DiverMike

How many husbands did you take on a honeymoon with you? No wonder you only got out of the room 4 hours a day

better leave the 'sister' part in there. The 'twin' could be a brother For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Although you are grammatically correct, you changed the subject and thus the meaning of the statement. Shah's original statement was to a second person, not to himself. A more appropriate rendition would be: Shah: "A statement out of which way you cannot think." Hot chick(breathlessly):"Fuck me, Shah. Can we invite my size 8 sister to join us?" For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

When I was in High School I read Agatha Christie's "And Then There Were None". It was original titled, "Ten Little N*ggers" and took place on "N*gger Island". That was deemed too offensive and all occurences of "n*gger" were change to "indian". Recently, that was considered too offensive and the latest publication of the book changed all references of "indian" to "soldier". I imagine the publisher did all this to offend the least number of people in order to make the most money. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Wow - you really are omnipotent. Do you monitor the entire internet Skymama? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Please read post #12 on this thread for clarification. Reading glasses only need to be available, distance glasses worn. In both cases, it only applies 'during aviation duties'. Tandem instruction is not defined to be an aviation duty, so you can cover your eyes in duct tape if you want while being a TI. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

My naive belief that people are generally good? Leave it alone and let me cling to it, otherwise I will become yet another bitter twisted DZ forum poster. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

As it pertains to AAD's I will give DZO's the benefit of the doubt that they want to make the sport safer rather than squeeze out the competition. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Net worth is too subjective. Do you include unrealized capital gains? Who assigns a value to privately held companies? Is my antique butter urn that Benjamin Franklin sat on worth $1 or $100,000? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

What happened to all the other posts? Andy9o8's thoughtful and legally accurate description is gone. Now it just sounds like he likes to talk about pedophiles. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

As disgusting as the subject and author is, words are just words. As long as they are not threatening or libelous I don't see how they couldn't be protected under the 1st amendment. That assumes there are no photographs or even a line drawing that can be considered obscene. I don't think a 'how-to' manual about committing any other illegal activity would send two LEOs to extradite. It appears to me to be political grandstanding and has no hope of being successfully prosecuted. It may be successful in a local Florida court, but it will be overturned. I guess the intent is to cause monetary damage to the author. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

I feel that income tax is a different level of taxation that most people find more onerous. It is the one tax that the government says, "I know you earned this money through your hard work, but I am going to take it away from you and your familiy and spend it wastefully because I am bigger than you are". I think if 100% of the people were subject, then 100% would put pressure on the gov't to be more efficient. Now 50% of the voters don't have skin in the game so what do they care? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

1. I no longer smoke the silly stuff - it is your interpretation 'silly stuff' is marijuana or some other illegal drug. Again, I do not admit to ever consuming any illegal drug. 2. You are telling him to not find out, and not to mention it. That is exactly 'advocating lying by omission'. Wrong. 'lying by omission' is knowingly withholding information you believe to be true. If you do not know it to be true, you are not omitting. 3.Give an example of how a properly rated twin commercial pilot is unsafe flying a single engine airplane that he is current on? Don't ask me to justify a bullshit FAA regulation. It exists. Call someone at the FAA. I am not going to defend it. I will defend the statement that all FAA regulations should be followed, not just the non-bullshit ones. 4. This isn't fun anymore. I give up - you win, I quit. FAA regulations and maintenance schedules are just recommendations and we should only choose to follow the ones we like. I smoke heroin laced pot on a daily basis and I recommend that all pilots lie to the FAA as often as they can. Does that about cover it? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

A few points: 1.people know you are not supposed to drive on an expired license. So it is not similar there either. Pilots know they aren't supposed to fly a plane unless they are fully qualified to do so. It is exactly the same. 2.I no longer smoke the silly stuff but I probably would if I wouldnt get fired for it. Nothing in that statement indicates I ever used illegal drugs. I do not admit to having smoked illegal drugs. (especially not on a public forum) 3.I agree - go with Don't ask Don't Tell. I was advising not going to the authorities and asking if what happened qualified as an incident. In my mind it wasn't, so I suggested not bringing it up. I also provided a reference to what the FAA definition of an 'incident' is in case the original poster thought differently. I was not advocating lying by omission. I never claimed to be a safe pilot (or skydiver). I personally don't think there is such a thing. We all take calculated risks which are often less safe. IMHO any skydiver who uses less than a NAV 280 and performs any turns below 300 feet isn't safe. Your opinion may vary. I was disagreeing with someone who thought actions I considered unsafe were safe. Not following the regulations is one measure of not being safe. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

I agree. That is why I inserted a small single bifocal lens in the left eyepiece at the approximate clock position of 7 to 10. (I cut an insert in half I bought off the internet. They sell them for scuba masks). It allows me to view my altimeter in freefall on my left wrist, but doesn't interfere with my downward landing view. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

You are exactly correct and proving my point. You may not agree with the regulation, but you damn well better follow it . You can't pick and choose which regulations you like and want to follow. That (at least in my book) makes you an unsafe pilot. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Congratulations. You must be extremely relieved to have this behind you.

You don't really want to come under the jurisdiction of the FAA. Someday the regulations may be rewritten to include TI's. That won't be a happy day for TI's. Until then, if you need corrective lenses wear them or don't put yourself in a position of defending your decision to not wear them (stay off of a witness stand). Most TI's I know don't have deep pockets and don't have to worry too much about being sued. Tandem manufacturers, DZO's, and their insurers might start requiring corrected vision to avoid liability, but the FAA doesn't give a shit about TI's vision while jumping. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

This is a 'grey area' because the FAA does not have any regulations covering Tandem Instructors, not because it is impossible to require it. I have prescription lenses with a bifocal insert in my liquid eyewear that I use to skydive. It is completely possible to have prescription eyewear in skydiving goggles. The FAA regulations for eyewear are as follows: Since the FAA does not consider Tandem operations 'aviation duties' you could be legally blind without your glasses and still be a TI flying without them and not run afoul of FAA regulations. If the tandem manufacturer does not require 20/20 corrected vision to act as a TI, you are technically ok. You are still liable as well as the DZO and the manufacturer if you land anywhere other than where you were supposed to, don't have 20/20 vision, and aren't wearing corrective lenses. I wouldn't want to be a TI on the witness stand defending my decision to not have 20/20 corrected vision because I didn't want to buy the prescription lenses for my goggles. All these liability loopholes are caused by requiring a FAA 3rd class medical when the FAA does not have any regulations regarding tandem instructors or someone acting as 'parachutist in command'. If the FAA considered tandem instruction as an aviation activity you would absolutely be required to have 20/20 corrected vision when acting as a TI. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

I can't completely agree with that statement. Not complying with FAA regulations (even the bullshit ones) shows a lack of knowledge or professionalism. If you don't have the ticket for that plane - don't fly it. (Especially for hire). For the non-pilots out there, it is similiar to driving with an expired license. It is an indication that the driver isn't aware of the basic regulations or chooses to disregard them. Would you call that driver a 'safe driver'? I would not, especially if I were paying that driver to drive me. What other basic regulations is he unaware of or disregarding? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

+1 And speaking as one of Obama's hypothetical rich people, I will shelter my estate with A/B trusts to avoid probate taxes. Most rich people are pretty smart about avoiding taxes, and this one is relatively easy to avoid with proper planning. I guess they are going after the stupid rich. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is real even when you aren't stoned. Prove me wrong. That is the whole point of pastafarianism. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

I don't know this guy Rhys, and I generally disagree with everything he says, but you moderators seem to have it out for him. You told him to post it to Quade's forum and Quade then said it was bad form to post to a different forum. I suppose you moderators are being PC and just not telling him to STFU. On a slightly relative note, my wife bought me a Go Pro for my birthday. I am still at least 136 jumps from taking it out of the box. Be encouraged that some people listen to experienced skydivers For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

With an attitude like that, you will probably never be a millionaire or if you become one you won't be for long. Becoming a millionaire is quite achievable in the US given a long enough period of time (20-30 years). Spend less than what you make, protect what you own, don't give the government any more money that you have to. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

I bought a pair with prescription lenses over the internet and had lots of communication issues but everything was satisfactorily resolved. I am quite happy with the product and can vouch for the service. What skydiver discount? I used your name and still paid full price. Silly me. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.