Pilot charged with Manslaughter

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.

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.

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?

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


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.

"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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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????