mr2mk1g

A kebab. mmmm, bread, meat and mayo.... and I've not even been drinking.

the reason we still get negligence claims despite a signed written exam is two fold. 1. People are gready and dumb, and lawyers are whuffos (mostly). A claim doesnt have to have any merit to be brought and cost the BPA money to tell them to fuck off. There may be absolutely no hope of the claimant winning, but it still costs the BPA money to say so. 2. Understanding the risks does not prevent a claim in neg. Imagine a SL instructor forgot to hook up the SL. Just cos you appreciated the risk of skydiving doesnt make it excusable for the instructor not to hook you up. (ignore the possability that you should check just for the sake of the example).

Because waiver like that are illegal in this country. They are also pretty un-necessary in most cases. We have a principal called “volenti non fit injuria”. Ie I voluntarily accepted the risk of injury. Non of the claims should succeed unless the instructor/centre has done something negligent to expose the student to danger. Now we know this doesn’t happen very often but we also know it does sometimes. In those instances where there has been negligence then I think its ok to sue – someone has done something wrong. But I guarantee that most of these instances are idiots who break their ankle cos they don’t PLF properly like they were shown and then bring a claim. Simply telling these idiot claimants to piss off costs money, even if they have no hope of succeeding. This is shit annoying, but this fact is a comment on society not on skydiving, skydivers or lawyers.

Nah - the greenies just get to keep the dress in the freezer for a couple of years

I love a good bonfire.... try not to scream and wriggle too much. [warms hands]

nah - he'd just be there in a full face, or you'd get the back of his head carved out of the rock

Big Macs have protien in them now??? They must have added something....

Just remember what he keeps telling us though: Are you sure you know what you're asking for?

Me, Tim, Sam, Rebecca (im the only .commer - except rebecca who just lurks - I know you're watching) Mid-morning ish... Saturday. lets see... descriptions.... I'll be the big bugger with the skinny girl probably annoyingly climbing on him, arriving with a long haired hippy type and a scruffy looking skinny bloke that looks like he hasn't slept since the early 80's.

hehehe, us three again. All we need is for spike to post an then thats the british PW contingent all here.

My reserve is bigger (ok by only 6sq foot but its still bigger) And I've jumped it (demo of it) to see how it will fly should I end up under it. If anyone has the oportunity to do so you should.

Everyone agrees with that. But that is not "safe" that is "safe enough for me".

hehehe, I found that one too and PM'ed it to him

Cool, we all agree. I don't think anyone won or lost an argument here though. I think people were just arguing themselves in circles without clearly defining the issues in contention, when in reality there really wasnt an issue in contention. Maybe I should look again at a career as a court appointed mediator....hmmm?

YOU HAVE THE SAME OPINION. You are simply failing to fully enunciate that opinion. You are applying different meanings to the same word, that’s all this argument is about. You both agree that there are risks and you could die but Ron says that is contrary to the definition of “safe” and you say it is compatible with that definition. You are not arguing with each other about the risks in this sport YOU ARE ARGUING ABOUT A WORD. Agree the definition of that word. If you agree the definition of that word I put a case of beer on it that you agree. How about for arguments sake you agree the definition of “safe” as it appears in the Webster’s dictionary… ie as it appears in my post above. Now, with that definition in mind, “is skydiving safe?”

The title to this thread is an oxymoron! Safe means "Free from harm, injury or risk". If something is risky it cannot meet the definition of "safe".

yup - im a monkey too - definition works for me edit - actually Im a metal monkey.... AWSOME! just like in one of those mad Japanese cartoons.... wow - Robo Monkey.... or Monkey-bot.... hehehe

The word “safe” has a specific definition. That definition is fixed and is not open to discussion. It does not change from person to person, it is fixed by society. That is a fact and trust me on this one, words are the tools of my trade. “Safe” means: (with reference to the Webster's English Dictionary which I believe is the first source Amercian Courts will turn to should there be a dispute over the meaning of a word) What everyone is trying to say is that skydiving does not match that definition. While skydiving you are not “free from risk”; you are not “unthreatened by danger”. You therefore cannot be “safe” according to its correct definition. If you want to say skydiving is “safe enough” or that you “feel safe” then that is fine. The definition there is subjective. You can mess with the meaning of those phrases all you like. Because of the fact that these phrases are subjective, people aren't going try to argue with you. They may be worried that you don’t have all the facts on which to base your assessment, but it is still your assessment to make. You don’t have the same liberty to modify the word “safe” – only “society” makes up the definition for that word and society's decision on that is reflected in the contents of its dictionaries. The argument here is essentially at cross-purposes again, over the meaning of a word.

Monkey - good luck finding one of those for lunch.

We should all be a little careful not to let these two issues get confused. The rise in membership is due to the hike in insurance. That's not the BPA's fault at all. The other issue is the way their budget is spent. This budget comes from a charge within our overal membership fee. I don't have a problem with the level of funding we give them per-say, but based on the broadband budget it seems it is possible there may be questions to be asked about the way it is spent.

Gung Hay Fat Choy everyone.

The have a budget of £3000 for upgrading to broadband??? WTF?? That shouldnt cost shit ! Ok there may be some small hardware costs if they are netorking but three grand??? And do we get to see this: Produce a ‘’History of the BPA” display for the BPA Office ? or does that just stay in their office. I'd support the production of a "history of the BPA" even if its just for archives but the title of this makes it seem like its just a fancy wall decoration for their offices. Why not do it in book format and publish it - I'd buy it.

The visual indicator on time outs are quite easy to come by in England (read - no one really uses them so there are plenty just sat arround). You might try importing one if they are scarce in the States. You should be able to pick up a Timeout for $60 (cheap to us but sucks for you cos of the exchange rate) and the visual dongle is peanuts.

We don't get medical insurance, we have the NHS (free medical for all... so long as you joint the que).

Martin