AndyBoyd

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    612

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by AndyBoyd

  1. If it's not fun and rewarding, there is no reason to put your ass on the line 8 or so times every Saturday and Sunday between April and October. This is stating the obvious, I know, but skydiving has serious, significant risks. No matter how good you are, no matter how careful, this sport can bite hard and fast. There is no reason to take the risk if you are not having fun. As other posters have said, there is lots of other cool stuff going on outside the DZ. It sounds like maybe you should take a break and try some of that other stuff. After a while, the skies may call you back. Or they may not.

  5. Anvilbrother

    Obama has been air striking via drones the SHIT out of the middle east, where have you been?



    Agreed. Don't mean to quarrel with you so much, you were just the last poster. We have had boots on the ground, planes in the air, both manned and drones, in the middle east for going on what, 20 years (roughly)? They still hate us. This nation-building crap doesn't work. I am sincerely sorry for the guys and girls that got hurt or killed over there. Breaks my heart. We tried this crap in Vietnam. Same result.

    This clip sums up how I feel. No disrespect is meant to any soldier who served. I respect and appreciate your service. But as far as our involvement in the middle east:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRJ38y4Jn6k

  7. ***Point is. What the Iraqis do to each other is no concern of ours. Let them figure it out. ***


    You have got it right. There is a quote from the (getting old) Stanley Kubric movie Full Metal Jacket that is pretty telling. I can't remember it exactly, but it goes something like this. A journalist is interviewing a squad in Vietnam. An American soldier says "Can I quote LBJ? I will not send American boys 8 or 10,000 miles to do a job Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4BuQMJEKHw 1:10 into the clip, about.

    My limited research indicates the quote is roughly accurate. I guess this is my feeling about Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a job middle-eastern boys ought to be doing for themselves.

  8. mpohl

    Your wish is my command.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/world/middleeast/republicans-press-obama-to-move-swiftly-to-halt-extremists-advances-in-iraq.html?_r=0

    ***Please link the article, which names what republicans are asking for this? You cant judge them all by the actions of a few there are assholes and idots in all groups.



    Tried to make the link clicky. Hope I did it right.

    Don't want to get into a fight on this one, but I've heard this in the media -- even Al Qaeda thinks these ISIS guys are too aggressive? Yikers. :o

  10. SivaGanesha

    ***That said, public pressure can cause a prosecutor to file charges.



    True. However, I think in a lot of cases the plaintiff's attorney in a civil case would actually have a strong DISincentive to try to pressure a prosecutor to file criminal charges. The reason is that if criminal charges are filed, the defendant may well switch their priorities and their financial resources to defending the greater legal risk: the criminal case. This could leave the defendant unable to pay a civil settlement so the plaintiff's civil attorney won't get paid. Never a happy outcome for any attorney.

    Right.

  11. ryoder

    ***

    Because you come on here as if you know something that we don't, yet provide nothing of substance to prove it.

    If you don't have the time to explain your legal expertise, then maybe you should just sit on the sidelines like normal and just shut up.



    Oh, for chrissake!:S
    AndyBoyd already clearly explained in this thread: A citizen cannot hire an attorney to open a criminal case; Only a prosecutor can initiate an criminal case. Even after he explained it, Turtle insisted it could be done.

    Thank you.

  16. turtlespeed

    ************If they've served their sentence, and don't try to weasel or hide the past, then I think it should be up to the DZO. His business is the one that would be ruined if there were a problem. I realize that if there were an incident the victim would be the worst hurt, but the business owner does share some risk. And consider that having a job would give the TI some incentive to keep on the straight and narrow.

    Wendy P.



    +1

    Do we believe that people can change? Do we believe that people should get a second chance? If yes, then we need to offer that chance. Which is not to say the DZ should not monitor the person closely. But if a DZO has talked to the person, checked his or her background, and is willing to offer the chance, then yes.

    So . . . that begs the question of whether or not the DZO should be charged as an accomplice, or at least implicated, if the sex offender commits another sex offence.

    There would be no criminal offense by the DZO if this happened. The possibility the DZO would need to be aware of is called "negligent hiring". This would occur if it was clear the instructor had a history of this, and the DZO did nothing to prevent a future offense at the DZ. But this would only result in a (possibly costly) lawsuit. But, again, not a crime by the DZO.

    I don't mean to be disrespectful by "talking down" to you. But there is a difference between a criminal offense, and something you can get sued over.

    The DZO would have to take that into account in deciding whether to hire that person.Negligence in any form can be raised to criminal with the right attorney. I have a hard time believing that the governing court would be all that forgiving in it's evaluation of what is allowed. Of course this is completely dependent on what the sex offender did.

    No, negligence in any form cannot be raised to a criminal offense with the right attorney. Only state, federal, or county appointed prosecutors can instigate criminal charges. You are not a lawyer, and you have no idea what you are talking about. You are flat out wrong. Give it up.

  17. turtlespeed

    ******If they've served their sentence, and don't try to weasel or hide the past, then I think it should be up to the DZO. His business is the one that would be ruined if there were a problem. I realize that if there were an incident the victim would be the worst hurt, but the business owner does share some risk. And consider that having a job would give the TI some incentive to keep on the straight and narrow.

    Wendy P.



    +1

    Do we believe that people can change? Do we believe that people should get a second chance? If yes, then we need to offer that chance. Which is not to say the DZ should not monitor the person closely. But if a DZO has talked to the person, checked his or her background, and is willing to offer the chance, then yes.

    So . . . that begs the question of whether or not the DZO should be charged as an accomplice, or at least implicated, if the sex offender commits another sex offence.

    There would be no criminal offense by the DZO if this happened. The possibility the DZO would need to be aware of is called "negligent hiring". This would occur if it was clear the instructor had a history of this, and the DZO did nothing to prevent a future offense at the DZ. But this would only result in a (possibly costly) lawsuit. But, again, not a crime by the DZO.

    I don't mean to be disrespectful by "talking down" to you. But there is a difference between a criminal offense, and something you can get sued over.

    The DZO would have to take that into account in deciding whether to hire that person.

  18. tkhayes

    I am generally against the registered sex offender database entirely. People get convicted of crimes, they serve their sentences, and they finish their time.. Done. society does itself no good by labeling people for life. You may as well hand out life sentences....also ineffective.

    the system is flawed from the ground up....best intentions but completely fucked up in any good that it might do.



    +1

  19. wmw999

    If they've served their sentence, and don't try to weasel or hide the past, then I think it should be up to the DZO. His business is the one that would be ruined if there were a problem. I realize that if there were an incident the victim would be the worst hurt, but the business owner does share some risk. And consider that having a job would give the TI some incentive to keep on the straight and narrow.

    Wendy P.



    +1

    Do we believe that people can change? Do we believe that people should get a second chance? If yes, then we need to offer that chance. Which is not to say the DZ should not monitor the person closely. But if a DZO has talked to the person, checked his or her background, and is willing to offer the chance, then yes.

  23. Quote

    The way I see it, pieing is both a right of passage and a means of your freinds saying..."You're doing good, we like you, we're glad you're jumping with us, we're glad you're here, but stay humble!"



    This is a reasonable comment, I have to agree. You could just say that to the person, though, without splattering food all over him or her. Look I know it's tradition, and the tradition is very much alive at my DZ. I guess I'm in the minority here, and that's OK. Carry on.

  24. How about congratulating the person, shaking his or her hand, and maybe buying them a beer? I've never understood the need to splatter food all over someone who just reached a significant milestone. Seems to me like a sincere congratulation might be the more respectful move. I know it's tradition. I just don't get it.