Bolas

Deland had showers last time I was there. Not as numerous or as nice as ZHills but they did have them.

Did they really become widely uncool or did AAD two outs and the cost/danger associated with those do it more? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Witnessing fatalities and training seem to have had an affect on our policies over the years. At least in all aspects of the sport except swooping and carving turns in the pattern. I remember watching what happened to the way jump pilots take off after the Otter crash at Perris. You never ever saw high speed pull out type rotations after that one. It only took one crash to fix that problem. You see if the pilot had rotated on the numbers, and feathered the proper engine, more people might have survived the incident. But like I said, it only took one crash to change the way pilots at Perris are trained. Why is it taking all these years and fatalities to change this problem? Jumpers started wearing seatbelts too... I don't think jump pilots are really relevant to the question as while they are a part of the skydiving community, they differ in that to do any sort of non fixed object jumps all jump disciplines rely on them. There are far fewer diver drivers than there are jumpers. Plus that whole directly regulated by the FAA thing... My point is when it comes to skydivers, rules generally don't work and even moreso rules from higher up. What does work is technology and education for all, and if needed, attitude adjustments. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Someone tell PETA, maybe they can do something worthwhile for once... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Has the skydiving community as a whole ever been able to eliminate or minimize a safety issue, or has it always been technology advances? Were it not for AADs, no pull/low pull could very likely still be common. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

So if they had let you take some more "normal" size people, possibly letting you teach those less experienced how to handle the "non normal" sized ones, you might not have done it longer?

It's not always about the $$$ they make, particularly when someone is doing something that they love. It's usually boils down to a perceived lack of respect or worth and the financial piece is just a part of that. I'd be willing to bet if the people not renewing ratings were asked, a majority would say, "It wasn't just the money, it was..." I'm in no way saying instructors should not make more, just saying that it should be seen as a start, not the solution.

His sign said, "Please Help." Help doesn't always have to be monetary... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Also how not to fly a pattern. How many spirals did they do? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

All beach landings? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

They were sending 1099s to you for your winnings? If so, the gov't was getting at least part of its cut. Legislating victimless morality is pointless. Legalize all gambling, drugs, prostitution, etc. Far easier to control with economic policy and profitable too vs banning something then having to enforce that ban in addition. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Set Hide "My Stuff" Menu: to Yes under settings and you won't even get the side ads. Only drawback is you have to click on Home to logout. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Ankle bracelets for house arrest are currently used as a punishment device. So if the laws were changed to require everyone to wear one, you'd be fine with that? The biggest issu I have is this machine operates without probable cause. If law enforcement can't do it, why should we let automated devices do it if it hinders someone needlessly? Were someone to come up with a device that monitored a persons driving and if it determined it to be erratic, require a breathalyzer, that would be a different situation entirely. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Actually you are. It's currently used as a punishment device. Basically, the court is saying "You've proved by getting 1 or more DUI/DWIs that you are prone to drinking and driving. Therefore, as part of your punishment, we're mandating you get this device installed on your car that checks your BAC before the car will start." What your supporting is the same end result. You've done is just taken the whole judicial process to determine guilt out of the equation. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Robe of protection? Really? Seriously?????? I'm all for taking the guys name but if he thinks I need to be under his "robe of protection" THAT'S a deal breaker. What if under the robe of protection you were allowed to suck on the "sausage of wisdom"? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

We just need to somehow segway to talking about the debt, healthcare and religion and this can be the all purpose thread... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Charlie Sheen had to stop taking Chucks calls... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Not a quibble as that was my point all along. Perhaps I didn't state it clear enough in the original post. No, but I also realize there may be times where the law is not applicable (such as private property use only) and times in emergency situations where it needs to be disregarded. A binary device such as this (most likely with a no start failure mode to prevent tampering or bypassing) can't make that determination. This doesn't mean that the person breaking that law should be immune from the consequences of breaking the law, but in some cases even those consequences are the better option. You already lost at "was never wrong" so your answer still applies. However - Even if this theoretical device existed... From earlier in the thread Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

If a tail light is not working the car is still physically drivable and startable. If this alcohol detector isn't working properly, is there a bypass so the car can still start? Most likely not as that would defeat the entire purpose of the device to begin with. Additionally if you don't have current registration, inspection, insurance, a license, a license plate etc. nothing is physically preventing that vehicle from being driven on the road. Granted it's illegal to do so, but unless caught there is nothing preventing it. Playing the player for a sec, but what do you Bill personally think about making a device such as this mandatory? I have a feeling you're just playing devils advocate here. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

You're forgetting the nature of rules though. If one thinks a rule is unjust: * they will likely ignore it. So now you need people to enforce it. * Once these enforcers catch someone, now you need to porive they did it. * Once you prove it you now need a penalty * If people keep doing it you may need a stronger penalty as a deterrent. Additionally others might just find a way around it, possibly something even more risky than the rule was supposed to protect against. It's a shell game and the gov't is always going to be playing catch up. I'd be willing to bet that even before the gov't started cracking down on existing practices, most companies already either had new ones in mind that they used their lobbyists to get loopholes added to the latest rules... It's sorta like trying to regulate morality, such as the war on drugs. How's that going again? Economic policy is a far better tool of control than regs/laws ever will be. Processes that are more risky/unknown, assign higher transactional taxes to, the less risk, the less tax.

Ahem. If you're going to quote a post, particularly a short one, please quote it all. Thanks. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

You missed the point, the person giving the money and taking away all risk was not an investor, it was the government as they have done repeatedly. I don't have issue with people making or losing money in bubbles. I do have issue with the gov't trying to foolishly control and manipulate those bubbles. It used to be those companies that took more risk had more to lose. Now if they're big enough they can just get bailed out. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Assist a driver as in allowing others to see what they're doing so they're less likely to have an accident. Tail lights, even if malfunctioning, do not stop the operation of the vehicle either. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

You COULD have started by rolling back all the GOAT FUCK STUPID tax cuts to mollify the 1% who have all the fucking money and dissasociate yourself from their TRUE BELIEVERS who are completely fucking delusional in thinking that the VOO DOO DOO economics they wallow in is sound fiscal responsibility. Instead.. you want MORE OF THE SAME... DUUUUUUDE you know what they say about doing the same stupid shit... and then expecting different results... right??? I completely agree with rolling back tax cuts AND raising taxes across the board as long as spending is drastically cut in ALL areas. I definitely don't want more of the same as the policies from both the Republican and Democratic party as well as "bleeding hearts" are what got us into this mess. I still contend that it was not as much the trickle down aspects that sunk us, it was more increasing gov't spending. I haven't viewed the numbers but I'd be interested to see just how much actual tax revenue was created/lost after implementing as we all know the budget defecit increase. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.