RhondaLea

Too late. It is now officially a food fight. For the record--because we are clearly headed for a thread lock--if we're taking sides on the various issues, I pick Tom and I pick Nick. Not because they're Tom and Nick--although that's reason enough--but because (a) Tom just got nailed with an off-topic and undeserved brick to the back of the head--again, and (b) because Nick has earned the right to judge. This was an interesting discussion while it lasted. I'm sorry that it has gone so far off track. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Although it might seem logical to think that having made successful jumps before getting hurt or killed would be evidence of non-endangerment, I don't think it's relevant. The analogy that probably works is that of drunk driving. If you drive drunk ten times with your kid in the car and nothing happens, it doesn't mean you're going to be off the hook when you kill or maim him the eleventh time. As for the other dangerous activities you mentioned, they're not as lethal as BASE on a statistical scale. Further, as wwarped pointed out, they begin with a progression that allows one to gain proficiency over time. In BASE, it's sink or swim the very first time. I admit, I didn't bother to look at any case law. But not being inclined to go off half-cocked, I did discuss it fully with a lawyer--one who has seen just about everything, because he's been practicing for 50 years. Given the outcome of that little chat, if I were the parent of a minor child, I wouldn't even sign a skydiving waiver. But Jimmy has said he's going to stop teaching Clair until she's 18, so it's moot. What isn't moot is the discussion of whether teaching someone BASE without any skydiving experience is a legitimate method. IMO, someone with a lot of skydiving experience is at a disadvantage because they have ingrained reactions to unlearn when beginning BASE. On the other hand, canopy skills are essential, so just throwing someone off an object doesn't look like a very good idea. My question then is this: in a perfect world, how would you design the perfect pre-base parachuting course? rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Mommy thinks sonny boy is a wise ass who needs a trip to the woodshed. But I'll be sure to check it out with Daddy first. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

You might have a point if the dzo were running the game. As it is, exhibiting "a decided lack of care" isn't actionable under the circumstances. The person running the game and the game participants have no duty to care and thus cannot be considered negligent. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

There are two standards: legal and ethical. On the legal side, if you disobey a law--deliberately or by accident--you take your chances with the consequences. In this case, we have a violation of at least one California law and possibly others: Cal. Penal Code § 273a (West Supp. 1998) Any person who, under circumstances or conditions likely to produce great bodily harm or death, willfully causes or permits any child to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any child, willfully causes or permits the person or health of that child to be injured, or willfully causes or permits that child to be placed in a situation where his or her person or health is endangered, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison for 2, 4 or 6 years. Jimmy is a legal adult, who is permitted by law to make his own decisions. Clair is a legal incompetent who is not. Clair's parents have the legal responsibility to protect her welfare, but they do not have the legal right to sign away her right to safety. Only Clair can do that--but not until she becomes legally competent to do so. So you're hanging out there, Jimmy, with potential criminal and civil penalties in the offing if you fuck up and maybe even if you don't. On the ethical side, my own belief is that laws regarding victimless crimes are the legislation of the paternalistic, and as such, are made to be broken. As I see it, if you choose to do something that does not adversely impact others, no one has the right to forbid you freedom to do as you will, even if it damages you. IMO, BASE fits very neatly into such an ethical system. Teaching Clair to base jump at this time and in this manner does not. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

And one of Hoover's good friends put his own kid out at a relatively young age. But knowing Hoover...and his friend...and how it was done...I don't see those instances as being comparable to this one. I guess it's because I remember Hoover as being one of the smartest guys I've ever run into. He was careless with himself in some ways, but that lack of care never extended to anyone else. The same applies to his friend. I'm struggling with this because I don't know how to easily explain the difference between Hoover and his son, his friend and his daughter, and Jimmy and Clair, but the difference is there, and its a huge one. I wish he were here to explain it. RIP Hoover. You're missed. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

When Jimmy first posted (before Tom split the thread), I thought it was a joke. Then, as the flurry began, I took it for granted that he'd really done this. Now I'm starting to wonder if, in fact, he's not just trolling. Is there anyone who can corroborate his story? rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Obvious question now: what would you consider adult responsibilities? And, are adult activities and adult responsibilities not closely related? I mean, if you can't participate in adult activities, isn't it more difficult to take up adult responsibilities then? Feel free to PM me is this is going to much off topic. I'm going to take it even further off, and then come back round again. When a child becomes self-supporting and able to attend to all his/her needs w/o parental assistance, one may consider that child an adult. (Some people never attain that status but the law says that they are adults anyway. Nothing we can do about that, although perhaps we should.) My mother was 16 when she married my father and 19 when I was born. It took her many years to understand the consequences of that impulsive act. I was in foster care when I was 16 and molested by my foster father's 31-year old best friend. At the time, I did not understand it as child abuse, because I valued the attention, but that's exactly what it was. And the consequences for me were terrible on many levels, because although I was very bright and capable, I was already damaged, and the experience damaged me even more. I did not have the judgment to know what the consequences would be. A teenager does not have sufficient emotional maturity to evaluate the outcome of adult actions. By definition, teenagers believe themselves to be invulnerable. It is only as we age that we begin to understand irreversible consequences and the permanency of death. Unfortunately, in the absence of that kind of comprehension, risk analysis fails. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

If I were her, I'd dump you just for writing that. On the subject of age, however, I wonder if you would condone a relationship between an 11-year old and a 22-year old. Same thing, right? Hmmmm...maybe not. As people get older, significant age differences between partners is reasonable. But there is a veritable abyss between 16 and 20 in terms of emotional maturity, and in professional circles dealing with the issue, a relationship between a teenager and an adult is considered child abuse. No matter how grown-up a 16-year old seems, s/he lacks the wisdom to discern consequences, and there is an inherent power imbalance in such relationships that make it unhealthy and dangerous for the child. In another day and time, people lived shorter lives and children grew up faster. Children today give the appearance of being mature at an earlier age, but it's no more than a dangerous illusion. They have the accoutrements--because adults provide them--but the substance is lacking. It is only when a child takes on adult responsibilities that s/he can be considered an adult regardless of his/her age and therefore equipped to engage in adult activities. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Oddly enough, there's a thread in General Skydiving Discussions right now about minors making a skydive. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1792831#1792831 Parents have gone to jail for some pretty weird things, Jimmy. Sometimes it turns on nothing more than where the powers-that-be see their interests lie. You need to realize that what Clair's parents have done (by allowing this) is probably sufficient reason for child protective services to remove her from their custody right now. The only thing between Clair and a foster home or group home or worse is that they probably won't find out what's going on unless something goes wrong. If I were you, though, I'd be very wary of publicity. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Actually, Tree didn't call Jimmy a "demented pervert." He said the 31-year old guy he knew who hung around with 15-year olds was a demented pervert. As for the rest of this... You've said, Jimmy, that you're going to have her parents read this thread. That's good, because if anything does happen to her, it won't just be you going to jail. They'll be going right along with you. For many reasons, not all good, there are a lot of laws on the books to protect minors from bad judgment on the part of those charged with their protection. And while both you and they don't feel that allowing her to jump with little to no preparation is endangering the welfare of a minor, my guess is that the local child protective agency will look at it differently if it comes to their attention in the worst possible way. That being said, children--and she is a child still--are more deft at learning certain skills than adults, so she will probably do well. But all it takes is a little bad luck to offset whatever natural ability she might have, and all of you are toast. For her sake, and hers alone, I wish you the best of it. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Well, ya got me. I thought this post was intended to be a joke. And as a joke, it was funny. As a true story, there are so many things wrong with it, I don't even know where to begin. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

I would recognize it, except for a few things. "Peter Terbush seemed destined to stand beside a cliff face. Born into the third generation of a Colorado climbing family...." Dad's a lifelong climber himself. He is not merely a grieving parent who does not understand the sport that took the life of his son. "Jim Terbush was a physician for the U.S. Navy and at American embassies from London to Singapore." Dad is well-educated and intellectually capable of understanding complex concepts. I'm guessing that his career left him well enough off financially that not only does he not need a lawsuit to finance his retirement, but he can afford to pay hefty legal fees. And it's a good thing, because I don't know any lawyers who would take this kind of case on contingency. "Jim Terbush, already pursuing an exhaustive records request of any Parks Service information dealing with Glacier Point, embraced the theory. He moved toward a lawsuit, the father said, after the agency redacted a dozen key documents he hoped would answer questions about what happened. Lawyers told him the only way to see the contents was to file a claim." As far as I'm concerned, the park service added insult to injury when they withheld information. They fucked with him. What would you do if you had the wherewithal to make them regret it? rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

I want to change my answer. The best thing to do is take one's rig in all its myriad parts and give it to the rigger of your choice to put it together and pack it up for you. I think you should stay and get some education for yourself in the process--a complete review of the rig and other components, a lesson on how to inspect the rig after each jump, all that. If, however, you're not going to bother to do all this, you might as well just leave it to the manufacturer as to have an independent rigger do the work. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

About Watts About his idea In 1999, when the Park Service immediately denied his preliminary findings, Watts responded that they were blameless because they couldn't have known of the problem. This was shortly after the death of Peter Terbush. Terbush's father does not have the credentials of an idiot, and he has to be aware of the timeline. So this action isn't about what the park could have done to prevent his son's death; it's about what they've [not] been doing since then. If Watts is right, and if plaintiff's counsel does not allow the U.S. Attorney to deflect the issue, it could lead to a more detailed examination of how park management operates. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

That's an interesting way of asking for $10,000,000. They withheld documents. His only way of getting at the documents was to file suit. Ten million dollars is a legal device, nothing more. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Fascinating article. The plaintiff's argument hinges on Watts' theory. If he's wrong, there is no cause of action. If he's right, the issue has nothing to do with climbing, but with mismanagement by park administration. And the U.S. Attorney's argument is nothing more than an attempt to deflect attention from that very important point. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

My sig is taken from a post written by Mary Shafer Iliff, the wife of the now-retired chief scientist at Dryden and an aerospace engineer of no small standing in her own right (understatement). If you click on her name in my sig, it links to the post, but here is most of what she had to say: You can't even predict every danger. How can you guard against a hazard you can't even conceive of? I agree that the days of "kick the tires and light the fires" are gone, but insisting on perfect safety is the single most reliable way of killing an aerospace project. I've been on both sides of the FRR (Flight Readiness Review) process for a number of aeronautical projects. Experienced engineers try to think of everything that can go wrong. But airplanes can still surprise the best team. I've had to sign a form, certifying that to the best of my knowledge everything that we're going to do on a flight is safe. I've never seriously asked myself "What will I say to the AIB (Accident Investigation Board)" because once one starts on that, the form will never be signed, the flight will never be flown, and the research will never be done. But I have asked myself "Have I told everybody exactly what we're going to do and what the _known_ risks are and are we agreed that these risks are acceptable" and when I can answer that "yes" I sign the form. That also answers the question of what I'd say to the AIB. I'm not talking about abstract theories here, I'm talking about test pilots that I've known for decades. Believe me, I _know_ exactly what the consequences of a mistake on my part could mean. The reminders are all around me: Edwards AFB--killed in the XB-49, Lilly Ave--NASA pilot killed in a crash, Love Rd--I _saw_ his burning F-4 auger into the lakebed, with him in it. But once I've done my best, like everybody else on the team, it's time to go fly the airplane. As an aside, I believe this is essentially what Jaap intended when he was writing about "comfort zones." rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

The action you describe above is "making a skydive" not "being a skydiver." The trouble with strict definitions is that they don't describe real life. And most of real life is very much about attitude and state of mind. My father hasn't seen military service since Korea, the conflict in which he was disabled. Feel free to walk right up and tell him (and every other non-active jarhead) he's not a Marine. Or maybe you want to tell the woman who lost her only child in a skydiving accident that she's no longer a mother. Or how about...well, I guess if you don't understand that it is what we have done--not just what we do in any given slice of time--that makes us who we are, all the examples in the world won't help. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

No, it wasn't. But it wasn't a missile either. It was a government conspiracy ("conspiracy" should be pronounced with a long "i" sound). Go ask all the kooks at alt.disasters.aviation. They'll tell you. They've been telling anyone who hasn't already killfiled them for the last four years. Sheesh! rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

I feel so old. If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Raff's answer. I was just quoting him.

I love it when people speak for me, especially when what they say is wrong! My statement would stand no matter which manufacture I bought from. I like the fact of having the manufacture verify that everything works the way it should and that there are no compatibility issues etc. And yet there are stories on this board about manufacturing mistakes, rigging mistakes and so on. Do you just not take any of that into account? If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Why is all the pre-'98 stuff missing? Were you searching by his email address? Edited to add: I've PMed you the old email address, and a link to all his r.s posts from '95-'97. If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Yes, without hesitation. You say that because you look around you, and you know--up close and personal--the people who would be doing the assembly and packing. You have an acceptable comfort level because it's familiar to you. Would you feel the same way if your rig were coming from up the street, down the street, an hour or so southwest or from California? I know I'd be a lot more comfortable if I knew the identity of the person who actually did the work. As an aside, my gear came from a rigger with a gear business in Arizona, and it arrived fully assembled and partially packed, because he felt I should pack my own main. rl If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb