Trent

Like money in the bank... We should ban hybrids. That's all. Oh, hello again!

Sure, 2 less legs, 1 less drogue. If that happened, there may be the chance that an entanglement could be cut away by either the TM or the jumper. This scenario scares me more and is possible in a typical hybrid. This would probably result in someone being unconcious or missing limbs and not much chance of saving themselves on the way down. We could take this whole thing even further.... right? Hybrids are dangerous, we shouldn't do them. But then skydiving is dangerous, so we shouldn't be doing it either. Most of us accept the risks and do it anyway, against decent advice from others. In my opinion, the "student" here understood the risks of this jump... even if people here, even though they are ignorant of the actual scenario, will insist that she was incapable of understanding these risks. Oh, hello again!

Not only that, it would prove that it is dangerous to do ANY hybrid.... or even any freeflying where people move over and under each other. Proof positive that freeflyers either have more balls, or are just more idiotic.

When hovering over a student... you can see the PC and d-bag coming... when it's from someone hanging beneath you, you probably won't see it going between your legs. Make no mistakes, you WON'T avoid it on any hybrid. Oh, hello again!

Re-read the parts where I, clearly in vain, explain the "students" situation. All of those disagreeing with her capacity to understand risks, I've noticed, weren't there. So they hybrid aspect of this jump added more risk than any normal hybrid jump. Or is it that the sum total of risks is higher because of the fact that it's a tandem? Like I've said, I wouldn't hang or be hung from on a tandem. I also wouldn't take super huge people on tandems. Other instructors would. I'd recommend contacting the dropzone in Mexico directly and bitching to them. Oh, hello again!

I won't defend doing tandem hybrids as "the next big thing", but I won't listen to the BS about how she couldn't have understood the risk. She probably understood the risks of skydiving better than some of us do because of her boyfriend's accident. Don't beleive me? How many times have we told someone not to do something because it's dangerous only to have them say, "it is?" All I can say to you all is that she was briefed for a while. What they said, I'm not 100% sure because it was in Spanish, but it looked pretty thorough. Anyone thinking that a sport jumper with a hanger having a premature could avoid it is kidding themselves. All hybrids suffer from that risk. Now, the point about "killing" two birds with one stone is valid, I agree. But what can you do when 2 adults make that decision in a country with little to no regulation? And for the point about overstressing the harness and attachment points... Do you think having a hanger with a lightweight girl passenger is stressing that harness more than the opening shock with a 220lb passenger? Either way, it happened, it may happen again there. We probably will never see it here, and that doesn't upset me at all. There's always going to be people who think something is irresponsibly unsafe when others don't. Oh, hello again!

So ALL hybrids are unsafe regardless of any of the jumpers' experience since no one could react fast enough to avoid a premature happening underneath them. If that's the way you want to go with it, I understand. I disagree, but I understand. Oh, hello again!

I've seen it done twice... once with an ex-student jumper who came back with their jumper boyfriend and wanted to do something special. The second time was here in this picture. Any other times, I wouldn't know about. I've never hung under a tandem and I wouldn't want to do it for my own sake. I don't see how it'd be any more dangerous than a normal hybrid or taking a heavier student on a tandem, however. Sure, you can imagine some bizarro scenarios that *might* happen, but for every one of those, I'll match it with one from a normal skydive. Oh, hello again!

What's your point? She wanted to do it, understood that skydiving was risky due to her boyfriend's prior accident. Besides the fact that people act like they've never done any tandem RW with a first time tandem, which is bullshit, it happens everywhere... what is the importance of the fact that she is a "student"? I guess I could sit here and tell you that she understood the risks till I was blue in the face, but most of you would just come back with the "she can't possibly understand since she's not a skydiver." For my part, I've docked on tons of tandems in a sit. Should they have all been experienced passengers too? Oh, hello again!

Watch out, someone will come here and get on you about what the "real world" really is, then change the whole subject of the thread. Be careful with that one! I agree here too... sports with no scores, tests with no failing grades, no red ink for corrections, we're setting our kids up to be a bunch of spineless retards. Way to go sensitive crowd! Your pansiness will do us in yet! ... next thing you know, people will try to blame society or something when they're on trial for murder... oh.... wait.... Oh, hello again!

As I said before... her boyfriend is an experienced jumper and she wanted to do something different. It wasn't just for a picture. Oh, hello again!

Just ask next time... all of you. This dive was planned on the ground and dirt dived a few times. The hanger is a TM and AFFI. I am the freeflyer docking on her wrist. This was one of her first tandems. Her boyfriend is an experienced jumper who had a pretty serious accident last year. He still jumps. She knows about the accident. I'm pretty sure she didn't pay. What else? Oh, hello again!

Here's a link to the actual full recording (as full as I've heard anyway). Listen for yourself, then come back and talk shit. At least you'll be able to do it with full information about the topic of the thread. http://www.850koa.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=news_worthy.xml Oh, hello again!

You clearly know nothing about evil death-monkeys and how they spontaneously appear. When you walk down the street, it is possible that you will have to fight off an attacker or run from one. Do you anticipate that happening each time and wear running shoes and carry brass knuckles or a pistol? That's a better example, but people still won't like it. People should just say they want George Bush to take control over their state and local governments so he can personally give evacuation orders since their incompetent and corrupt local officials won't do it on time. Oh, hello again!

Read the transcripts, as someone already pointed out. But that probably will be meaningless to most bashers out there anyway... There's also a difference between "possible" and "anticipated". It IS possible that evil death-monkeys will burst from your spleen, but do you anticipate it? Oh, hello again!

I re-read my post to make sure that I didn't confuse anything by mentioning Bush, the White House, or this administration. I naively thought that this topic was about... well... the topic stated. You got drooling over some email that someone sent you or some headline on a blog somewhere and wanted to bash FOX. I pointed out a couple of situations that might have been, based on the feeble information you provided. You then go on to point out that us conservatives missed the point, and your more intelligent viewpoint is blah blah blah, I don't like Bush, conservatives only listen to the media that propagates Bush's lies, the REAL story cannot be hidden. I'm not surprised that you try such a big turnaround like that. What YOU have whooshing over your head is the fact that you look down upon those who are looking at media (FOX, CNN, etc) to get their news... but YOU somehow have access to "The Truth" which let's you know what is REALLY going on in the world without ever having to actually witness it. Oh, hello again!

Unless you watched both broadcasts, are you SURE that the first show wasn't talking about a hypothetical IF an all out civil war broke out, would it be good? Just from what you posted, I can't assume that FOX was saying "There IS a civil war in Iraq, is that good?" Since most of the media is jabbering about a civil war anyway, it's pretty valid to ask questions about whether or not it might be good. The "made up by the media" line is pretty unsurprising given the BS that our media has shoveled towards us about the war. It's not really a stretch to imagine that outlets are exaggerating to make people watch. One one hand, maybe you're right... maybe Cavuto was bashing his own network too. Good for him and good for FOX for letting it happen. On the other hand, maybe you're misunderstanding the stories here and just propagated something that was forwarded to you. There is the chance that you actually watched both broadcasts, but what would you be doing watching FOX instead of listening to NPR or whatever? Oh, hello again!

Yeah, well, how sad is it that 90% of the customers of this team are apparently fucking morons for being offended about a date that allows them the opportunity to live, work, and watch soccer in the US? All those offended are still welcome to kiss my ass. Oh, hello again!

Apparently some thin-skinned "offended at anything" types really do. The point isn't about the name anyway... it's about the retards who are offended by the name "1836" which has historical, factual significance here. Oh, hello again!

There's a really bad movie about that. Check out "A Day Without Mexicans". It gets a little absurd, and is pretty poorly produced but it sounds like you might like it. Oh, hello again!

The 76ers are a staple that have some loyal fans. Their name is pretty distinct and stuff. Whatcha got to say to that? Anyways... as long as they have a mascot that is non-gender/ethnicity/sexual orientation-specific... who really cares anyway? But still, it's stupid that people got offended by a name like 1836. Oh, hello again!

Again, not what this is about. No, again, not what this is about. Getting warmer... Sure, they are free to be offended. It is the FACT that they are offended that is stupid. Do you think it's reasonable that they are offended by this? Really? And YES, it is STUPID that someone is offended by something as insignificant as a soccer team name. The fact that naming something after a date that created our state can be deemed offensive, is retarded. I wonder if the San Jacinto monument is equally offensive and deserves to be taken down. Why do I get to say what people are offended about in this case is stupid? Because Stone Cold said so! Oh, hello again!

It's not about the name actually being changed or not. It's about the fact that some bored, cause-hunting, publicity hounds actually decided to be offended by something that is historical truth and pretty much the reason we're all here in this state. The issue is that people STILL beleive they have a right to not be offended and DEMAND that anyone who offends them should bend to their will. I have the same issue with the islam-Denmark thing. Oh, hello again!

The silliness of your argument here offends me. Please change your argument to be less offensive to me so that the world will be a better place. If you don't do this immediately, I will wittily imply that your mind is not open. Stop trying to generalize this issue so that you have something to argue about. This is pretty simple. Texas won independence from Mexico in 1836. This is viewed by people in Texas (including many people of Mexican descent) as a good thing. A soccer team is named after an important historical date in our history, and somehow it is offensive. THIS is stupid. Would you support people of British descent bitching an crying over the 76er's name? Do our July 4th celebrations offend someone? Would you back them in being offended? Or are you just arguing this time because someone said "mexicans" and their feelings are more important than those evil Brits? Because it's fun to confront bullshit when you see it. If you don't live here and care about soccer, why are you arguing about it? Oh, hello again!

I woulda called it out if it were a guy who got such an off-topic response from you. But hey, you found something to argue, so.... While the decision to change names may have been based on expected monetary gain... the REAL question IS about PC... the real question is about how stupid people can be with any issue. Even a non-offensive one like when Texas won their independence. I think the team owners are pussies for changing the name because someone got their feelings hurt. I also think that anyone offended by the name "1863" is a dumb-shit. Most of the hispanic people that called the show were not offended by the name, but then it was a conservative station. I have a feeling that the team MIGHT lose 1% of their ticket sales because of the name... so what does that add up to 5-10 tickets? Oh, hello again!