Andrewwhyte

Felony is an American term but there are two types of dui charges in Canada; a summary offense and an indictable offense are similar to misdemeanor and felony. Generally one's first offense would not be prosecuted as an indictable offense unless there were grievous injuries or death.

Nope he is right.. I was going up to Canada with an old guy to go fishing out at Ucluelet on Vancouver Island. We had been up there two weeks before and his friend had got tossed against a gunnel in some rough seas. We had to bring him home. We left the boat up there with the intent of returning. Upon trying to reenter .. something he had done severl times a year for the last 25 years.. some Canadian border guy.. bored at 11 pm at night did a background check on him... Christ you would have thought the old guy was fucking public enemy number one on the FBI's most wanted list.. Apparently 4o years ago... like many a young guy he liked to drink.. get in fights.... I am sure you know the type. He had a drunk driving arrest.. and a couple arrests for fighting. They denied him entry... after literally arresting him for 4 hours. The guy is diabetic.. and is very old.. and can barely get around with a cane. He went thru the months long process they demanded of him...so that he could drive thru BC to get to his place in Alaska.. just as he had done for many many years. ONce he paid his money to the Canadian government though.... he was deemed now innocent and not a threat to the good people of Canada.. It only cost a couple thousand dollars US to buy innocence. Since then he refuses to spend a dime in Canada.. he has a trailer with all the fuel he needs to make it up to AK... he also does not spend money for any services there. No hotels... no restaurants...he no longer fishes in CAnadian waters... so he does not spend the large amounts of money he used to for licenses.. fuel bait moorage... you get the picture. Who lost out on that deal.. I would say your tourist industry has. Hmm, I didn't know they were doing that. I suppose it shouldn't surprise me. Probably a tit for tat kind of thing. The US used to refuse people for drug offenses routinely, but since 9-11 any offense whatsoever is a guaranteed refusal. I know several people who purchase an entry waiver every three years for 25 year old infractions. You are right this kind of bullshit costs the tourism industry money. There is a group that wants to move our nationals later in the year. Weather means it would have to be held in the US (TK is all over this one). One of the main problems is that too many people cannot enter the US. It is far cheaper to fly to Eloy from here than to Montreal, but the number of folks from Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver who are stamping their feet with impatience waiting for the Montreal tunnel is impressive.

There is no amount of training that can prepare you for the adrenaline rush that comes with the first jump. For that reason I am a big fan of starting with a tandem. In your case however, you have already experienced the first jump. You know how wild those first few seconds are going to be. Now go out there and take control of the situation.

Will they? I have never heard that. The US is the only country I know of that worries about stuff like that. I could be wrong.

You're kidding right? There is no country in the world that runs that racket even remotely as extensively as the US. There are upstanding Canadian citizens who have never been charged with anything that are not permitted to transit the US because they have expressed political opinions that the US government didn't like. Author Farley Mowat is an example. Ayers on the other hand is on record making statements supporting the goals and actions of criminal groups. The government of Canada does not have my fingerprints; the government of US does. Of course I didn't have to give them up. I just would never be allowed to enter, transit or (coming soon) overfly the US. My choice.

It's my understanding that's it's part of the citizenship requirements. For the overwhelming number of Americans there are no requirements for citizenship; it is a birthright. "It is my understanding," sounds a lot like people saying what they think should be true often enough that it becomes "common knowledge," otherwise known as myth. In UK the constitution is so steeped in tradition that "it has always been thus" is a good argument. In Canada we have an "Official Languages Act." I think the US should have an Official Language Amendment, but they currently do not.

You're wrong. English is our country's language. Is that in the constitution or is there an official languages act?

State issue. Fed should mind its own business.

This entire thread is predicated on Newfies using bats to kill seals. The problem is they don't use bats, they use clubs. What do you think of when you think of clubs? That's right Paris Hilton; she is always out at the clubs. PARIS HILTON is the cause of global warming.

Well they were the underdogs the last three weeks.

Heh, heh, heh. The Eagles remain the only team in the NFC East that has ZERO Super bowls.

Donovan McNabb.

Jumps in the last year. Camera jumps in last year. Equipment that currently comes with you. Any unusual equipment you have used (Imax camera, 70mm).

This is true. In Canada where we have a 'solo certificate' after ten jumps it is particularly true. However in UK while the student is doing their 'consols' after AFF before their 'A' they have a mandatory structured program called a CH1. This addresses the issue quite well in my view.

What part do you not understand about it actually being safe when done properly by trained professionals? The part about no room for error. If you ever get a chance to talk to or listen to a lecture on stunts from BJ Worth or Tom Sanders or Jake Brake they will drive home that the trained professional always has room for error built in. A professional stunt is engineered to look dangerous, not be dangerous. By the way, I am a trained professional.

I was bringing the discussion back into the original context. The argument has been: -You cannot safely dump at 400 ft on a skydive. -Sure you can. You just need base gear. -A base jump is not a skydive. -But you can do a skydive with base gear, so it's safe. -No it isn't you still have no time for emergency procedures. -I wasn't talking about low openings.

The IPF standard is 25 jumps including S/L. From what I have seen of the UK system it is pretty normal to get there 'A' at or close to 25 jumps.

I think you're being overly simplistic. For example, that would unduly discount the value of more (and gradual) canopy flight experience before moving on to "self-supervised" status. I have heard this argument before and it makes no sense to me. If you take RAPS and do twenty five jumps to get your 'A' you will have twenty-five canopy rides. Conversely if you take AFF by the time you get your 'A' you will have twenty-five canopy rides.

It makes no difference whatsoever whether the gear is TSO'd or not if main deployment is at 400 ft. If the highly trained and current professional has a mal he will not have enough altitude do implement emergency procedures.

The Gem of the comments section: bassbus Says: December 21st, 2008 12:10 PM How about ten bucks to go second?

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

What ever happened to Holy Joe at Eloy? He wasn't satisfied with a PA so he got it flayed open like a hot dog bun.

pa! PA!

Well I am pretty sure there is one or two special agents keeping an eye on this gang.

You have to admit, he was right on target on this one.