys who have licenses who are no safer (and, in fact,
> considerably less safe) than guys who do.

What????

[Kingfish]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Then why have licenses at all?

Rhetorical question, I know...

Because they're an indicator that an individual has been trained for a
task to a known standard of competancy. I know of a local guy that
*did* take flying lessons at one point but never got his license, who
got busted not too long ago for flying a King Air 200 for a charter
company. Unbelievable that this could slip between the cracks.

[Matt Barrow]

"Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
>
> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because
> he
> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
> for
> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to fly
> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder if
> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him with
> murder if he was drunk.

CJ, do you know the difference between "murder" and "manslaughter"?

Are you practicing law without a license? :~)

[Matt Barrow]

"Kingfish" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Christopher Campbell wrote:
>>
>> I know too many guys who have licenses who are no safer (and, in fact,
>> considerably less safe) than guys who do.
>
> What????

Who do do?

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Christopher Campbell" > wrote in message
e.com...
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:51:55 -0800, Matt Whiting wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> Christopher Campbell wrote:
>>
>>> I think there is something wrong with charging a guy with murder because
>>> he
>>> did not have a piece of paper from the government. Charging someone with
>>> murder for flying without a license is pure vindictiveness -- punishment
>>> for
>>> daring to defy governmental authority. It is not any more dangerous to
>>> fly
>>> without a license than with one. You should only be charged for murder
>>> if
>>> reckless behavior led to a death. I have no problem with charging him
>>> with
>>> murder if he was drunk.
>>
>> So if someone who had never been to medical school posed as a surgeon
>> and operated on your wife or child and killed them, you'd be OK if they
>> weren't charged with murder? After all, a medical license is just a
>> piece of paper from the government.
>
> He should be charged for murder if he made mistakes in procedure that
> would
> not be expected of a licensed surgeon. He should not be charged with
> murder
> simply because he did not have a license. He should be charged with murder
> because of actual reckless behavior, not for simple non-compliance with a
> government regulation.
>
>

The lack of a license is prima fascia evidence that he does not have the
skills. It would then shift the burden of proof to him to prove that he did.
This would count for brain surgery or flying.

[Skylune]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Just
> being stupid normally leads to manslaughter.
>


I don't think Boyer should be charged, despite the absurd TV ads
running on the weather channel denouncing "special interests."
Outstanding irony, the AOPA denouncing "special interests.."

Q: If he thinks the funding forumula is so fair, why not support this
with numbers?
A: Because it would show the massive subsidies taxpayers and
commercial passengers give to GA.

Happy holidays, and thank you to whomever signed me up to recieve
Flight Training. I do read it each month.

[John Theune]

Skylune wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> Just
>> being stupid normally leads to manslaughter.
>>
>
>
> I don't think Boyer should be charged, despite the absurd TV ads
> running on the weather channel denouncing "special interests."
> Outstanding irony, the AOPA denouncing "special interests.."
>
> Q: If he thinks the funding forumula is so fair, why not support this
> with numbers?
> A: Because it would show the massive subsidies taxpayers and
> commercial passengers give to GA.
>
> Happy holidays, and thank you to whomever signed me up to recieve
> Flight Training. I do read it each month.
>
I had unblocked you recently but see it was a mistake, your just as
stupid as ever.

[Blueskies]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message ...
: PILOT CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER AFTER FATAL CRASH
: (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/766-full.html#194044)
: A 30-year-old man who was flying a 1972 Bellanca Super Viking when it
: crashed into a pond in northeastern Oklahoma on Saturday night,
: killing all three passengers, has been charged with three counts of
: manslaughter. Thomas Brent Caldwell, 30, of Pryor, Okla., apparently
: never had a pilot certificate and was drinking at the time of the
: accident, authorities said. Killed in the crash were Mariano Carlos,
: 15, of Pryor; and Eduardo Robles, 20, and Campos Gonzalez, 33, both
: from Mexico. Investigators said it appears the engine was not
: producing power when the airplane hit the water, and the passengers
: appear to have drowned.
:

Interesting everyone is calling this guy a pilot!

[Mxsmanic]

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

> The lack of a license is prima fascia evidence that he does not have the
> skills.

No. The possession of a license is prima facie evidence that he has
the skills, but the converse is not true. Many people may have the
skills but choose not to get the license. There are far fewer people
who do not have the skills and yet manage to get the license.

> It would then shift the burden of proof to him to prove that he did.

Having an accident can be pretty good evidence that he lacked skill.
Not having an accident can be pretty good evidence that he had skill.

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

[GDBholdings]

"Kingfish" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Then why have licenses at all?
>
> Rhetorical question, I know...
>
> Because they're an indicator that an individual has been trained for a
> task to a known standard of competancy. I know of a local guy that
> *did* take flying lessons at one point but never got his license, who
> got busted not too long ago for flying a King Air 200 for a charter
> company. Unbelievable that this could slip between the cracks.

Happens all the time. Quite a few years ago my father (who was also a pilot)
recommended a guy he knew to fly the company twin. My father knew this guy
for a number of years so he checked him out in the aircraft, "one of the
most competent pilots he had seen in years" I remember him saying. Because
this guy was such a master at handling the plane in many different types of
scenarios and seemed knowledgeable in all the procedures the company hired
him. Only one problem, he didn't have a commercial license!. He was such a
good pilot no-one bothered to check to see if he actually had a commercial.
He only had a private with a twin endorsement. It wasn't until almost a year
of flying that someone actually asked the question. (dumb I know but
everyone assumed he was qualified).
He was let go from his job and the company hired a new fully licensed
commercial pilot.
>

[gatt]

"T o d d P a t t i s t" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote:
>
>>There was no pilot on board according to the NTSB.
>
> The pilot was unlicensed. The concept of "pilot" predates
> the concept of licensing people to engage in that activity
> by many years.

Makes me think of Bob Hoover; did he cease to be a pilot while they pulled
his ticket? IE, if he had crashed, would the NTBS have said there was no
pilot on board?

-c