0
dbcooperfan

17 year old turns in at Start Skydiving!

Recommended Posts

Within the article, it states that "According to Newsom, a skydiving accident that injured a 17-year-old girl Sunday is being investigated by the company and the Federal Aviation Administration." *(emphasis added by me)

Does anybody know if this statement, or quote, is accurate? Is THE FAA really, and indeed - directly now, actively investigating this incident?
coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When someone of legal age gets hurt it looks bad on the sport becuase some crazy person did something stupid.

When a 16-17 year old gets hurt doing the same exact thing, it is a HUGE news story that makes our sport look TERRIBLE! Who would let her jump a that age?, that poor child should never have been doing that!, why would those people allow this to happen? , etc.

It is always a huge black eye to the sport when someone "young" gets hurt more so than when someone that is an "adult" does.
"TREE!" - D.B. Cooper 1971

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

When someone of legal age gets hurt it looks bad on the sport becuase some crazy person did something stupid.

When a 16-17 year old gets hurt doing the same exact thing, it is a HUGE news story that makes our sport look TERRIBLE! Who would let her jump a that age?, that poor child should never have been doing that!, why would those people allow this to happen? , etc.

It is always a huge black eye to the sport when someone "young" gets hurt more so than when someone that is an "adult" does.



I'm with you on this one...

I'm certain many children could learn to skydive and do it safely, but skydiving has unknowns that no amount of skill can prevent, and those unknowns present liability issues to other people. We never skydive alone. Skydiving requires pilots, instructors, ground crew, investors, private businesses.

Can laws in the US truly protect everyone involved in a child skydiving fatality to the same degree they would protect them if that child were an adult? My understanding is No, they do not.

Sure...we deal with children doing dangerous things all the time...playing football, driving cars, joining the military. My issue is one of liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Also, most of you know who I am so no need to go down that road.



Yes, we know that you are a fuckin clown, that's all we really need to know.

Quote

This poor girl is going to have to live with two broken femurs...



And quit acting like you give a shit about this girl, the only thing you care about is spewing your bullshit about Start and how this should translate into more rules and regulation. Do us all a favor and go crawl back into the hole you came from.
ZC OG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

When someone of legal age gets hurt it looks bad on the sport because some crazy person did something stupid.

When a 16-17 year old gets hurt doing the same exact thing, it is a HUGE news story that makes our sport look TERRIBLE! Who would let her jump a that age?, that poor child should never have been doing that!, why would those people allow this to happen? , etc.

It is always a huge black eye to the sport when someone "young" gets hurt more so than when someone that is an "adult" does.



I'm with you on this one...

I'm certain many children could learn to skydive and do it safely, but skydiving has unknowns that no amount of skill can prevent, and those unknowns present liability issues to other people. We never skydive alone. Skydiving requires pilots, instructors, ground crew, investors, private businesses.

Can laws in the US truly protect everyone involved in a child skydiving fatality to the same degree they would protect them if that child were an adult? My understanding is No, they do not.

Sure...we deal with children doing dangerous things all the time...playing football, driving cars, joining the military. My issue is one of liability.



I agree, but I'd also like to throw in that at that age..without the benefit of 'worldly experience time imparts' one tends to think they are bullet proof and NOT that even simple mistakes can have a detrimental effect on the rest of your life.

Those of us in the sport for some time know plenty of people that started young and have quit as they got older for no other reason that that the cost/benefit equation didn't make sense anymore to them.

I have to wonder if someone 17 years old understands that skydiving for all the hype, isn't a carnival ride and again...even a slight error may cause a lifetime of pain ~if not your life itself.










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me ask you a question~

Take the profit$ factor completely out of the equation altogether.

Two students call for instruction for which you will charge nothing, you can only teach one of them period...one is 17 and the other 18, which one would you mentor and why?










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats a loaded question, so here is the loaded answer you are seeking.

I would choose the 18 year old because they *might* be more mature.

They might also not be more mature. What if one is a guy and one is a girl? At that age women mature faster.

Now, lets unload the question. In the real world you dont have to choose one or the other, you can teach both. In the situation where you can teach both is there really much of a difference?
"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That's a loaded question, so here is the loaded answer you are seeking.

I would choose the 18 year old because they *might* be more mature.

They might also not be more mature. What if one is a guy and one is a girl? At that age women mature faster.

Now, lets unload the question. In the real world you don't have to choose one or the other, you can teach both. In the situation where you can teach both is there really much of a difference?



Yup...possible legal liability.



The real 'unloaded' question is, is the money gained worth the possibility of negative publicity regarding a minor and the probable legal implications?

In some instances, at some places I gather the answer is yes, at others it is not.

I'm not saying get a rope & find a tree over this, only that as you yourself admit...all other factors being equal...most would take the 18 year old.

How much of 'our' decisions in matters like this are perhaps shortsightedly so, dollar driven?










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm getting a good kick out of the bozos coming out with, "Well I know someone who....." lame ass reasons for allowing under-age kids to be skydiving as if 'those people' justify your position.

You people just don't get it.

Law is law and the reasons for the limitation have been explained to you over and over again. You don't like the law? Do something to get it changed instead of whining about it.

And for the record, I oppose letting any body skydive who cannot legally sign the waiver and be held accountable to it. Parents signing for underage kids just doesn't cut it.



Speaking for at least some of us bozos, I totally get it, Pops.

I totally get that there are multiple other sports and even travel activities that also require adult and minor waiver-of-liability contracts (WOLCs), the minor versions of which are seldom upheld by the courts unless there's also an accompanying proviso about agreeing to arbitration (and that's a crapshoot too).

And I totally get it that the vast -vast - majority of those sports and travel activities, most of which have far deeper pockets and more minor-participants-at-risk than parachuting, do in fact include and even encourage minors to participate. Yes, sometimes they get sued, but yes, too, those sports benefit in the long term and in overall terms by not only expanding their customer pool but getting people actively involved while they're young and still forming their sporting preferences. In other words, the risk is justified by the benefits.

I wrote about this in great detail in the final issue of SKYDIVING Magazine. Check it out if you'd like to get educated about the way this whole issue plays out across the sporting and adventure travel spectrum, not just with parachuting.

Bottom line is the bottom line: Each parachuting BUSINESS should make its own informed choice about the age at which they allow people to jump. Period.

To date, most of them concur with Andy908 and go with age-of-majority only. Fine and dandy, more power to 'em.

But what I don't get is all the bozos who seem to think it's intelligent and appropriate to insist on a single standard, enforced why who-knows-who, for all businesses in all states in all circumstances. It's THEIR business, not yours, and if those business owners want to increase their legal risk to increase their business, well, uh... it's THEIR business, you know?


B|
SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Unless and until the supreme court addresses this type of issue, it would be left to state courts, no businesses.
This is a legal issue, not a best practice issue.



Jeez, dude, get a clue. A business can indeed decide whether or not to allow minors to jump. No state law in any state prevents that.

State law enters the picture if and only if a minor is injured during a jump and a lawsuit is filed claiming negligence, and disaffirming the WOLC because a) the signee was a minor (thus invalidating the WOLC on its face) and b) the parent/guardian co-signee cannot sign away any minor rights (thus also invalidating the WOLC).

That's IT. Please, people, read some basic contract law before you start spouting off on this subject.

It's really - really - simple: A business can choose to let minors participate -- or not, depending on how much risk it wants to assume against the potential benefit of so doing. Period.


B|
SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to me.
Given that the lawsuits follow the MONEY, not the business.
The manufacturers are the ones that get sued.
No way in hell would I ever allow my business' liability be managed by a dropzone looking to make a few hundred dollars. Were I a manufacturer in the industry with something to lose.
Seems like a legal issue to me.
:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strange, i have no fucking idea who you are and dont really care.

All i know is you are a joke who is pretending to give a shit about someone you don't know just to bash Start Skydiving. Morally speaking, you are fucking sick to use a severe injury on a young girl as a tool to take up your agenda.
1338

People aint made of nothin' but water and shit.

Until morale improves, the beatings will continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


No way in hell would I ever allow my business' liability be managed by a dropzone looking to make a few hundred dollars. Were I a manufacturer in the industry with something to lose.
Seems like a legal issue to me.
:P



The fact that you can in fact make that decision means its a business issue. If the legal system made the decision for you it would be a legal issue. Any activity in business is subject to legal liability, you cant use that as a standard.
"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you made this decision with gear made by "my company", guess what?
I'd sue you for using it "outside manufacturers recommended use" and the legal agreement entered into for the use of said gear.
How many lawsuits do we need before we do the right thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you made this decision with gear made by "my company", guess what?
I'd sue you for using it "outside manufacturers recommended use" and the legal agreement entered into for the use of said gear.
How many lawsuits do we need before we do the right thing?



Thats fine and dandy, and in your example it would be both a business and a legal issue.

Unfortunately it has nothing to do with this case as there are no manufacturer recommendations when it comes to age for solo gear. We are NOT talking about tandems here.
"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I am waiting. Might be a while though as this argument about age and skydiving has been going on for for the better part of 3 decades.
"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0