jmpnkramer 0 #1 February 23, 2004 I mean really people!!!! If you cannot handle the sport then stop jumping all together. I am sick and tired of hearing all of this. One on a person who obviously does not know how to pack or does not realize that they are opening in a track! Almost all canopies have the same ratio of hard openings. If you want to be sure of an opening then pack for yourself like I do. Quit Bitching and blaming the canopy for your lack of skills!!!!!!!! There are always obstacles on the ground. If people learned how to fly a canopy instead of trying to look cool then maybe they would be able to handle these things. Once you learn how to fly a canopy you should be able to land it almost anywhere!!!!!! Bottom line is, as there was a thread on it, you had better be reading that waiver you sign!! You are releasing almost all of your rights! If you cannot accept this then do not jump!!!!!!!!!! Just like some people do not like there picture taken. Well, That is on a bunch of waivers as well. It must be all these new poeple to the sport because I do not recall of this wining B.S. Years ago!!!! Accept all that goes with the sport or leave it!!!!!!!! Laters, .The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER! "HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!" "Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #2 February 23, 2004 QuoteIf you cannot handle the sport then stop jumping all together. I'll sue you for that the US legal system is something to laugh about... or cryscissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #3 February 23, 2004 QuoteI'll sue you for that And I'll sue you for suing him! These 'would you sue if....' threads piss me off too. There are no guarantees in this sport, your equipment may fail, the plane may crash and you might die. If you don't like it take up knitting. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyyhi 0 #4 February 23, 2004 Kramer. . .gotta agree with you man. . .I am tired of seeing the sue threads myself. . .________________________________________ Take risks not to escape life… but to prevent life from escaping. ~ A bumper sticker at the DZ FGF #6 Darcy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #5 February 23, 2004 Do you believe the following are risks you have assumed, or ought to assume? Are these risks that are under your control? On October 17, 1982, a military version of a Beech D-18 crashed during takeoff near Taft, California. The aircraft had 12 sport parachutists on board; none survived. The NTSB determined that the airplane had been overloaded with a center of gravity that was well in excess of the aft limit. On April 22, 1992, a de Havilland Twin Otter crashed during takeoff at Perris Valley, California after an engine lost power. The Safety Board determined that the accident was caused by contaminated fuel obtained from the improper handling of the air field’s fuel tanks and the pilot's improper actions after the power loss. 14 fatalities. On September 7, 1992, a military variation of a Beech D-18 crashed near Hinckley, Illinois, after one of the engines malfunctioned. The pilot was maneuvering to land when the aircraft went out of control close to the ground. All 12 aboard died. The NTSB found that the "dead" engine and its propeller had been improperly stored for 20 years and installed by unqualified, unlicensed "mechanics". The pilot had not operated the propeller controls according to the manufacturer's instructions (in fact, apparently he had never bothered to read the intructions). None of the above fall into the "sh1t happens" category of skydiving accidents. Every one was preventable by the DZ.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aneblett 0 #6 February 23, 2004 QuoteI am sick and tired of hearing all of this. I find it amusing to some degree as law suits don't really go on as much up here so even the thought process behind the reason someone feels that they should be able to sue is interesting to me. QuoteOne on a person who obviously does not know how to pack or does not realize that they are opening in a track! Almost all canopies have the same ratio of hard openings. If you want to be sure of an opening then pack for yourself like I do. Quit Bitching and blaming the canopy for your lack of skills!!!!!!!! I don't know that you can ever be 100% sure of your opening but if you don't have time or are too lazy to pack for yourself then I agree you take what you get. Afterall you pay for the packjob and not the opening QuoteAccept all that goes with the sport or leave it!!!!!!!! Here Here. AdrianS.E.X. party #2 ..It is far worse to live with fear, than to die confronting it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkM 0 #7 February 23, 2004 QuoteIf you cannot handle the sport then stop jumping all together. I am sick and tired of hearing all of this. Well said. If you don't want to risk getting hurt, don't skydive. Seems like most of the people I talk to have gotten some sort of injury from the sport somewhere along the way. Talked to one guy yesterday where his reserve broke some ribs during an unstable faster than normal opening. Could easily happen to anyone of us at any time and in no way would the gear manufacturer be at fault, because you put yourself in that situation in the first place by jumping out of a plane when you didn't have to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpnkramer 0 #8 February 23, 2004 QuoteDo you believe the following are risks you have assumed, or ought to assume? Are these risks that are under your control? Even these instances are on the waivers from what I have seen. You are taking for granted that the aircraft and the person in charge of it are doing what they are supposed to. It is part of the risk. As unfortunate each one of the incidents you stated are we assuming the risk even in these. QuoteEvery one was preventable by the DZ. This is True J.K. but unless an individual is going to become qualified to do the proper inspections prior to take off it is a risk that we assume. Honestly, How much do most of us know about the aircraft we get on? What about the faith which we put in our riggers? I personally have only had 4 in Eleven Years but still. I Have been severly injured jumping. I blame no-one but myself. I put myself in a bad situation and was lucky to live. The problem is that someone always wants to blame someone else. The situations you presented were no doubt carelessness on the part of others but we still assume that risk. QuoteTHE BOTTOM LINE IS IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DIE EVERY TIME YOU PUT THAT RIG ON AND BOARD THE AIRCRAFT THEN MAYBE YOU SHOULD NOT BE JUMPING!!!! Laters, .The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER! "HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!" "Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #9 February 23, 2004 Quote This is True J.K. but unless an individual is going to become qualified to do the proper inspections prior to take off it is a risk that we assume. Thats his point - its because we cant all become qualified to do that, that its NOT a risk we can assume. The DZ is qualified to inpect these things so its their risk and they must insure against their errors. We ARE qualified to spot, to pack, to assess the risk that "shit might just happen" and we get a total. These are examples of risks we assume. Kelland pointed to some examples where we might not be able to make that assessment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harksaw 0 #10 February 23, 2004 My point is that no contract, no waiver, no disclaimer can supercede the law. Anyone who is reckless or negligent with other peoples lives can be sued, and I don't think that that is ALWAYS a bad thing. Yes there are too many frivilous lawsuits, yes some lawyers go too far, and definitely yes you agree to the inherent risk of skydiving, but everyone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be.__________________________________________________ I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #11 February 23, 2004 QuoteOn April 22, 1992, a de Havilland Twin Otter crashed during takeoff at Perris Valley, California after an engine lost power. The Safety Board determined that the accident was caused by contaminated fuel obtained from the improper handling of the air field’s fuel tanks and the pilot's improper actions after the power loss. 14 fatalities. I just took that one as an example. Let's say someone did sue them and won a 200 million dollar settlement. How would skydiving and the skydiving community be better off now? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpnkramer 0 #12 February 23, 2004 Quoteits because we cant all become qualified to do that, that its NOT a risk we can assume. Yes it is! No one is forcing you onto the aircraft. You can request to look at the proper paperwork anytime you wish. Although most likely you will have no clue as to what you are looking at. Either accept it or don't get on the aircraft. Once again read that waiver. Laters, .The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER! "HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!" "Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #13 February 23, 2004 QuoteMy point is that no contract, no waiver, no disclaimer can supercede the law. Anyone who is reckless or negligent with other peoples lives can be sued, and I don't think that that is ALWAYS a bad thing. Yes there are too many frivilous lawsuits, yes some lawyers go too far, and definitely yes you agree to the inherent risk of skydiving, but everyone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. Then why are you signing a document expressely saying that you won't do that? (yes, I know legally you can etc etc, but why are you giving your word?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SniperCJ 0 #14 February 23, 2004 QuoteIf you don't like it take up knitting. And stab myself with a knitting needle!!?? No WAY! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpnkramer 0 #15 February 23, 2004 Quoteeveryone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. This may be true but then why are you jumping? What if someone sued you for all of your mistakes? I mean the one instance quoted was contaminated fuel. Well maybe they did not know the fuel was contaminated. Then the pilot did not handle the emergency properly. Well does everyone handle a malfunction properly? Maybe then the gear manufacturer should sue the individual for not following proper procedure! Accept it or walk away. Once again I say: QuoteTHE BOTTOM LINE IS IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DIE EVERY TIME YOU PUT THAT RIG ON AND BOARD THE AIRCRAFT THEN MAYBE YOU SHOULD NOT BE JUMPING!!!! Laters, .The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER! "HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!" "Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harksaw 0 #16 February 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteMy point is that no contract, no waiver, no disclaimer can supercede the law. Anyone who is reckless or negligent with other peoples lives can be sued, and I don't think that that is ALWAYS a bad thing. Yes there are too many frivilous lawsuits, yes some lawyers go too far, and definitely yes you agree to the inherent risk of skydiving, but everyone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. Then why are you signing a document expressely saying that you won't do that? (yes, I know legally you can etc etc, but why are you giving your word?) Well, depends on the waiver. If I saw a dropzone waiver that said no one is responsible if the pilot is high on cocaine and crashes into a mountian, or not responsible if one of their manifest people snips my reserve risers, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't jump there.__________________________________________________ I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harksaw 0 #17 February 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteeveryone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. This may be true but then why are you jumping? What if someone sued you for all of your mistakes? I'm not talking about mistakes. I'm talking about cases of being completely reckless with someone else's life, knowing and ignoring that something you are doing will most likely kill someone.__________________________________________________ I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpnkramer 0 #18 February 23, 2004 Quotenot responsible if one of their manifest people snips my reserve risers, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't jump there. This would be your fault for not doing a proper gear check!!!!!!!!!! If you are incabable of doing so then ask a rigger or instructor to help you learn!!!!!!! QuoteI'm talking about cases of being completely reckless with someone else's life, knowing and ignoring that something you are doing will most likely kill someone. Do you know the mental state of everyone you jump with? Are they on drugs or drunk? Are they depressed? If one of them injures or kills you what then? The sport is dangerous. The DZ is not knowingly going to put your life in danger. I mean seriously. Laters, .The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER! "HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!" "Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #19 February 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteOn April 22, 1992, a de Havilland Twin Otter crashed during takeoff at Perris Valley, California after an engine lost power. The Safety Board determined that the accident was caused by contaminated fuel obtained from the improper handling of the air field’s fuel tanks and the pilot's improper actions after the power loss. 14 fatalities. I just took that one as an example. Let's say someone did sue them and won a 200 million dollar settlement. How would skydiving and the skydiving community be better off now? Same reason we are better off by putting criminals in jail. It would be a stern warning to others that they can't disregard the FARs to the point of endangering lives and get away with it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #20 February 23, 2004 >On April 22, 1992, a de Havilland Twin Otter crashed during takeoff >at Perris Valley, California after an engine lost power. Just a question - would you jump at Perris, a DZ with a known history of fuel problems? If yes, and a similar accident happened, would you sue? Would you claim that you had no idea such a thing could happen? >None of the above fall into the "sh1t happens" category of skydiving >accidents. Every one was preventable by the DZ. EVERY accident is preventable by the DZ. They control the means of access. No lift, no accidents. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #21 February 23, 2004 >Well, depends on the waiver. If I saw a dropzone waiver that said no > one is responsible if the pilot is high on cocaine and crashes into a > mountian, or not responsible if one of their manifest people snips > my reserve risers, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't jump there. Ding! Ding! We have a winner. That's exactly the time you should decide if you want to jump there or not. Do you like the waiver? Then sign it and jump, accepting that what it says can happen, can happen. Don't like the waiver? Don't like that it holds the DZ harmless even if the people at the DZ are careless, negligent, or stupid? Then don't sign the waiver and find somewhere else to jump. I think if more people had this attitude we'd see a lot fewer lawsuits, and a lot more taking of responsibility by the jumper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #22 February 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteeveryone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. This may be true but then why are you jumping? What if someone sued you for all of your mistakes? I mean the one instance quoted was contaminated fuel. Well maybe they did not know the fuel was contaminated. Then the pilot did not handle the emergency properly. Well does everyone handle a malfunction properly? Maybe then the gear manufacturer should sue the individual for not following proper procedure! Accept it or walk away. Once again I say: QuoteTHE BOTTOM LINE IS IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DIE EVERY TIME YOU PUT THAT RIG ON AND BOARD THE AIRCRAFT THEN MAYBE YOU SHOULD NOT BE JUMPING!!!! Laters, . There are procedures in place for checking that fuel is uncontaminated. Following them is a requirement under the FARs. I check the fuel in my plane before every flight, even if the plane has been in a locked hangar since last time I flew it. What part of using unlicensed and unqualified mechanics to install an old and improperly stored engine and then not properly testing that the prop. works as it should constitutes a "mistake" as opposed to deliberately reckless behavior ?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #23 February 23, 2004 QuoteThe DZ is not knowingly going to put your life in danger. In cases where engines are crappy or fuel is contaiminated the courts would say that the DZ HAS knowingly put your life in danger! The phrase they would use it that the "should have known" ie any fool would have known that leaving fuel barrels in the rain gets rain water in the drum and that rain water in the fuel makes the plane crash. As a skydiver I did not know the DZ was dumb enough to keep its fuel outside in unsafe fuel drums (example). If I did not know they did this, (in fact by implication Im told they dont as its not how fuel must be kept) how can I accept the risk? Similarly how can I accept the risk that they use untrained mechanics and crappy engines if the rules say they must. The rules say they must so Im entitled to rely on the DZ doing what the rules say. If I am then injured because the DZ does not do what they say I can rely on them to do (by implication as they're supposed to follow the rules) why are they not at fault? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #24 February 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteMy point is that no contract, no waiver, no disclaimer can supercede the law. Anyone who is reckless or negligent with other peoples lives can be sued, and I don't think that that is ALWAYS a bad thing. Yes there are too many frivilous lawsuits, yes some lawyers go too far, and definitely yes you agree to the inherent risk of skydiving, but everyone seems to be saying that there is NEVER a justifiable case where a person could sue, and I am saying that there could be. Then why are you signing a document expressely saying that you won't do that? (yes, I know legally you can etc etc, but why are you giving your word?) Who is giving their word? When you sign a LEGAL DOCUMENT you are agreeing to what the law says you are agreeing to. If the document is worded so poorly that it appears that you are agreeing to more than the law allows, then that is a problem for the DZO's attorneys, not you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #25 February 23, 2004 So the DZ shouldn't be held accountable for any accident because they've demonstrated in the past that they are capable of doing stupid things? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
