Ron 7 #26 November 9, 2011 QuoteDoesn't matter who your ideas are for they are still intrusive. So are pull altitudes... you going to complain about them? So is students needing an RSL and AAD... you going to complain about those? QuoteI don't want to be legislated just because you'll feel bad if I kill myself. I don't want to legislate to protect you from you... I want some legislation to protect OTHERS from you. QuoteLet people be responsible for themselves and any would be problems will sort themselves out. Currently people being 'responsible for themselves' is ending with them hitting and killing others. Again, feel free to kill yourself. I will not be happy about it, but hey it is your right. But you are NOT free to risk OTHERS lives."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #27 November 9, 2011 QuoteSo are pull altitudes... you going to complain about them? So is students needing an RSL and AAD... you going to complain about those? What are the federal laws governing those? I may disagree. QuoteI don't want to legislate to protect you from you... I want some legislation to protect OTHERS from you. Currently people being 'responsible for themselves' is ending with them hitting and killing others. Again, feel free to kill yourself. I will not be happy about it, but hey it is your right. But you are NOT free to risk OTHERS lives. You must have missed where I said the same thing, try re-reading. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #28 November 9, 2011 QuoteQuoteSo are pull altitudes... you going to complain about them? So is students needing an RSL and AAD... you going to complain about those? What are the federal laws governing those? I may disagree. QuoteI don't want to legislate to protect you from you... I want some legislation to protect OTHERS from you. Currently people being 'responsible for themselves' is ending with them hitting and killing others. Again, feel free to kill yourself. I will not be happy about it, but hey it is your right. But you are NOT free to risk OTHERS lives. You must have missed where I said the same thing, try re-reading. Oddly the rules you are arguing over are there to protect all: From the new-uninformed-inexperienced-student-jumper, or the slightly-informed-knows it all-has "madd skillz"-you're trying to hold me back-barely licensed-jumper, and the - been here and there done that-held all the ratings-jumped rounds and squares-warts-loops and ropes-has the bumps and bruises to show he has the knowledge and experience to speak-cares about the individual and sport-old jumper. But, hey, Your right to kill your self and the sport, trumps all. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #29 November 9, 2011 I'm not arguing about any rules. I was voicing my opinion on when to make rules into laws. Never said I disagree with any of the rules. If I stated that anywhere let me know. Maybe I wasn't clear in what I think. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 151 #30 November 9, 2011 QuoteQuoteThe flaw in your logic is that by extension, we should be able to do what we like. As adults someone should be allowed to arrive at the dz and jump with no training, because that is their "right". There is now flaw there. We should be able to do as we like. However your overextending yourself since I never said nor implied that jumping with no training is their right. You're not paying attention to what I'm saying. When you jump you affect the pilot, other air traffic, and targets on the ground. This is no longer only affecting you. QuoteThe problem is that we have defined a student as someone with less than an A license. The reality is that while you are continuing to learn, you are a student. Some disciplines require hundreds of jumps in order to qualify to become a student. That's not trying to protect someone from themselves. If you were to argue that someone jumping too small of a canopy puts them at risk of landing on you or running into you in the air then I might give some weight to your argument. You're not going to convince me with arguments of hurting ones self though validating legislation. It is a matter of perspective. You appear to feel that if someone believes that at 200 jumps they are able to jump katana, they should be allowed to. Why should you not extend the same courtesy to the guy who has done 1 AFF jump and feels ready to jump solo? My example of no training was intended to be extreme. What you don't seem to realise is that for the most part, everything that we do as skydivers affects other jumpers. In purely selfish terms, you killing yourself under a Katana means that I miss my next load, because the DZ is temporarily closed for jumping. The DZO has to deal with media and shit and probably at least some paperwork so that person has ruined at least 1 persons day.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #31 November 9, 2011 QuoteWhat are the federal laws governing those? I may disagree. There are no Federal Laws... They are USPA rules. The SAME as are being proposed about canopy WL issues. QuoteYou must have missed where I said the same thing, try re-reading. You must have missed where canopy collisions are growing, thus affecting innocents ... Try re-reading my post again."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #32 November 9, 2011 QuoteBecause children are different. Children are still developing the ability to make decisions. When they are adults it changes. I'd qualify that statement. When they are mature adults it changes. What is currently considered majority age is more an accident of history than anything. Not to stray too far off topic, but young "adults" are still developing that ability thru their late teens and well into their 20's. Turning 18 doesn't increase their wisdom one iota - but it does give them access to increased dangers. IIRC, statistics show newly minted legal adults are the worst decision makers out there - other than people with diseases like Alzheimer's and the like - yet that is the age when they are turned loose." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #33 November 9, 2011 QuoteI'm not arguing about any rules. I was voicing my opinion on when to make rules into laws. Never said I disagree with any of the rules. If I stated that anywhere let me know. Maybe I wasn't clear in what I think. You do know that nobody is talking about creating an actual law, right? Nobody is suggesting that it be a criminal offence to jump the wrong canopy. The discussion is about the USPA creating a BSR with regards to canopy selection and education. Within the skydiving community in the US, a USPA BSR is as close to a law as we get, but there are no criminal consequnces for breaking a BSR. That todbit aside, your views are still selfish and shortsighted. What is the downside to having a BSR that restricts a downsizing progression? We know the intended benefit, that being ensuring that jumpers have an appropriate amount of skill and experience for the canopy they are jumping, but what's the downside? What about it makes you feel that it's a bad idea? My ideas having nothing to do with me or my situation, I'm well past needing any help chosing a canopy or what to do with it. I get nothing out of this besides creating what I see as a better situation for new jumpers and skydiving in general. I'm not sure how you could call that selfish on my part. Your ideas, on the other hand, don't appear quite as magnanimous. Just how many jumps do you have? Are you in the range that might be effected by such a BSR? Are you concerned about being 'held back' from whatever you think your progression should be? This must be the 1000th time this issue has come up on DZ.com, and it never fails that the jumpers who stand to be effected (who also happen to be low timers) all rail against the idea of any oversight, while jumpers beyond the BSR (higher time, or longer time jumpers) all seem to support the idea. On the one hand you could look at it as jumpers only being concerned about themselves, the low timers looking to not be curtailed and the high timers not being concerned about things that don't effect them. The reality is different though, it's the low timers who don't know better and the high timers who have figured out what's what. Not the best example, but who is making the laws in the country, kids fresh out of college or older folks who have been around for awhile? Is there a chance that life (skydiving) experience might give you some insight as to how the world works? In any case, it's fun to look back and see that not one jumper has posted here to support you, while all who have replied to you have sided with me. Coincidence? Me thinks not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #34 November 9, 2011 QuoteIt is a matter of perspective. You appear to feel that if someone believes that at 200 jumps they are able to jump katana, they should be allowed to. Why should you not extend the same courtesy to the guy who has done 1 AFF jump and feels ready to jump solo? My example of no training was intended to be extreme. I believe the risk each poses to others is different there hence why I would decide differently on each. I may change my mind later but for now that is where I stand. QuoteWhat you don't seem to realise is that for the most part, everything that we do as skydivers affects other jumpers. In purely selfish terms, you killing yourself under a Katana means that I miss my next load, because the DZ is temporarily closed for jumping. The DZO has to deal with media and shit and probably at least some paperwork so that person has ruined at least 1 persons day. I do realize that. My point is that if I die I don't care if you miss your next load or the DZO has to deal with the media. I'd be dead so how could I care? However if the DZO does not want to deal with it they could have their own rules as I believe many do. What I want is the DZ's to control themselves even if it is abiding by USPA as long as much as possible stays out of government hands. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #35 November 9, 2011 QuoteI'd qualify that statement. When they are mature adults it changes. What is currently considered majority age is more an accident of history than anything. Not to stray too far off topic, but young "adults" are still developing that ability thru their late teens and well into their 20's. Turning 18 doesn't increase their wisdom one iota - but it does give them access to increased dangers. IIRC, statistics show newly minted legal adults are the worst decision makers out there - other than people with diseases like Alzheimer's and the like - yet that is the age when they are turned loose. I could agree with a better age being later into the 20's but since we've decided the basic age 18 that's what I'm using as when it changes. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 151 #36 November 9, 2011 QuoteThis must be the 1000th time this issue has come up on DZ.com, and it never fails that the jumpers who stand to be effected (who also happen to be low timers) all rail against the idea of any oversight, while jumpers beyond the BSR (higher time, or longer time jumpers) all seem to support the idea. On the one hand you could look at it as jumpers only being concerned about themselves, the low timers looking to not be curtailed and the high timers not being concerned about things that don't effect them. The reality is different though, it's the low timers who don't know better and the high timers who have figured out what's what. QuoteMy ideas having nothing to do with me or my situation, I'm well past needing any help chosing a canopy or what to do with it. I get nothing out of this besides creating what I see as a better situation for new jumpers and skydiving in general. I'm not sure how you could call that selfish on my part. Dave, you might be missing the fact that some people resent the fact that 'you' were able to have any canopy choice. 'You' are now telling them that they don't know any better and need guidelines. BTW I do support a BSR on wing loading and I would be affected by it. Going by the current recommendations, I have nearly 400 jumps before I could jump a 150. At my present rate of progression that is about 10 years.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cocheese 0 #37 November 9, 2011 Your attitude sucks and is not conducive to harmony in the community. Please go bowling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 151 #38 November 9, 2011 QuoteI do realize that. My point is that if I die I don't care if you miss your next load or the DZO has to deal with the media. I'd be dead so how could I care? However if the DZO does not want to deal with it they could have their own rules as I believe many do. What I want is the DZ's to control themselves even if it is abiding by USPA as long as much as possible stays out of government hands. If I am understanding correctly, you are approaching this as a political argument. You are ideologically opposed to government regulation? If that is the case the best thing that you can do is to actively join in the promotion of safer, more responsible skydiving. By asking the USPA and fellow skydivers be responsible, we reduce the risk of external intervention.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #39 November 9, 2011 Quote You do know that nobody is talking about creating an actual law, right? Nobody is suggesting that it be a criminal offence to jump the wrong canopy. Read the previous two posts from where I started, that is where my response originated. One of which I believe was yours no? I believe you said 'official' oversight as well? Quote The discussion is about the USPA creating a BSR with regards to canopy selection and education. Within the skydiving community in the US, a USPA BSR is as close to a law as we get, but there are no criminal consequnces for breaking a BSR. That's fine by me as I have said before. Quote That todbit aside, your views are still selfish and shortsighted. What is the downside to having a BSR that restricts a downsizing progression? We know the intended benefit, that being ensuring that jumpers have an appropriate amount of skill and experience for the canopy they are jumping, but what's the downside? What about it makes you feel that it's a bad idea? I would technically fall in that category. I would not be affected though as I seem to be missing this needed desire to downsize. Again as I have said before I agree with the sizing and downsizing recommendations etc. Quote My ideas having nothing to do with me or my situation, I'm well past needing any help chosing a canopy or what to do with it. I get nothing out of this besides creating what I see as a better situation for new jumpers and skydiving in general. I'm not sure how you could call that selfish on my part. I was not talking about your helping someone choose a canopy. It was about legislating a canopy and more importantly the reason behind doing so. Quote This must be the 1000th time this issue has come up on DZ.com, and it never fails that the jumpers who stand to be effected (who also happen to be low timers) all rail against the idea of any oversight, while jumpers beyond the BSR (higher time, or longer time jumpers) all seem to support the idea. On the one hand you could look at it as jumpers only being concerned about themselves, the low timers looking to not be curtailed and the high timers not being concerned about things that don't effect them. The reality is different though, it's the low timers who don't know better and the high timers who have figured out what's what. It's not the oversight but your 'official' oversight i.e. government legislation that I have a problem with. Mmmmmmkay? Quote In any case, it's fun to look back and see that not one jumper has posted here to support you, while all who have replied to you have sided with me. Coincidence? Me thinks not. Please see the post by david3 to which you responded. I was agreeing with his viewpoint. So I guess technically you are correct still. Yes I am bored at work or I wouldn't be posting things this long. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #40 November 9, 2011 QuoteIf I am understanding correctly, you are approaching this as a political argument. You are ideologically opposed to government regulation? If that is the case the best thing that you can do is to actively join in the promotion of safer, more responsible skydiving. By asking the USPA and fellow skydivers be responsible, we reduce the risk of external intervention. I guess that would be mostly correct. Less government is more. I understand there has to be laws and whatnot but with limits. I am all for safe and responsible skydiving and would love to get more into whatever I can do when I get back to the states. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinciflies 0 #41 November 9, 2011 QuoteIn purely selfish terms, you killing yourself under a Katana means that I miss my next load, because the DZ is temporarily closed for jumping. The DZO has to deal with media and shit and probably at least some paperwork so that person has ruined at least 1 persons day. Surely one answer to this (which exists right now) is for the DZO to mandate canopy limits. This would mean that on DZs where the DZO feels strongly about personal freedoms, canopy choice would be left (largely) up to the individual, and on those where the DZO recognizes a significant risk to having free canopy choice then (s)he is completely at liberty to introduce local regulations. Jumpers could subsequently vote with their feet and jump where the rules best suit their own set of criteria. This is really just an extension of AAD-required DZs, or HP turns to landing being limited. Limitation of peoples' behaviour by the DZO in the interests of safety without more all-encompassing regulation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #42 November 9, 2011 QuoteThere are no Federal Laws... They are USPA rules. The SAME as are being proposed about canopy WL issues. You must have missed where canopy collisions are growing, thus affecting innocents ... Try re-reading my post again. I re-read your post again. Funny thing is that going by your numbers canopy collisions are actually going down, from 6 in 2010 to 4 in 2011. I guess we have a couple months left so are you expecting a surge in collisions? So what's your issue? I was agreeing with you and then this last post you had was irrelevant, I had already brought collisions up. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC1 0 #43 November 9, 2011 Quote Your attitude sucks and is not conducive to harmony in the community. Please go bowling. Pots and kettles everywhere are saying "who, me?" Another thought crosses my mind. If the topic of conversation were changed from canopies to guns, how many people here would be on the other side of the fence? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 151 #44 November 9, 2011 Quote Quote If I am understanding correctly, you are approaching this as a political argument. You are ideologically opposed to government regulation? If that is the case the best thing that you can do is to actively join in the promotion of safer, more responsible skydiving. By asking the USPA and fellow skydivers be responsible, we reduce the risk of external intervention. I guess that would be mostly correct. Less government is more. I understand there has to be laws and whatnot but with limits. I am all for safe and responsible skydiving and would love to get more into whatever I can do when I get back to the states. It took me a while to figure out. At first I figured you were planning on joining the mad-skills camp straight after your A license.Ultimately the USPA needs to catch-up the BSR's to reflect modern times. I am pretty sure the current BSR's evolved out of previous fatalities. We just need the BSR's to include more on the parachute itself now. I think that you will find there are many experienced jumpers who do not want more Federal involvement.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #45 November 9, 2011 QuoteIt's not the oversight but your 'official' oversight i.e. government legislation that I have a problem with. Mmmmmmkay? Once again, nobody has mentioned creating a law or involving any governmental agency. 'Official oversight' in the skydiving world (in the US) means the USPA. The truth is, the longer the USPA sits on it's duff the closer we get to actual governmental oversight in the form of the FAA. The director of the FAA has already sent a shot across the bow of skydiving, letting us know that we're on their radar and that action needs to be taken. If that action is on the part of the USPA, good, and if not I can only imagine that the FAA will step in. I'm all for freedom, but even in the US, we're not really 'free'. We have limitations on what we can do, and those limitations are in place in order to keep things 'civilized'. You can't drive 100mph, you can't take things that don't belong to you, and you can't harm another person. These are all limitations on your behavoir, but all in the name of peaceful coexistance with others. The same can be said for skydiving. We have a great deal of freedom, but for the sake of maintaining a workable 'society', we cannot be left to do anything and everything we want. There was a time where canopies were not an area of concern, and thus no canopy relates rules are in place. Times have changed, and it's time the rules change as well. Let's face it, 20 years ago there were no laws governing intellectual property on the internet, but times have changed and the internet has become a marketplace where intellectual property has value and needs to be protected. Ditto with canopies, it used to be a non-issue, and now it's the biggest issue, so let's get with the times and take some action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cocheese 0 #46 November 9, 2011 You can go to speaker's corner or bowling. Your choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #47 November 9, 2011 QuoteOnce again, nobody has mentioned creating a law or involving any governmental agency. 'Official oversight' in the skydiving world (in the US) means the USPA. I took legislation to be of the government type, not a BSR from USPA. Am I wrong in that or is a BSR also called legislation? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cocheese 0 #48 November 9, 2011 Dude give it up. What difference does it make? Follow the rules or go bowling. Don't be dying at the dz. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrokenR1 0 #49 November 9, 2011 Quote Dude give it up. What difference does it make? Follow the rules or go bowling. Don't be dying at the dz. I don't understand. I am following the rules. I generally try to avoid dying period, not just at the dz. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rap is to music what etch-a-sketch is to art. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 151 #50 November 9, 2011 QuoteQuoteOnce again, nobody has mentioned creating a law or involving any governmental agency. 'Official oversight' in the skydiving world (in the US) means the USPA. I took legislation to be of the government type, not a BSR from USPA. Am I wrong in that or is a BSR also called legislation? My understanding is that the US operates as follows: The FAA is the law. All aviation falls under the FAA's oversight. The USPA as the only association representing skydivers, is the voice of skydiving to the FAA. The BSR (basic safety requirements) are compulsory rules for USPA members only. There is no real sanction for breaking a BSR, other than possibly being expelled from the USPA. As such we tend to treat BSR's as rules or legislation. Hopefully I am correct, if not I would love to get a better understanding.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
