Leaderboard

to me it looks like a motion to enforce the agreed upon settlement.......i think all members should have transparency on where "our" money goes. the fact multiple settlements have been given out and hidden with the idea that , if we pay you we dont admit any fault per the suite. it also seems making disciplinary actions confidential and hidden from the membership could protect the wrong doing of the USPA while ironically claiming to protect the abused party. this is a non profit organization who holds responsibility to the sponsors aka you and ironically at the time mr garmashov

With which point/s do you take issue?

Interesting how much more valid fact checking is when it agrees with one. In an opinion piece, no less. Wendy P.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3850219-the-seven-biggest-lies-biden-told-this-week/ It is one thing to misspeak, it is another to pack the State of the Union with untruths, half truths and outright lies. This is not the incoherent ramblings of our feeble minded President, it is an orchestrated attempt by his administration to gaslight the entire country.

"Is that you Rhys?" Concerning the Mission Beach accident & Cypres' foot dragging on the recall: There was plenty of discussion on DZ but I'm not going to go back and find all the threads again. Most of us are just happy that much of the constant bickering about 'which AAD is better' is over, compared to back in the early 2000's, when there were all sorts of AAD issues still being found. Electronic AADs were still reliable and a net benefit, but there were bulletins from time to time. There was Argus who seemed plainly incompetent to make a good product, Vigil who seemed careless & sloppy but at least tried to fix issues, and then there was Cypres, with only the very occasional bulletin (after its early years in the 1990s when it was the pioneer in the field) -- but who made their rare problems worse by their immense arrogance.

One thing I'd add is that this is a motion, not a final decision. I'm not a legal beagle, but I'm pretty sure that a judge has to sign the last word in the case, not the plaintiffs lawyer. So I wouldn't expect USPA to hand over a dime until ordered to do so and after exhausting all options.

That's some major pot stirring there, whoever you may be! Well, I'll take a bite.... Interesting to see these "secret" things about the USPA be opened up to view. While the PDF above has a pages of legalize about why the USPA is obligated to pay up the $150,000 as agreed, it all came about because of the stuff described below: (Which must be about the Lodi tandem fatality and all the shady stuff going on there when it comes to fake certifications of instructors.) Mr. G sued the USPA, the court sent it to Mediation and came to an initial sort-of agreement, but the USPA wanted one more change, but Mr G didn't agree. The court then decided that the initial agreement was legally an agreement. So the USPA had agreed to pay the $150,000. Part of the deal was also confidentiality on both parties -- One of those things that's common in the legal world but often seems really slimy to someone not in that profession. The case involves the USPA and so USPA members should have a right to know if something got screwed up, that's costing their organization. I have no dog in this fight but just wanted to summarize what's hidden away in the PDF. Others are free to do a better job. Anyone got a link to the old Lodi fatality thread, or some thread that gets into whatever license suspensions took place, and all that mess with Tandem Instructors having to requalify because their instructor wasn't considered to have been properly rated? One thing I'm wondering about is the statement: I suppose that has been previously established, and agreed to by the USPA prior to the court case? Is there info to that effect available publicly? It sounds like the USPA was pretty upset with all the Lodi stuff, and in effect did an "emergency revocation" of ratings.... but didn't pull out the manual to do so in the prescribed manner, allowing the defendant to make a proper defense.

That's not really been the case on Shutter's site lately. Miss a month and you only miss a handful of posts. I hope it picks back up. GO CHIEFS (Can never pull for the Eagles)!!

And he is not alone. There is a meme out there that gun laws do nothing because well-armed criminals will ignore them, so they are useless. I contend that most of the shootings that put the general public in danger are not from those well-armed criminals - they are from law abiding citizens without a criminal record who simply snap and grab their AR-15 before they run out the door to get their revenge or make their statement. To demonstrate this I looked at the last ten mass murders, taken from Wikipedia's list of mass shootings in the US. Yakima shooting - the shooter, Jarid Haddock, had no criminal record - just a semiauto handgun and a lot of ammo. Half Moon Bay shooting - the shooter, Chunli Zhao, was a disgruntled worker with no criminal record. Monterey Park shooting - the perpetrator, Huu Can Tran, had one previous arrest for illegal possession of a firearm with no other arrests. No conviction. There was no apparent reason for the shooting but he did appear mentally disturbed beforehand. Goshen shooting - two suspects arrested. No clear motive yet but it may be related to gang activity. Enoch shooting - a man killed his family and himself. No criminal record although he had been investigated for domestic abuse allegations, and his wife was seeking a divorce. Chesapeake WalMart shooting - a WalMart employee with no criminal record shot several people at WalMart then killed himself. He left a note with allusions to Satan and being mocked at work. Colorado Springs - Anderson Lee Aldrich shot up a nightclub. He had one arrest previously for "taking his grandparents hostage" with a weapon and threatening to blow up their house - but was not convicted of anything. University of Virginia shooting - Christopher Darnell Jones Jr shot and killed several other students. He had no criminal record, although he had been under investigation for possibly having a gun at school. St Louis shooting - Orlando Harris shot and killed three schoolkids. No criminal record. He was being treated for mental illness. He tried to buy a gun from a dealer but failed the FBI background check. He then bought one from a private individual. His mother was horrified when she heard this and called the police. The police came, but said that he had broken no laws, so they could not take the AR-15 from him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States Of those ten, one MAY have been pulled off via one of those hardened criminals that gun supporters always reference. The rest were people with no criminal records who just snapped. It is also worthwhile to note that in at least half of the cases, there was a clear sign (former misuse of a weapon, mental illness, or threats of violence) that this person might be a danger if armed.

It’s an allegation on here. I’ve got no reason to doubt you other than that to me, you’re a rando on a forum talking shit about another rando. No worries: I’m a rando too, so take my notes for what they’re worth. I definitely, sincerely hope that anyone being abused in this scenario is able to find a better situation and that their abuser gets what they deserve.