What's everyone's opinion on convicted and registered sex offenders being TI's?

[Southern_Man 0]

promise5

If he's signing off on a TI and that TI is a sex offender and he knows it. Yes he would be held accountable.

Right. When I brought up cost you said it was free to check the registry. But this takes somebody's time to check the registry. And then if it is a system issue it then takes time for record keeping to ensure and document that you are in compliance. And then it takes time for that examiners record keeping to be forwarded to the regulating body, and them for somebody there to enter it and ensure everybody is in compliance.

I'm not saying that is not all worthwhile, but it is not worth while until you could put some context around the scope of the problem besides saying you know of several.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[promise5 17]

This instructor doesn't work at a DZ? He wouldn't know the policy of not allowing sex offenders to be registered ?

So there isn't an application that asks if the person applying has been convicted of a felony? If the guy checks no then fine once it's found out he lied it will go from there. If the guy checks yes and then yes the instructor I hope would then pass on taking this person back or refer him to the DZ owner etc.

Very simple.

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[normiss 622]

This is anything but very simple.
Law in this country is NEVER very simple.

[promise5 17]

True on law.



Neither is trying to get oranges to sound like gullible.

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[SivaGanesha 2]

quade

Item 18v of the FAA 3rd Class Medical.

Which is IMHO exactly why the USPA shouldn't be getting involved in this. The FAA is better positioned logistically to address these issues both because of its size and because of the fact that it is part of the government, so it is in a position to get involved in law enforcement issues. And this is essentially a law enforcement issue. The USPA simply isn't well positioned to address these kinds of issues. An arm of the federal government is in a position to enforce law; an organization devoted to promoting a sport, not so much.

OTOH I could certainly see upgrading the requirement for a TI from an FAA 3rd Class Medical to an FAA 2nd Class Medical. The TI is, in effect, flying someone for hire. And I could also see an FAA 2nd Class Medical requiring a full criminal background check including (but not limited to) sex offender issues--if indeed that isn't already required.

I believe that if people are serious about addressing this issue sport-wide this would be the general direction to head in.

Other comments in this thread seem to again be devolving into a general debate as to how to handle sex offenders in society at large and I don't have anything more to say on that.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[promise5 17]

Forgive my ignorance.

What kind of physical is needed for a TI certification?

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[SivaGanesha 2]

promise5

What kind of physical is needed for a TI certification?

I don't know that much about it.

I was simply responding to quade who was indicating that DUI restrictions for TI's are enforced not directly by USPA but by the FAA via the requirement for a 3rd Class Medical.

I was suggesting that if either a 3rd Class Medical or a 2nd Class Medical requires a full criminal background check, then maybe it is better to go with whatever infrastructure the FAA currently has in place rather than having the USPA develop the infrastructure to deal with sex offender checks--which I don't feel it is equipped to do.

However I must confess that I am also ignorant of what exactly these checks require. Perhaps others can help us.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[ryoder 1,384]

promise5

Forgive my ignorance.

What kind of physical is needed for a TI certification?

Any FAA medical, (1st, 2nd, 3rd).

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[promise5 17]

So where would that come into play considering a sex offender?

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[SivaGanesha 2]

ryoder

Any FAA medical, (1st, 2nd, 3rd).

I think the question here is what kind of criminal background checks are needed for the different levels of FAA medical. According to quade there is clearly some since even a 3rd class medical will disqualify someone with multiple DUI's. So the question is whether the 1st or 2nd classes also require a sex offender background check.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SkyDekker 1,122]

normiss

I don't think rape is about sex.

Correct, it is about power.

(Also the reason why "rape" is the number one fantasy for women)

[quade 3]

SivaGanesha

***Item 18v of the FAA 3rd Class Medical.

Which is IMHO exactly why the USPA shouldn't be getting involved in this.

This has also been my opinion.

Promise5 believes it should be. We've even discussed the issue of FAA medicals in this thread already too.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

SivaGanesha

So the question is whether the 1st or 2nd classes also require a sex offender background check.

No. They do not. Nor should they because there is no inherent interest by the FAA with regard to sex offenders and the issuance of airmen medical certificates.

Flying impaired by drugs or alcohol is an obvious problem.
Flying with a desire to have sex is generally not.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[LuckyMcSwervy 0]

Not to be a dick on this issue because Lord knows I hate sexual predators more than anything else in the world.

However, does anyone realize how inaccurate a lot of public records can be? It all starts at the point of data entry. I've had to correct more than my fair share of official judicial records that become public records on people who were screwed over by some lazy, couldn't care less court clerk who either misspelled, entered an incorrect sentencing code, misread a judge's handwriting on a disposition, the cop or whomever generated the initial criminal complaint into a statewide system?

Do you realize how many people actually have the same names and the same date of birth? You'd be surprised how common this is.

I've hard more idiotic excuses which I had to document for the state police or other law enforcement agencies to have certified criminal histories corrected. One of the favorites was a cop who said he was so tired from working midnight shift where he entered his own name, DOB, SS # and other qualifiers in the defendant information fields, even his own state bureau of investigation number from his own firearms ID card , and realized it halfway through generating a warrant in our system. He forgot to ask the judge to dismiss it on the record and replace it with the correct complaint number. So what happens? He's in the middle of a nasty divorce and his wife's attorneys start doing their background work. Well, what do you know? Officer has an active warrant in his own name, generated by his own user id, charging him with some indictable offense. There were many, many, MANY fail safes that were grossly mismanaged by the court and the officer. This happens so much and it's a shame when someone gets effed over by human errors.

When some people claim something like that comes up and it's a mistake, I hope someone does more official homework and digs deeper, straight to the judicial and law enforcement source, to verify the validity of a criminal conviction.

Hope you guys understand the point I'm trying to make.

Always be kinder than you feel.

[quade 3]

Absolutely.

This is why there is more to it than simply looking it up in the database. There is a bit of detective work to verify the person is who they say they are and the record is accurate as well.

It's something the USPA shouldn't be burdened with, nor should the person who gives the TI candidate instruction or signs off on his currency. That's not what they're there for. The responsibility shouldn't be shifted to them.

The responsibility should stay precisely where it currently is, in the hands of the person who hires the TI. That person has a vested interest in maintaining his business.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[champu 1]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

[LuckyMcSwervy 0]

quade

This is why there is more to it than simply looking it up in the database. There is a bit of detective work to verify the person is who they say they are and the record is accurate as well.

And of all of the states in the nation, I don't know if there's two alike when it comes to sentencing codes, legalese, degrees of offenses vs. crimes, etc. What's considered indictable in one state may be considered a disorderly or petty disorderly persons offense in another.

Also, if someone calls the court office in NJ, the court clerk is not an attorney and is absolutely forbidden on giving legal advice. They're only supposed to give information from the record, some of which is publicly redacted and they can't disseminate anyway (or they can give procedural information and also direct the person inquiring to a legal aid office).

The Open Public Records Acts leave a lot to be desired even when staff and people who are public contacts are educated with classes and seminars on accurate information dissemination.

Quote

It's something the USPA shouldn't be burdened with, nor should the person who gives the TI candidate instruction or signs off on his currency. That's not what they're there for. The responsibility shouldn't be shifted to them.

I agree.

Quote

The responsibility should stay precisely where it currently is, in the hands of the person who hires the TI. That person has a vested interest in maintaining his business.

I agree, again. I'd hate to be a business owner for fear of hiring someone who is a risk to others.

I forgot to mention in my previous post the havoc AKAs (also known as) and identity theft wreak upon background checks.


BTW I forgot to mention fingerprints. A lot of us get fingerprinted for firearm permits, work security clearances and such. Does the DZO need to fingerprint employees and send them out for verification? The way DZs go through employees and also the foreigners, can you imagine if that were a requirement? Holy shit.

Seriously though, I was a victim of a sexual predator as a young teenager and then again as an adult BY THE SAME MONSTER (my mother's husband). As were other females in my extended family. If people think these monsters get "better" over time, they're out of their fucking mind.

Always be kinder than you feel.

[LuckyMcSwervy 0]

SkyDekker

***I don't think rape is about sex.

Correct, it is about power.

(Also the reason why "rape" is the number one fantasy for women)

I agree rape is about power.

However, it sure as hell isn't the number one fantasy for me or any of the women with whom I've discussed fantasies and/or rape. Possibly it is for woman who haven't been assaulted or abused. I don't know. Is there scientific research to back that statement? Some things I just don't Google so they don't trigger nightmares.

Always be kinder than you feel.

[Arvoitus 1]

promise5

I brought up a scenerio close to that.

He wouldn't be able to get current if he was on the list. If not being a sex offender was a requirement.

Whoever signed off on getting him current would also be held responsible if they ignored that requirement.

I'll rephrase it once more,

- gets a TI rating
- commits a sexual crime
- pleads guilty, gets 3 months in prison, 9 months suspended, ends up on sexual offender registry
- not uncurrent enough to involve USPA, mfgtr examiner, another TI

So why should the mfgtr examiner/USPA be responsible for this scenario. Makes much more sense for the DZ to do the screening.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[promise5 17]

Just going to jump and cover a couple things from several posts.

I don't think the FAA really gives a dang about wether a Sex Offender is a TI or not. I also think it's a huge level of bureaucracy that doesn't need to be involved in the sport. Why not have an organization that cares about the sport and involved in it take the stand of not certifying sex offenders.

Yes there are mistakes in records. I understand that. I'm also very aware that " corrupting the morals of a child" is VERY different from sexually abusing that child for 5 years or more. Big difference between the two. That's why I do my research. But I hope I understand the point you made.

Lol the fantasy thing. Sorry but a " rape" fantasy is not really a rape scenario. Openly discussed this with a few women about it.
They still maintain a level of control by having "safe" words agreed upon with a partner they trust. Big difference between that and what "rape" actually is. No control,no safe words, no trust and no willingness to participate. Just to name a few things. When the issue came up I wanted to understand and have the women that thought it was the same understand the differences.

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[stayhigh 2]

Your TI rating goes un-current after 30 days.

where the fuck did I get 30 days??????

I'm talking out of my ass.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[promise5 17]

Arvoitus

***I brought up a scenerio close to that.

He wouldn't be able to get current if he was on the list. If not being a sex offender was a requirement.

Whoever signed off on getting him current would also be held responsible if they ignored that requirement.

I'll rephrase it once more,

- gets a TI rating
- commits a sexual crime
- pleads guilty, gets 3 months in prison, 9 months suspended, ends up on sexual offender registry
- not uncurrent enough to involve USPA, mfgtr examiner, another TI

So why should the mfgtr examiner/USPA be responsible for this scenario. Makes much more sense for the DZ to do the screening.

In THAT scenario then the DZ would make sense.
Having the USPA take a stand and them also encouraging DZ owners to take the same in cases like you offered as a scenario. But, crap I hope someone that has committed rape/child molestation doesn't just get 3 months. But yeah in the real world it happens I'm sure.

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.

[Arvoitus 1]

stayhigh

Your TI rating goes un-current after 30 days.

where the fuck did I get 30 days??????

I'm talking out of my ass.

On strong tandems(the only ones I'm rated and familiar with) if you have under 500 tandems after 30 days you'll need to jump with a licensed skydiver as a passenger under the supervision of another TI. After 500 tandems its 90 days. After 6 months you'll need another TI as a passanger and after 12 months you'll need to do re-currency training with a TIE.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[DanG 1]

Quote

But, crap I hope someone that has committed rape/child molestation doesn't just get 3 months.

When did you redefine sex offender to only be child molestation or rape?

- Dan G

[promise5 17]

***

Quote

But, crap I hope someone that has committed rape/child molestation doesn't just get 3 months.

When did you redefine sex offender to only be child molestation or rape?[/


Well I don't see someone as peeing in public or streaking as a sex offender. But if you want to pick my statement apart go ahead. I'm sure there are MANY scenarios/cases that I haven't covered by choosing only those two. And I'm sure there are those that want to take the time to go through each one by one. Then sit back and say how horrible it would be if anyone tried to bring this forward.

If you feel so strongly against it do your research (detailed) and then present it to the USPA,FAA and any other governing department that you think you should.
But, don't just sit and do nothing.

No matter how slowly you say oranges it never sounds like gullible.
Believe me I tried.