flyingferret

Ok, A few comments, as for the legal ramifications, thanks but I was never interested. My point from the beginning was to say this thread mostly sensational from the first post, and from a layman's perspective there was plenty of other things that were as dangerous as street racers, IF slightly less obvious. As for the legal definition of irresonsible, again I am not terribly interested, my point was perception from the beginning. And in the world outside the courtroom you can do plenty of irresponsible things based on negligence rather than 'evil intent'. It is still not a responsible thing to do...we argue about it all the time in the skydiving world. Study on cell phone usage: Summary with lots of footnotes and sources http://www.irmi.com/Expert/Articles/2003/Olson05.aspx As for confusing the issue, the only reason I ever got in this thread was a cross post from lawrocket in a thread about bikers, with a link to this one. Along with that a bunch of speed data got dragged in which was entirely from that thread and not this one. I set out to clarify, not confuse the issue. On that note, I would ask lawrocket to produce any data he has on the wreck....speed, location, etc, etc. Anything beyond the statement that 'asshole murdering street racers' killed somone. THEN, and only then, might there be analytical conversation about the event in question. In the mean time you are now using legal definitions to explain to me how these people are the most irresponsible people on the road, while a day ago you were indicated that legal definitions did not allow adequate punishment. Yet once more....for a layman's standpoint. A person accidently causes a collision, be it car or canopy is still irresponsible. If you would prefer to call it reckless or call people with intent malicious, whatever. The point is...most people don't have intent to cause an accident, they have intent to do what they want....whether it is drive a certain speed or talk on the cell phone or swoop in a congested landing pattern. Choosing to ignore the limitations of the situation is the irresponsible action. Your argue about "it must be true" is pretty weak and applies to this thread as much as anything. I was referring to the fact, that cell phone usage is a problem with pending legislation. One would have to be pretty isolated from suburban/urban society to miss that fact. Yep, soccer mom could be irresponsible too. Eating in my car could be too. Go watch defensive driving, it will advocate all of that. Do we follow it? DO I follow it? Not entirely, I am not sure how you can in today's pace of life. BUT, you can use judgement to eat a snack while cruising on an open highway, rather than in stop and go resedential traffic. You can choose to use a headset if a phone call is necessary. As an aside the definition of irresponsible is the lack of responsiblity. And the definition of respnsibility is: Liable to be required to give account, as of one's actions or of the discharge of a duty or trust. Involving personal accountability or ability to act without guidance or superior authority: a responsible position within the firm. Being a source or cause. Able to make moral or rational decisions on one's own and therefore answerable for one's behavior. Able to be trusted or depended upon; reliable. Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking: responsible journalism. Having the means to pay debts or fulfill obligations. Required to render account; answerable: The cabinet is responsible to the parliament So, in summary, my point remains that there are plenty of irresponsible drivers that that do not engage in street racing and cause more deaths. You are trying to argue defintions with me that I never set out to state. As a postscript, I do agree that our driving tests are a joke, and would be fully in favor of skill based tests that would eliminate inept drivers over a spectrum of ages. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Minobu, in reference to these numbers, billvons comments, etc, I disagree with you. 135 people in a year killed from street racing, when almost the same number get killed daily on the road. Your argument about intent is flawed in my opinion. You do not have to intend to irresponsible to be irresponsible. The numbers about cell phones are everywhere, literally. As I stated before studies show that driving with a handheld cell phone is equivalent to a Blood Alcohol Content of .08. Think about that for a minute.....it produces the same slow reactions and bad judgement as driving drunk! It is hard to avoid this perception...it is all over the news. If anyone chooses to still practice it, they are knowingly ignoring the advice. SO, in my opinion they are no less irresponsible that someone who wants to go fast. There are no numbers that will show that going fast is like being a drunk driver...they just arent there. There are too many other variables. I know a lot of people that drive fast, and I am not referring to street racing speeds (although by virtue of this thread, that has not even been defined) and are very alert and competent drivers. I know other people that never drive fast, but practically bumble and mosey down the highway. As a driver and a biker, I can predict the actions of a fast moving car in many cases. I cannot however predict the actions of slow moving cell phone using SUV driver....because the entire prediction is that they will be erratic. So, AGAIN, am I adocating either? No. What I am saying is that there are many more common driving habit that are just as irresponsible and kill per people simply because of the sheer numerb of driver's will to engage in them. The perception of this thread extends to real life and dictates that people who would not top 100mph because it is 'unsafe' would be willing to pay more attention to their cell phone that the road, becuase is 'mostly safe' The very perception that it is safe is what makes it more dangerous. Take a look at the numbers....because your argument is the same as people looking at high performance landing accidents and alleging that skydiving kills people. The high visibility sensationalism is grabbing attention. I am not arguing that swooping (street racing) is safe, I am simply saying that there are a lot of other dangerous habit which get accepted by nature of being less blatant that are just as dangerous in skydiving (driving) -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

All of that really does not change the fact that the thread was a biker asking to meet more bikers in the dropzone community and someone decided to turn it into bitching about noise. I was simply asking for consideration of thread author's intention. That would be like me posting about my concerns regarding breastfeeding in a thread asking for fellow breastfeeders in the women's only forum. It is just plain rude. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Look, I am not actively advocating either, as I just posted, my point is that this thread is devoid of any data about the accident, and full of data about a biker who went down a straight road at high speed with no incident. The only connection was that lawrocket felt commonality. There are lost of ways to be irresponsible, and as I have posted more than once the speed is no sure measure of it. SO....without more details, you don't know that these street racers were not doing 50 in a 35 or 60 in a 45, etc, etc. You dont know the number of lanes, or the stretch of road. All you know is that someone was 'allegedly' speeding. Wrecks happen all the time due to bad judgement at legal speeds. The speed is not the error....the judgement is the error. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

I think you got the idea -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Yeah he did and it was controlled. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1699943#1699943 Stopping distance at 45 is 108 feet. Where is the kid stepping out? That said I agree with you...but this whole thread was started without any reference to the speed or much to the locale. What we do have is a different person in a different thread on a different vehicle with a different number of wheels doing 148 on a different road with control points, an EMT, and a precheck. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

bah, handlebar streamers fit harley....IF you have a low slung beacn crusier or are wearing white leather with tassles -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

The speed is only one factor people. People hit 300 on a closed track. There are stretches of road that are no different that a closed track GIVEN the right prep. Regardless you are taking a speed from one vaguely referenced action in one thread and pulling it into another thread. You can kill people doing 55mph on a highway. I am not arguing with the point of the thread...most street racers practice poor judgement. But the proof is not the speed....it is the environment they are in. And before there is too much whining, look back and say you have never done anything you knew was dangerous from speeding to pushing a red light. People's risk assessment if often off. The further off, the bigger the consequence if you guess wrong. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Did you guys miss a chunk of the 90s? -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Legal /= responsible and vice versa. Laws are blanket statements that provide for public safety using an average denominator. In most extreme pursuits, people while do things that may be illegal in those or other circumstances. The speed limit is the maximum speed in good conditions, prudence would call for lower speeds in bad conditions. A cautious rider in the situation you describe is no less responsible in mind than a soccer mom in an SUV driving 5 over in the rain. or a skydiver with too many variable on a load versus a pro rated demo jumper paid to handle variables. Context makes a difference, and this thread is not the context. BUT man it sure is a favorite today, 3 hijack attempts so far. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

First, I am sorry for your loss. Second, I agree with the sentiments in several posts that we collectively have allowed things that have led to this point. And, absolutely no personal offense included, lawyers have had a huge part in furthering that. Your reasoning is correct, but your follow through is a bit emotionally charged, understandably. I suspect if caught would get capital murder, but I am no expert I could be completely wrong. But extend your reasoning a bit. If they are guilty....is the mother that hits a somone while doing 50 in a 35 while trying to get to work as a single mother after dropping off two kids equally guilty? and should be executed? Should someone who causes injury or death while talking on a cell phone face that fate? Are they being any less selfish? Studies shows that people on cell phones drive on par with people with a .08 BAC. Which raises the next should... You are advocated tougher penalties than states have against drunk drivers, yet that seems like the most serious lack of concern for human life to me. While not a defense at all, because illegal is illegal: there are people who drive very well at excessive speeds. Is it responsible, I am not saying that and there is no blanket answer. BUT...there are few drunks who drive well. You see the tricky part about responsibility is dealing out objective judgement. As a society we preach one thing and then complain about the consequences. Most of our violence and sex-related 'problems' in society are in no small way linked to the way we sell both. You cannot always take the convenient and pleasing way, prevention takes sacrifice. While I realize that this is way beyond your post and as I pointed out first I am sorry for your loss, it is very difficult to address this issue vehemently without addressing the idea of responsiblity as a whole. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

I put my pants on just like everyone else one leg at time. Just after my pants are on, I make gold records. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

You know this sounds a lot like a gun argument.....it is not the people who make noise that I dislike....it is the noise maker. Um...here in Texas, a lot of trucks make bikes sound quiet, how about directing thoughts at people's decisions, rather than the object which they use for those decisions. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Actually, many bikes make modulating headlights now for that very reason. And Vallerina.....holy cow. Someone started a thread asking for about fellow bikers. We don't come into your thread and whine about hating belly dancing.....what do your comments have to do with the thread topic? at all? Someone was looking for bikers....your aren't one, and obviously you don't like things about that mode of transportation or the people who use it. SO.......don't hijack the thread and piss off a bunch of bikers, unless of course you want them to hijack your threads. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

I hate the sound of people whining. There are two kind of loud pipes, loud and deafening. As long as you don't cross the deafening line, the improve safety for riders and other people. If the pipes break a noise ordances, they will be ticketed. If they don't, then lobby your local lawmaker. Or stay inside your padded house and knit. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

yes The love of my life.....and my bike. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Yeah, there is a group of people that board the lakes in north texas, I have talked with one of them, they said 16s get the most use, occasionally 20s, but a big investment for minimal time on the water. It is hard for me to tall because based on skydiving wind experience, I would say the wind is stronger on the lake than a weather site reports it. I will be taking lessons on the coast, so wind will not be an issue there. My trainer is a foil...I have been flying it off the beach or waist deep in water, which means you need a second person to drain it to relaunch and it also keeps you motivated to keep the kite up. I could actually cross the lake, but with a bit more wind. The weekend before we had problems not letting the train pull us off the beach. This last weekend at times, I was really working the kite ti keep it in the air. So, I would want a steady breeze before I decided to body drag across. And...it looked like maybe a few trees/obstacles. I would like to check my path first. But if we get a lot of wind I would try it. It just means it will suck if the kite goes down. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

I 100% agree. I used to do it....you can do it without a service, although it is mroe difficult know with multi windows. But, I used to run 3-4 windows open each with different max bids, and submit within the last 20 seconds. Ebay used to be easy because only a few people (relatively speaking) were on there. It is not that way now, and its supply and demand curve is closer to the retail market. Trust me, Ebay gotten more annoying, BUT they has also gotten better about killing false user accounts and getting rid of fraud. That alone is HUGE undertaking to monitor. Regardless, they have changed their policy several times, and I guarantee you that they follow it. Additionally, they make a lot of money from people that sell hundreds or thousands of items a month, not from one person who is unhappy because there could have been a cheaper way. Additionally, ebay will automagically bump your bid to meet a reserve when the auction ends. Regardless of my opinion...simple solution, just like any other store...if you don't like it, don't shop there. You went to ebay trying to beat retail price, and you did. IF you think you can beat the ebay way, go patronize that business model. Personally, ebay is more annoying as a seller than a buyer, watching out for all the people trying to rip you off, but it beats classified ads. So, you take the good with the bad. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Looking good Chris, good move on the intake and fuel curve. 500, yep, no biggie even. Two weeks ago, we rode the other way with me riding down to meet dave. I put on 600 that day. My record is a bit over 1000 in 24 hours, and yep stock seat :) -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Thanks for the insight. The size ranges I listed were based on a few things, and of course my knowledge is very green: a. I weigh about 200lbs. b. the wind in S. Texas (Corpus) is pretty consistently between 10-20 knots. The historical data says an average of 13mph, but down on the beach is is more than that in my experience. So down there you fly a 16m and you will be gone. On the flipside, I live in north texas and to do this with any regularity, I will be riding lakes. That means my wind could be more like 5-10 knots, from what I hear I will need a 16m to harness that. Again, I don't have any lessons, and am just flying a trainer so far (which is pretty damn twitchy itself). But I was doing some half ass boddy dragging behind it in the lake this last weekend. The wind was low and irregular, so I could drag 50 feet and wade back. Had it been a lot stronger it would have been impossible without committing to crossing the lake. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

EVERYTHING! I have a 2m trainer kite and have been flying the snot out of it. The recommended approach is: Flying a trainer kite for 30-50 hours...learn it inside and out, fly it with one hand, eyes closed, etc. Learn to work the power zone and wind window (11-7 o clock and 1-5 o clock) You are looking for the wind lift in a 45 degree angle kindof. After that, go take a lesson, within a few hours you will be body dragging without a board, and be ready to add the board to the equation. The lesson is essential, so you don't get hurt or hurt others. These kites generate a LOT of lift. Then there are a million options...but you will likely get a kite between 8 - 16 meters depending on where you live and how windy it is, a board around 160cm, 60cm spread bar, 4 or 5 line kite setup, and a harness of belt, seat, or vest variety. You will spend between 1000-2000 bucks depending on the setup. Also, pick up a copy of kiteboarding mag, it is FULL FULL of information. You will know way more aobut the sport after one reading than any whuffo could reading parachutist. It really is one hell of a mag. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

This was posted once 2 years ago in the BASE forum. Their website has changed a bit with a cool layout and building jump video. Not intended to stir up any debate about civilians using BASE gear in emergency situation, etc, etc. Just saying kinda cool and neat video. http://www.evacuchute.com/ video http://www.evacuchute.com/media/mv_html/../wmv/cut1andcut2.wmv -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

Well, apparently if guns are not around, people use knives and they should be banned. Where does it end. http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7502/1221?etoc -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

You would never ever ever know so many people watched that crappy movie until you mention my name. As for the pumpkin....if you only knew how many jumps we had at the time. Still one of the coolest jumps I have ever lurked. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

I remember a time when I was 100 jumps ahead of Dave and the only one that owned gear. He actually made a really impressive number of jumps without borrowed/rented gear. Then he got his own and has lapped me twice since then. -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.