Cessna sued for skydiving accident.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
...
I am sick to death of everyone placing the blame for everything on
"government schools." It is very possible to get a good education at
government schools, if you want to learn.

If you want to learn what?

The blame for most of the
problems with government schools is the lack of motivation of the
students,
and is a failure of the parents of kids who are not motivated to learn.

Even where such motivation exists, the methods ot modern "teaching" is an
utter failure. Recall, too, that the schools have been telling parents for
decades to "Shut up...we're the experts". Those lacadasical parents are
products of earlier generations of public schools and their teaching of
irresponsibility. IOW, the chickens have come home to roost.


Hear, hear! Well put.

Not really. Just more typical excuse making that is become a cottage
industry in the US.


That said, there *is* a slant to the way things are taught in schools
that I find disturbing. To grossly over-simplify, this slant amounts
to an over-egalitarian "Everyone is equal, no one is better than
anyone else, everyone plays no matter how inept, business is evil but
the gummint will take care of you from cradle-to-grave" attitude that
sounds great on paper but produces kids without a work ethic or moral
compass.

Luckily, this can be easily "over-written" with proper parenting
skills. My kids are receiving an excellent public school education,
and are now at the age where they no longer need to be "de-programmed"
at the end of the school day. They can -- and often do -- sniff out
the slant on their own.

If they have to stift it out, they're not getting an excellent public school
education. The entire purpose of public schools is NOT education, and hasn't
been since the days of Thomas Mann in the 1840's.


I think Kontiki was referring to this slant more than anything
specific about the educational process. Too many parents aren't aware
of (or don't care about) this subtle undercurrent in the schools that,
over time, has produced a society of lazy, sue-happy "it's not my
fault!" people.

Look up the word "epistemology", then evaluate how the schools practice it.

Then grab your butt.

(I'll not wait for more of Morgan's adolesant alibis.)

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
...
Sorry about the confusion -- the opinions expressed here were mine, not
his!

Dang! I thought we had a chance at a father-son debate. Right here on
r.a.p.!

Actually, Joe read what I wrote, and agrees with me whole-heartedly.

As any kid who might want the car keys should...

;-)

And a parent that wants the airplane keys.

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Morgans wrote:


What does economic education have to do with leaning about a hopelessly
screwed up justice system have to do with the price of beans in China?

If you have to ask that question then you are one of the victims.

Or one of the causes.

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in
:


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:e5f4881f-1c03-4cd1-8862-26d10fe8fb63
@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.
..
I am sick to death of everyone placing the blame for everything on
"government schools." It is very possible to get a good education
at government schools, if you want to learn.

If you want to learn what?

The blame for most of the
problems with government schools is the lack of motivation of the
students,
and is a failure of the parents of kids who are not motivated to
learn.

Even where such motivation exists, the methods ot modern "teaching" is
an utter failure. Recall, too, that the schools have been telling
parents for decades to "Shut up...we're the experts". Those
lacadasical parents are products of earlier generations of public
schools and their teaching of irresponsibility. IOW, the chickens have
come home to roost.


Hear, hear! Well put.

Not really. Just more typical excuse making that is become a cottage
industry in the US.


That said, there *is* a slant to the way things are taught in schools
that I find disturbing. To grossly over-simplify, this slant amounts
to an over-egalitarian "Everyone is equal, no one is better than
anyone else, everyone plays no matter how inept, business is evil but
the gummint will take care of you from cradle-to-grave" attitude that
sounds great on paper but produces kids without a work ethic or moral
compass.

Luckily, this can be easily "over-written" with proper parenting
skills. My kids are receiving an excellent public school education,
and are now at the age where they no longer need to be
"de-programmed" at the end of the school day. They can -- and often
do -- sniff out the slant on their own.

If they have to stift it out, they're not getting an excellent public
school education. The entire purpose of public schools is NOT
education, and hasn't been since the days of Thomas Mann in the
1840's.


I think Kontiki was referring to this slant more than anything
specific about the educational process. Too many parents aren't
aware of (or don't care about) this subtle undercurrent in the
schools that, over time, has produced a society of lazy, sue-happy
"it's not my fault!" people.

Look up the word "epistemology", then evaluate how the schools
practice it.

Then grab your butt.


h aren't we a little Zen and the art of obfuscation"?


Bertie

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Matt Whiting wrote:

No longer can schools punish students as it is either illegal or will
harm the students' self-esteem. When a student fails a class, we blame
everyone but the student and find a way to move them along anyway. I
know you have public school connections (your wife as I recall), but the
reality is that public schools HAVE contributed to this phenomenon of
sending subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, messages that nothing is
YOUR fault it is the fault of the "system", and don't worry as the
"system" will take care of you anyway.


Yes, its a huge problem that tends to feed on itself. But before
any solution can be attained there must first be a recognition
that a problem exists and an understanding of the nature of
the problem. Then there must be the ability to use some critical
thinking (i.e. thinking outside the box) that most people lack.

Behavior is secondary to the inculcation of irrationality which breeds the
behavior pathologies. It is beyond two generation now, so Morgan's prattle
that parents being the cause is only partially correct...a very small part.

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:30:56 -0500, Margy Natalie
wrote:


It's not the schools its the parents.

Umm...the parents that came though public schools?


I've seen parents come in to find
out why the TEACHER made a mistake and Johnny got a B.

My wife's a dedicated teacher. I hear it every day. 8^(

And the teachers that have been telling parents, for years now, to "Shut
up...we're the experts" hasan't had an effect?

I remember when they gave teachers the same tests they were giving their
students, the teachers failed...miserablly.

I have, though, been to my kids school to ask the teacher why a science
question was a single sentence 115 worlds long, and why a friend of our,
with an MS degree from Princeton, could not figure out the problem.

That's just ONE instance.

Dedication is nice, but that's about all - it will not give students even an
ounce of knowledge or ability to comprehend the world.

BDS wrote:
"Maxwell" wrote

I don't think that is really the case. It does indeed take people seeking
recovery to start the process. But I have never seen a lawyer get involved
with a case in the interest of justice. They pick and choose who they help
base on yeild, not justice.

Both the plaintiff and his or her lawyer share a portion of the blame, no
doubt. But the fact remains that none of it could take place without a
willing plaintiff no matter how many morally corrupt lawyers there are out
there. I guess it shows how quickly many of us are willing to throw
everything we know about what is right and what is wrong out the window if
the price is right.

BDS


I went through a long process where I gave the lawyer/plaintif equation
a lot of hard objective thought. In the end I came to the following
conclusion;
Although it's true that the plaintiff has to want the lawsuit, one has
to consider that in considering the plaintiff side of the equation, one
has the entire population to consider. It's reasonable to assume that
within that population there will be a considerable amount of potential
plaintiffs seeking unreasonable, trivial, and financially inspired
litigation.
In other words, on the plaintiff side, you will always have a willing
and unethical base seeking financial gain.

On the attorney side, we supposedly have an educated, ethical base,
steeped in honesty, integrity, and legal knowledge.

For a lawsuit to occur, regardless of the reason, if a million dishonest
plaintiffs approach the bench and seek litigation, it is the lawyer who
makes the litigation possible. You can have an unlimited supply of
people seeking a lawsuit, but it still takes that lawyer to file it.

In summation, I have long ago come to the conclusion that although I
completely recognize and accept an unethical plaintiff base, when it
comes to the relegation of responsibility for the terrible mess the
legal profession has become in the United States, one has to comclude
that it is incumbent on the lawyers not the population to control any
unethical plaintiff base and to me it has become perfectly clear that
the lawyers not only have failed to control this unethical base, but
have gone to extreme ends to encourage it and take active advantage of
it for their own financial gain.

To me, it's obvious that the ultimate blame lies with the lawyers.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, "Blueskies" wrote:

The airplane is NOT approved for flight into *known* icing conditions. So when a pilot finds himself in those conditions
in one of these planes, Cessna is to blame if he/she screws up and crashes...

So, why do so many of them have boots and hot props and all
the rest? It would seem to add a lot of expensive weight if flight
through known ice is forbidden. What does FedEx do with their Caravans
when the weather is less than CAVU? Ground them?

I quote the first paragraph from a Transport Canada Service Difficulty
Alert:

"Cessna 208 (Caravan) Series - Operation Into Known or Forecast Icing
Conditions

"The Cessna Model 208 and 208B (Caravan) airplanes (C208), when
appropriately equipped, are certified for flight into the continuous
maximum and intermittent maximum icing conditions specified in Federal
Aviation Regulations (FAR) 25, Appendix C, in accordance with FAR
23.1419. However, there have been numerous documented cases of icing
related accidents/incidents involving the operation of the C208."

Read the rest at http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/ce...rt/2006-01.htm

Dan

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 16:30:37 -0500, "Blueskies"
wrote:


"F. Baum" wrote in message ...
On Dec 2, 11:32 am, wrote:

There's been an AD against the Caravan for more than a year
(2006-06-06) that was recently superseded by 2007-10-15, perhaps
driven by this accident. It seems that it doesn't matter that ADs are
issued; they have to be modified or amended or superseded to make
people sit up and take problems seriously. The Caravan has long had a
history of poor ice performance and anyone flying one and staying
current with aviation should know that.

Dan, thanks for posting something aviation related on this thread (As
opposed to Jay's OT BS). It has been a long time since I have flown a
Caravan so I am not going to try to be an expert here. Unfortunatly
the Caravan isnt the only Turboprop with poor icing performance
(Remember the ATR). There are several others that I have flown that
are downright scary in icing conditions. Maybe it is an inherent
problem in Turboprpops. Thanks for the link.
F Baum

The airplane is NOT approved for flight into *known* icing conditions. So when a pilot finds himself in those conditions
in one of these planes, Cessna is to blame if he/she screws up and crashes...

The Cessna Model 208 and 208B Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) and
FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)Supplement S1 "Known Icing
Euipment" begs to differ.

Shirl wrote:

Some of us knocked ourselves out every bit as much as you did, Jay, to
produce good, honest, decent, productive offspring -- kids with good
value systems and some awareness of how to set "priorities". There for
them as much as you have been, filling in all the holes that ANY
educational system has ... still to have kids with skewed attitudes. It
happens.


Well then there must have been other influences in their lives
that worked against all your hard efforts. It is certainly
worth considering that since government schools control a good
portion of their young lives that they might bear some blame.