This Site Is For Sale
Recommended Posts
I remember a time before the tandems .
That's when I liked being a skydiver and skydiving.
We jumped 182's mostly. Occasionally a Beech 18 might frequent the dropzone.
That was a great day.
Go to a boogie and you could jump some of the great DC-3's. Maybe the HelioStallion would be there!
Definately there would be a campfire and an impromptu bbq at the end of the day, and just enough beer.
It may be my imagination but I seem to remember a USPA during that era which was more concerned with the safety of jumpers than the profits of the drop zones and the manufactureres.
Of course now it's about making 300 jumps in your first year and getting to altitude and back as quickly as possible, and quicker aircraft and smaller and smaller canopies to achieve those ends.
No one seems to remember that the journey is more important than the destination.
I remember a time.
Blues,
Cliff
That's when I liked being a skydiver and skydiving.
We jumped 182's mostly. Occasionally a Beech 18 might frequent the dropzone.
That was a great day.
Go to a boogie and you could jump some of the great DC-3's. Maybe the HelioStallion would be there!
Definately there would be a campfire and an impromptu bbq at the end of the day, and just enough beer.
It may be my imagination but I seem to remember a USPA during that era which was more concerned with the safety of jumpers than the profits of the drop zones and the manufactureres.
Of course now it's about making 300 jumps in your first year and getting to altitude and back as quickly as possible, and quicker aircraft and smaller and smaller canopies to achieve those ends.
No one seems to remember that the journey is more important than the destination.
I remember a time.
Blues,
Cliff
2muchTruth
tigra 0
Quote...Am I allowed to call the guy that brought the suit a fucktard without getting banned? In any event, I would like to see him in some financial pain for the burden that he brought to an honest businessman. What part of "waive the right to sue" does he not fuckin understand??? ......
Really???
Maybe you should read the entire thread, attachments and all.
That's me being as respectful as possible under the circumstances ............
BobMoore 0
Quote
I remember a time before the tandems .
That's when I liked being a skydiver and skydiving.
We jumped 182's mostly. Occasionally a Beech 18 might frequent the dropzone.
That was a great day.
Your information says "In Sport : 8 years". I'm confused.
Just asking ...
"For you see, an airplane is an airplane. A landing area is a landing area. But a dropzone... a dropzone is the people."
GaryP 0
Quote
Am I allowed to call the guy that brought the suit a fucktard without getting banned? In any event, I would like to see him in some financial pain for the burden that he brought to an honest businessman. What part of "waive the right to sue" does he not fuckin understand???
A person is dead (a victim of negligence it possibly )and many people are bereaved. You cannot waive your right to sue someone for negligence in most civil Western societies. Either there is negligence or the isn't - the courts will settle this. Check your facts before opening your mouth and have some consideration for the victims here. What have you lost in this ordeal??
"Altitude is birthright to any individual who seeks it"
.
.
Quote
A person is dead (a victim of negligence it possibly )and many people are bereaved. You cannot waive your right to sue someone for negligence in most civil Western societies. Either there is negligence or the isn't - the courts will settle this. Check your facts before opening your mouth and have some consideration for the victims here. What have you lost in this ordeal??
Bullshit! The waiver is specifically for negligence. If there is no negligence there is no tort, waiver or not. The question here is whether there is criminal negligence. If there is not the waiver should protect all parties. This is important because criminality its responsibilities are not joint and several in nature and should only be visited upon the guilty.
Sadly good people are forced to spend their life savings demonstrating that.
tigra 0
The deceased waived her right to sue. If she had survived somehow and tried to sue, the waiver might have held up. But, contrary to any verbiage on the document itself, you cannot waive anyone else's rights when you sign that waiver. (Isn't that the whole problem with allowing minors to skydive? They can't legally waiver themselves and their parents cannot waive their rights for them?)
I would also argue that the waiver is NOT specifially for negligence.
The real shame here is that the lawyers are going after the deepest pockets instead of the responsible parties. Actually, the real shame is that a woman died under entirely preventable circumstances.
I would also argue that the waiver is NOT specifially for negligence.
The real shame here is that the lawyers are going after the deepest pockets instead of the responsible parties. Actually, the real shame is that a woman died under entirely preventable circumstances.
BMFin 0
I think GaryP is right.
Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you.
Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc..
If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..
Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you.
Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc..
If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..
kallend 1,890
QuoteI think GaryP is right.
Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you.
Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc..
If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..
How is justice served if a defendant has to spend $500,000 to defend himself even if he's done nothing wrong?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
BMFin 0
Quote
How is justice served if a defendant has to spend $500,000 to defend himself even if he's done nothing wrong?
You need to re-read my post. Im not saying justice is being served.
Im saying that if justice is, or is not being served, it is the justice systems fault not the plaintiffs fault nor the lawyers fault etc...
Try 800K and counting
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo
tigra 0
QuoteI think GaryP is right.
Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you.
Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc..
If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..
OK, I only saw one post blaming the plaintiff, calling him a "fucktard" actually. Just one post, just one person. Certainly not "everyone".
And I don't recall ANY post "blaming" any lawyers. Its just a simple observation- the lawyers are going after the people they feel have the deepest pockets. That's their job.
kallend 1,890
QuoteQuoteI think GaryP is right.
Waiver doesnt give much protection for negligence and IMO this is the way it should be. In western world you cannot give someone permission to kill you.
Anyways, Im stunned how everyone here is blaming the plaintiff or the lawyers etc..
If you think justice wont be served, blaim the justice system. The justice system should take care of justice being served. Not the plaintiff nor the lawyers..
OK, I only saw one post blaming the plaintiff, calling him a "fucktard" actually. Just one post, just one person. Certainly not "everyone".
And I don't recall ANY post "blaming" any lawyers. Its just a simple observation- the lawyers are going after the people they feel have the deepest pockets. That's their job.
Under the current legal theories of torts, that is true. But the trial lawyers lobby vigorously opposes any change to those theories.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
normiss 744
Minors don't have legal rights to waive.
Once they reach the age of majority they do, but then they are of course no longer minors.
I would be curious to see if Alabama or Nebraska have had issues with their legal age of majority given that it is 19. I think Mississippi is 20 or 21 so also curious.
In any event, I think an ambulance chaser attorney playing on the next of kin's emotions for financial gain is a huge area we could really use some tort reform on.
Once they reach the age of majority they do, but then they are of course no longer minors.
I would be curious to see if Alabama or Nebraska have had issues with their legal age of majority given that it is 19. I think Mississippi is 20 or 21 so also curious.
In any event, I think an ambulance chaser attorney playing on the next of kin's emotions for financial gain is a huge area we could really use some tort reform on.
+1
"Good people" don't do what they did and leave SE hung out to dry by thier actions and lack there of.
"Good people" don't do what they did and leave SE hung out to dry by thier actions and lack there of.
The reference wasn't aimed at me, believe it or not there is ANOTHER demo jumping fossil that 'drivels' through here...on occasion!
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites