chaoskitty 0 #151 March 28, 2007 Who said anything about drunk driving? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #152 March 28, 2007 QuoteI do not consider it acceptable. Thankyou--you're the kind of person I wanna be in the sky with.Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #153 March 28, 2007 Quote>Know what else?? Thats the risk you take when you get in the door >and jump out of the damn plane. You take a risk every time you drive down the street. Does that mean you're OK with drunk driving? After all, you can be killed by anyone, drunk or sober. I say we ban jumpers who cause freefall collisions.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaoskitty 0 #154 March 28, 2007 They typically ban themselves to one last skydive out of an ash pocket. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #155 March 28, 2007 QuoteI say we ban jumpers who cause freefall collisions. Can we ban death? Or would that be considered obtuse? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy 0 #156 March 28, 2007 Maybe if we make everyone jump non-steerable rounds we can solve the canopy collision problem. Seems to work with the military. Dave Fallschirmsport Marl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #157 March 28, 2007 QuoteMaybe if we make everyone jump non-steerable rounds we can solve the canopy collision problem. Seems to work with the military. Sounds good to me ... just as long as we're all issued machine guns at the same time. Oh oh, there's that "gun" word. Off to the Speakers Corner with this thread. Is there a DZ.COM record for the number of times a thread has been moved? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gkc1436 3 #158 March 28, 2007 >willful negligence. Intentional performance of an unreasonable act in disregard of a known risk, making it highly probable that harm will be caused. Willful negligence usually involves a conscious indifference to the consequences. Whats that thing we sign ???cant seem to remember what its called........some sort of legal document.... g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #159 March 28, 2007 Quote>willful negligence. Intentional performance of an unreasonable act in disregard of a known risk, making it highly probable that harm will be caused. Willful negligence usually involves a conscious indifference to the consequences. Whats that thing we sign ???cant seem to remember what its called........some sort of legal document.... g I don't recall waivers exempting non-staff experienced jumpers from liabilities related to their actions against other experienced jumpers. Do you? Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #160 March 28, 2007 >I say we ban jumpers who cause freefall collisions. No need, really. They often don't survive the experience. But it is sometimes worthwhile to "ban" pulling over 4000 feet at a boogie to help prevent freefall/canopy collisions, or "ban" people who don't feel like tracking after a dive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mouth 0 #161 March 28, 2007 QuoteDiscuss. Coming from you I am disappointed. We are only as safe as we enforce ourselves to be no matter if at a boogie or at a weekend jumping. If anyone honestly believes that then you guys are shallow. So what if a boogie isn't the place for swoopers to spped through traffic on a big way? Can't you do that at most any DZ on a regular weekend. What is wrong with adapting to the safe crowd for a few jumps? Doesn't kill ya at least. End rant...this mentality has to stop though or the deaths will continue. -- Hot Mama At least you know where you stand even if it is in a pile of shit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rainbo 0 #162 March 28, 2007 Quote>willful negligence. Intentional performance of an unreasonable act in disregard of a known risk, making it highly probable that harm will be caused. Willful negligence usually involves a conscious indifference to the consequences. Whats that thing we sign ???cant seem to remember what its called........some sort of legal document.... g And I'll go back to my earlier comments although I'm sure they will fall on deaf ears for the most part. Take the latest fatality, he only took himself out, but do you really think after reading everything in that incident thread that this jumper "willfully" put himself in that situation. I don't, I think that he inadvertantly let himself get boxed into a corner trying to avoid a different situation. I think that this is the case most of the time and then a last minute bad decision closes the book on the subject so to speak. Yes people do really stupid shit but who are we to sit and second guess what was happening in thier mind at the time, so unless all the experts out there are some kind of freakin clarvoiants I don't they really know. I know what the appearance can be but I do not know what the thought and action process was, and I will never be able to know as I will never be able to ask those involved. Just remember the basics herre folks, we participate in an activity where until your feet are firmly on the ground you ARE DEAD, period. Yeah you can argue the semantics if you like but I won't, I know that I'm right, I'm god like and still alive, but I also know that tomorrow is just around the cornerRainbo TheSpeedTriple - Speed is everything "Blessed are those who can give without remembering, and take without forgetting." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gkc1436 3 #163 March 28, 2007 >I don't recall waivers exempting non-staff experienced jumpers from liabilities related their actions against other experienced jumpers. Call it honor among thieves if you will. everybody signs, everybody understands that this is an inherently dangerous sport/hobby/life and accepts that in exchange for what they get out of it. do i sue a particular jumper who after a 3 year lay off jumps a (not freefly frendly rig) with a stretched pocket for the throw out and has a premature deployment that clips me on the way out of the formation? bad judgement on his part yes......worse on my part for knowing the problem beforehand and still making the jump with him. from about jump 600 on, every jump i made had the calculation built in about canopy traffic before and after me. that includes type of canopy pilot, type of canopy, known history of jumper. Know thy enemy!! if you dont, they will kill or maim you would i rather hang in deep brakes and let the fools do their dz wide s turns, or spiral down over the peas shur, i know how to use my toggles heres a question for all of you....... why is it that you can dump 10 swoopers out at 6000' and they will be stacked and racked, landing in the order of exit with the almost same exact pattern??? just wondering.... g Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #164 March 28, 2007 Quotethe latest fatality, he only took himself out, but do you really think after reading everything in that incident thread that this jumper "willfully" put himself in that situation. I don't, I think that he inadvertantly let himself get boxed into a corner trying to avoid a different situation. Ok, maybe this is nitpicking. We want the same thing, i.e., no more deaths, but we just have different points of view. First, the parachute didn't steer itself, and even if it did, the jumper under the parachute is still responsible for where it goes. Second, I don't care how inadvertent it was. It was the jumper's responsibility not to put himself in that situation and I don't think anyone should whitewash it with terms or phrases like "inadvertent", "made a bad decision", or anything like that. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rainbo 0 #165 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuotethe latest fatality, he only took himself out, but do you really think after reading everything in that incident thread that this jumper "willfully" put himself in that situation. I don't, I think that he inadvertantly let himself get boxed into a corner trying to avoid a different situation. Ok, maybe this is nitpicking. We want the same thing, i.e., no more deaths, but we just have different points of view. First, the parachute didn't steer itself, and even if it did, the jumper under the parachute is still responsible for where it goes. Second, I don't care how inadvertent it was. It was the jumper's responsibility not to put himself in that situation and I don't think anyone should whitewash it with terms or phrases like "inadvertent", "made a bad decision", or anything like that. Walt You are right brother, we do want the same thing. I just can not take the human factor out of my reasoning, it's in my training over the years. No matter how much we try to teach from a theoretical, practical, or intuitive perspective the human will always find a way to circumvent that training. Remember that most of these incidents involve "extremely" seasoned jumpers. I'm not whitewashing, just being realistic. I hope we all live long and prosperous lifes...Rainbo TheSpeedTriple - Speed is everything "Blessed are those who can give without remembering, and take without forgetting." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #166 March 29, 2007 Quote>I don't recall waivers exempting non-staff experienced jumpers from liabilities related their actions against other experienced jumpers. Call it honor among thieves if you will. everybody signs, everybody understands that this is an inherently dangerous sport/hobby/life and accepts that in exchange for what they get out of it. I find nothing honorable about flaunting accepted standards of safety and hurting or killing an innocent jumper. I think in that case, all bets are off. There *are* situations in skydiving, though, where there is no one person clearly at fault. I accept that. About the same time the incident in Dublin happened, a friend of over 25 years died in a canopy entanglement at my home DZ. They were both jumping elliptical canopies; one had line twist and flew into the other. They opened too close together and were in the saddle at the same altitude. That can happen. Usually we get away with it. This time not. I have no ill feelings toward the other jumper involved in the accident that killed my friend. At first opportunity I will gladly tell him so. That doesn't mean that I accept *all* accidents as being acceptable within the bounds of an inherently dangerous sport--I don't accept that at all. Where do I draw the line between acceptable inherent risk and outright negligence that goes outside the bounds? Honestly, I don't have a single answer for that. It depends on the circumstances and the information available about what happened. Quote do i sue a particular jumper who after a 3 year lay off jumps a (not freefly frendly rig) with a stretched pocket for the throw out and has a premature deployment that clips me on the way out of the formation? bad judgement on his part yes......worse on my part for knowing the problem beforehand and still making the jump with him. The situation you are talking about here is one where a jumper *knowingly* accepts a specific set of risks. The jumper had a choice. I'm ok with that. No, I don't think a lawsuit makes sense in this scenario. Quote from about jump 600 on, every jump i made had the calculation built in about canopy traffic before and after me. that includes type of canopy pilot, type of canopy, known history of jumper. Know thy enemy!! if you dont, they will kill or maim you Good advice. Phrased a bit dramatically, but good advice. Quote heres a question for all of you....... why is it that you can dump 10 swoopers out at 6000' and they will be stacked and racked, landing in the order of exit with the almost same exact pattern??? just wondering.... g I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rainbo 0 #167 March 29, 2007 Quote> heres a question for all of you....... why is it that you can dump 10 swoopers out at 6000' and they will be stacked and racked, landing in the order of exit with the almost same exact pattern??? just wondering.... g cause they planned it, and prolly have done it a few times and know what to expect. Now throw them in the middle of a few other loads and is it the same???? I'm with ya, just being the devil...Rainbo TheSpeedTriple - Speed is everything "Blessed are those who can give without remembering, and take without forgetting." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeNReN 0 #168 March 29, 2007 Quoteanother thread right to the recycle bin Holy Moly was I ever off with that statement Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLKSKY 0 #169 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteyour right it will not help...Lets say you come across a very erratic person behind a steering wheel of a car. You keep telling this person that they need to slow down. Time and time again they say its ok i am a good driver.. Then all of a sudden this person kills your best friend or your family member. Should we just put this down to an accident or put it down to that person was too arrogant for their own good. Swooping is not killing innocent people its the arrogant self centred pilots that think they are invincible. Sorry, but that is how Danny saw himself. How do you know how he saw himself. I Know that this topic needs to be up for debate, but it must be debated with maturity and diligence, name calling is not going to do anyone any good. Make your point but there is no reason to call people names. Lets see, i have known Danny for about 9 years. How long did you know him exactly? I knew Danny when he was jumping at Monroe and peachtree. As nice as he was, he was still an arrogant batard. He would tell you that himself. So my point is, there are people just like danny in the sport that think they are untouchable. I don't mind if they go in but when you take an innocent person with you then peoples attitude and arrogance needs to be addressed don't you think Attitude no. Arrogance no. Landing pattern yes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyshrek 0 #170 March 29, 2007 Well u didnt know danny that well,,, he was a self proclaimed arrogant bastard he was proud of it. I'd give him shit for it and he would say i wasn't far behind him. Spoke with danny often either at boogies or on the phone. Now if you claim danny wasn't arrogant then you don't know danny sorryhttp://www.skydivethefarm.com do you realize that when you critisize people you dont know over the internet, you become part of a growing society of twats? ARE YOU ONE OF THEM? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billeisele 122 #171 March 29, 2007 can't believe i read the whole thread in only 25 minutes the real problem is canopies - ban them and this won't happen again - uhhh all the - "I'm too good, it won't happen to me folks" - go first so how many threads do we have on this subject? how many solutions have been offered multiple times? IMHO nothing will work until everyone that is bitchin goes to the DZ and tells the DZO to fix it or i"m going somewhere elseGive one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #172 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteDiscuss. Coming from you I am disappointed. We are only as safe as we enforce ourselves to be no matter if at a boogie or at a weekend jumping. If anyone honestly believes that then you guys are shallow. So what if a boogie isn't the place for swoopers to spped through traffic on a big way? Can't you do that at most any DZ on a regular weekend. What is wrong with adapting to the safe crowd for a few jumps? Doesn't kill ya at least. End rant...this mentality has to stop though or the deaths will continue. What mentality, dear? Have you not noticed I am one of the most outspoken proponents of NOT hooking in traffic?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #173 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteanother thread right to the recycle bin Holy Moly was I ever off with that statement You have anything interesting to contribute?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #174 March 29, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteanother thread right to the recycle bin Holy Moly was I ever off with that statement You have anything interesting to contribute? I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #175 March 29, 2007 I'm assuming your proposed ban of small canopies is as silly as my proposed ban on boogies. And nothing will get done unless whe change or ban the jumpers themselves.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
