Lucky...

A DZ knew a jumper was beyond 120 and let em jump? Not that care and I think the 120 rule s/b at least twice that, but the DZ / DZO / pilot could be fucked if they knew and it could be proven.... so just continue amnesia, please. I've had cops let me go speeding... like once. I bet the DZ didn't advertise it too loudly. I think the 120 rule is idiocy.

Becauseeeeeee? So should it read that straight in landings be banned then? 19% believe they s/b banned, which is ironically the same number that voted for Perot in 92. That is significant. And if asked if they s/b segregated, I bet 80% would say yes. Banning is the radical approach, so I just wanted to see what the result was. Thanks for the clarification. I edit that to say 19% of people miss the point by 270 degrees. It's kind of like saying that since most accidents occur within 2 miles of your house that you should park your car 2 miles away. I realize the poll is one of absolutes: Allow hooks or not. So I see your point. But legislation in the US works that way, it's crisis management. If we lost 1 or 2 a year, we can handle that, but when we start losing 6 in 3 months, or whatever t has been, then there is a crisis that needs to be addressed. Bottom line is that something needs to be addressed.

As for 120 pacs and regulation in general, here's some fodder to toss around. The USPA, if they're going to address 120 day packs, must equal or exceed the FAA. So why couldn't they require 60-day repacks? They could. I realize they are going the other way with it, but hypothetically they could shorten the req for repacks. They could also ignore the rule and figure it is already covered by the FAA, so there is no need to even address it. I mean really, do they need to remind you that you shouldn't speed on the way to the DZ too? Point is, they DO proactively legislate and enforce the 120 day rule, even if it does coincide with the FAA. Let's all quit acting as if the USPA doesn't regulate, just because they aren't like the local cops wriiting you for 5 over doesn;t mean they don't regulate.

The USPA has no means of enforcement. All they can do is revoke your membership, which is of little to no consequence. On the other hand, if a FAR violation is punished, the repercussions can be serious. Right, the USPA can only require the group members require it, then revoke if there is non-compliance. The consequences are huge, I like being USPA and I think group mmebers do too. Could you see looking for a non-USPA DZ? We would basically become base jumpers Yea, FAR's have serious teeth and they act on them. How did the 270 hook thread turn into a referendum on 120 packs? Anywho, the USPA can and does write regulation and on occassion will enforce I'm sure.

You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. Are you referring to reserve repacks? That is mandated by the FAA not USPA. Riggers are certified by the FAA and issued seal numbers. Does the USPA require that your gear be mantained as per the FAA? I'm thinking, yes, and I don't feel like loking it up, so someone pipe in! Why is it that she you go to a new DZ or your own DZ will do reserve checks? I'm thinking teh USPA also regulates this or enforces teh FAA regulation - same thing. They may require the same things that the FAA requires but they don't enforce it and can't change it. The USPA couldn't change that 120 day requirement to 180 days if they wanted to. They can only lobby the FAA to make that change. The individual DZ's enforce it. They can enforce it on at least 2 grounds: - It is FAA rule - It is USPA rule and a 3rd would be that it shows good faith and not being negligent. Does the USPA have any duty to legislate or enforce the 120 day rule? I don't see how they do. They do it as a show of good faith and responsibility, but they are not the FAA's arm and could simply ignore it.

Thank you. SO the USPA does backdoor regulate or ensure compliance with the 120 day repack. The FAR is a legal requirement whether you belong to the USPA or not. The USPA has to require FAR compliance, if they did not they would be seen to be condoning illegal activities. (And as far as I am aware, the USPA is in favour of the FAA extending the repack cycle) The USPA has to require FAR compliance, if they did not they would be seen to be condoning illegal activities. No, the USPA chooses to legislate and enforce the FAA rule. They could be complacent as to the rule. The FAA regulates equip and the USPA enforces that reg, but there is no duty on their part to do so. if they did not they would be seen to be condoning illegal activities. So if you witness a murder and do zero, don't call the cops, dn't help, you are not in violation fo anything. I think some states have these new motorist laws that require some assistance, but they are really not enforceable. As for seen as, now you're trying to interpret the legislative intent of teh USPA backing the 120 day. Hmmmmm. Perhpas it would be negligent to ignore teh 120 day rule, but it also might be construed as grossly negligent to ignore all the recent 270 hook-deaths. Hmmmmmm..... see how it works both ways? I try not to guess legislative intent, I'm usually wrong.

Or just point out the gold fringe on the flag. Gold fringe? Is there a ref I'm missing? It would appear so. Do a search! Hmmmm, I'm thinking, thinking, thinking..... yep, I absolutley don't give a shit about the reference.

I do not believe this to be true. I see BSRs and group member "rules" bent and broken often with little or no consequence. So you're saying there is no enforcement. Many state and federal laws are the same way. To have legislated rules is one thing, for them to have teeth is yet another. If suits are filed, these rules tend to grow teeth. The first step is writing the legislation, the second is enforcement; the wildcard is teh degree of enforcement and the selectivity as to who they are enforced upon.

Some House Reps are considering it, should he be impeached? A recent AOL poll just showed that 62% said yes he sould if he keeps the Iraq idiocy going. Should lawmakers pursue impeachment if President Bush continues with his Iraq plan? Yes 62% No 38% _____________________________________ What's your take on setting a troop withdrawal deadline? It's responsible 59% It's irresponsible 33% Not sure 8%

Or just point out the gold fringe on the flag. Gold fringe? Is there a ref I'm missing?

One does not need to be a USPA member to legally skydive. One does need to obey FAA regulations in order to legally skydive. Right, and a DZ / skydiver does need to be in compliance with USPA REGULATIONS in order to remain a license holder / group member holder. The USPA does regulate and can enforce by way of suspension or revocation. Fortunately they are a pretty great organization and they aren't into abuses.

Ad you're in law school? Yes. I am a walking contradiction. Aren't I sooo Emo? You're honor, I don't care about your fucking rules of court, fuck you and your kangaroo court. If you get stuck, revert to that.

You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. USPA requires FAR compliance. Thank you. SO teh USPA does backdoor regulate or ensure compliance with the 120 day repack. Why are some people so unwilling to agree that the USPA does regulate? Jebus....

You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. Are you referring to reserve repacks? That is mandated by the FAA not USPA. Riggers are certified by the FAA and issued seal numbers. Does the USPA require that your gear be mantained as per the FAA? I'm thinking, yes, and I don't feel like loking it up, so someone pipe in! Why is it that she you go to a new DZ or your own DZ will do reserve checks? I'm thinking teh USPA also regulates this or enforces teh FAA regulation - same thing.

Ad you're in law school?

If the USPA revokes the ticket, then the DZ has to operate w/o them, cool enough. They would lose the 3rd party protection, big deal I guess. Why is it then that DZ's want to be USPA so bad then? I think it covers them a bit by showing they subscribe to an organizing authority if they are sued. Also, the USPA fights against scum that wants to close DZ's. I think it is a big deal actually. Please. Lawrocket, please pipe in here and tell us the meaningless, worthless nature of waivers and prenups. All it does is shows the intent going in. If I own a DZ, have the students / up-jumpers sign a waiver and I allow activity that is KNOWINGLY more dangerous than it needs to be, then I can be personally sued for gross negligence, even with an incorporation/LLC. If I were a sleezy lawyer I could collect the recent barrage of 270-related deaths, sue and depose the DZ/DZO and ask what they did about these hooks, get video of post accident DZ operation and build a case. That's how it works, so we better self-regulate before some sleeze-bag gets involved. I appreciate the skydiver metality that says, ah fuck it, who cares? But we should self-regulate.

You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book.

And yanking your TI ticket of have a Cypress fire, etc, etc, etc...... I like the rogue, "fuck the rules" mentality of skydivers tho - I mean that seriously.

Becauseeeeeee? So should it read that straight in landings be banned then? 19% believe they s/b banned, which is ironically the same number that voted for Perot in 92. That is significant. And if asked if they s/b segregated, I bet 80% would say yes. Banning is the radical approach, so I just wanted to see what the result was.

I think it's a fair enough comparison, esp since driving a car is considered a priv, not a neccessity. The reaso we don't have regulation now is that if the avergae oe hears of a car collision killing 5 people, they shit, as they use teh roads. If the same Wuffo hears of a skydiving plane killing 10, they don't care and call them stupid. I do to and hope it goes that way. But if the USPA gets sued for underregulating the sport they are tasked to supervise and regulate, then they might do soemthing.

What are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday....

As I wrote above, the USPA could draw a line and revoke anyone who crossed it. Fortunatley the USPA doesn't work that way, but we're only 1 lawsuit away from that kind of policing. I still believe that if you're dumb enough to jump out of an airplane then you're dumb enough to die doing so, so I'm not Ralph Nader here, not at all. I think that if you jump then you assume a lot of what happens after that; don't like who you jump around, jump elsewhere or don't jump. As for enforcement, hey, we live in Nazimerica, if they wanna enforce ANYTHING, they can, hard to believe that point isn't moot by now.

Yea, as a person who wishes he was good enough to safely hook turn, I respect teh skill. I'm not freaking out when people hook close to me and think it's cool. Out of respect for others who don't think it's so cool, there has to be some remedy, whether banning or seperating. I think we can all agree on that. Then the issue of how much seperating is adaquate. For smaller DZ's what do we do?

Well, if there was a 270-related incident and it was discovered that the DZ refused to enforce it, the DZ/DZO could be: - Suspended / revoked by the USPA - Sued for neglegence by the injured, even by teh hook turner who may have caused teh incident

Perhaps the recent barrage of 270-related deaths. I saw the aftermath of a 270 gone wrong, almost killed the guy as he ha no outs. I'm curious as to what the logic and reasoning behind a 180 being more dangerous is.