turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I wouldn't be one to call the Mountain Cattlemen weak, gutless or stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 This thread shows that there are some dangerously irresponsible people among us, probably taking innocent passengers up with them, and telling the passengers they're "safe"Kaz spelled out the penalties for reckless actions when someone isn't killed or injured, so that more or less matches the statements outlining the macho "I can do what I want" theme. That covers past activities by at least one poster on the thread, and if I fund out about his actions, you can bet authorities with better equipment will be keeping a watch on him. However, quite often these cowboys make a misjudgement, and then the real penalties kick in. My advice? Treat these big noters like lepers. Common Tubs, You have to admit that Australia has turned into a nanny state. A classic example is people hurting themselves in sport like riding jets skis. Some bloke hurts himself because they were too stupid to relise that you need to throttle on to steer as they need water going through the pump. Next thing you know, the powers that be try to restrict them, same as quad bikes with their accident rate. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 that can only happen when the weak and gutless allow it. honestly there are some stupid people here And you are showing a naivety that indicates either a serious lack of good education or a tendency to troll..... In the example that Tubs provided a very small percentage of the vic population will be disadvantaged by the greater majority who want them out.....The Gov knowing which side of the bread contains votes did what fundamentally the number one basis for Gov is, it took up the cause of the majority..... We aviators are probably numerically very similar to the grazers in the example.....If you think it wont happen....here in Australia where Tall Poppy Syndrome was invented....then as previously said, you lack education or are trolling........In either case I cant help you so feel free to have the last word! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I wouldn't be one to call the Mountain Cattlemen weak, gutless or stupid. maybe they should fight instead of having their rights constantly trampled on then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 And you are showing a naivety that indicates either a serious lack of good education or a tendency to troll.....In the example that Tubs provided a very small percentage of the vic population will be disadvantaged by the greater majority who want them out.....The Gov knowing which side of the bread contains votes did what fundamentally the number one basis for Gov is, it took up the cause of the majority..... We aviators are probably numerically very similar to the grazers in the example.....If you think it wont happen....here in Australia where Tall Poppy Syndrome was invented....then as previously said, you lack education or are trolling........In either case I cant help you so feel free to have the last word! ah so if im not a sheeple i must be a troll right? who is this great majority that wants them out? was it the left wing media or the government thats talking for this great majority? do these trendy tossers in Melbourne like to eat? because thats where it comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 tbh im not trying to "troll" i only replied because the comments i saw in this thread disgust me, people these days are so gutless, weak and plain mean to their fellow brothers. this guy shouldnt have had any penalty, he flew stupidly and crashed, thats enough lesson learned, but anyone who supports a law for everything and this overbearing nanny/welfare/commy state we have turned into is an absolute fool who deserves the consequences of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Common Tubs,You have to admit that Australia has turned into a nanny state. A classic example is people hurting themselves in sport like riding jets skis. Some bloke hurts himself because they were too stupid to relise that you need to throttle on to steer as they need water going through the pump. Next thing you know, the powers that be try to restrict them, same as quad bikes with their accident rate. what about the Muslims Daz? More like a Muslim nanny state ( the down under caliphate ) leading the sheeples to the halal slaughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 what about the Muslims Daz? More like a Muslim nanny state ( the down under caliphate ) leading the sheeples to the halal slaughter tornado, it must be nice in Toowoomba, why not have a weeks holiday in Lakemba or any part of Sydney and then you can have a real laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 isn't sydeny where the poms used to send their crims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 yes, Sydney is where the English used to send the poor Irish for 7 year of hard labour after knocking off a loaf of bread to feed their starving family, are you saying it would be run better by isis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 sydeny deserves what it gets acro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Common Tubs,You have to admit that Australia has turned into a nanny state. A classic example is people hurting themselves in sport like riding jets skis. Some bloke hurts himself because they were too stupid to relise that you need to throttle on to steer as they need water going through the pump. Next thing you know, the powers that be try to restrict them, same as quad bikes with their accident rate. Sure, and they face the penalties Kaz outlined - have for years. There is no new Nanny State, just desperates trying to convince themselves and anyone who will listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 maybe they should fight instead of having their rights constantly trampled on then If you were aware of the history, you wouldn't dribble rubbish like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 tbh im not trying to "troll" i only replied because the comments i saw in this thread disgust me, people these days are so gutless, weak and plain mean to their fellow brothers. this guy shouldnt have had any penalty, he flew stupidly and crashed, thats enough lesson learned, but anyone who supports a law for everything and this overbearing nanny/welfare/commy state we have turned into is an absolute fool who deserves the consequences of it. You cant quite seem to grasp the logic of it.... had he done what he did in a remote part of Australia where he was the only person for miles (and even then how would he know that to be fact!!) and stood to hurt himself, his aircraft and nobody else....and in the event of an accident all that was required was for the emergency services to shrug and say "sh!t happens......" then I think your argument would have merit.....but that wasn't the case was it.....3rd party's were put at risk of potentially loosing their life....emergency services had to spring into action....and the RAAus organisation had to start protecting itself against the actions of someone acting exactly as you are arguing now....... Did you ever see the youtube video's of his flying....cant seem to find them now..... they were just unbelievable....hence why I thought that there might have been a mental health issue...or a substance abuse issue...... Bottom line is that we the taxpayers have paid for CASA to investigate and prosecute, the courts to hear, the emergency services to act, possible compensation to those that were frightened by the acts of another.... the town/council to clean their waterway of leaking aircraft.........There needs to be consequences.......I wonder how many $ were collected from him to pay for all those things...probably $0 in the $100 I'd guess........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Sure, and they face the penalties Kaz outlined - have for years. There is no new Nanny State, just desperates trying to convince themselves and anyone who will listen. But the thing is, people who as a example, trip over a tree root or something. These days are trying to find somebody else to blame instead of blaming themselves for walking around with blinkers on. Where is it going to end ? It will get to the stage where kids wont be able to ride motorcross bikes or ride horses at the weekend pony club. IMO we are heading in the wrong direction with all the cotton wool stuff. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 There are many examples where the actions of less than 5% of participants in activity, have seriously restricted that activity. Granted!.. Doesn`t mean it should be accepted though and it will never change while it is being accepted. I will not accept being grounded for the actions of anyone else. While it would seem grossly unfair to us for RA aircraft to be totally banned, don't kid yourself that it can't happen if someone does the unthinkable. I havn`t come across anyone discussing " The unthinkable". In your opinion, what would the unthinkable be? I`ve been discussing the attitude of penalizing everyone for the actions of an individual. Frank. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 This thread shows that there are some dangerously irresponsible people among us, probably taking innocent passengers up with them, and telling the passengers they're "safe".... I seriously despair that some of these cowboy comments are being made on this list because they greatly diminish the reputations of all of us on it and, by extension, those of RA fliers everywhere. I think that is terribly sad and foolhardy in the extreme. It must surely be obvious to all that CASA and the RA Board members read what is written here, and that the perceptions formed by this sort of extraordinary rebuttal of societal standards by a vocal few must sound alarms in their minds? What any wandering member of the public must think, I hate to contemplate. Just for completeness, in Victoria, manslaughter attracts a maximum penalty of 20 years plus a Level 3 fine. The driver with whooping cough referred to in a post above may have faced manslaughter but probably the alternative charge of culpable driving causing death which carries the same penalty. A charge of conduct endangering life gets 10 years and you don't even have to hurt the victim to be convicted. Generally, penalties in other States are more severe! Kaz 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 But the thing is, people who as a example, trip over a tree root or something. These days are trying to find somebody else to blame instead of blaming themselves for walking around with blinkers on. Where is it going to end ? It will get to the stage where kids wont be able to ride motorcross bikes or ride horses at the weekend pony club. IMO we are heading in the wrong direction with all the cotton wool stuff. You haven't been reading the dozens of case explanations. What has changed in the last ten years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 i think i can safely say that half the people posting in this thread are users of "twitter" i fear for this country, the arrogance and stupidity is amazing. im not going to post in this thread again so feel free to talk all the shit you want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Granted!.. Doesn`t mean it should be accepted though and it will never change while it is being accepted. I will not accept being grounded for the actions of anyone else. Well if it comes you can chain yourself to your aircraft and look ridiculous; you don't get to question laws which have been in existence for decades. I havn`t come across anyone discussing " The unthinkable". In your opinion, what would the unthinkable be? I`ve been discussing the attitude of penalizing everyone for the actions of an individual. The "unthinkable" I was suggesting was where your reckless conduct killed or injured someone. That just lights the fuse under Governments to "do something" One example was the massacre in Tasmania which took perfectly safe guns off hundreds of thousands of us. Good luck prancing up and saying you don't accept something like that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDQDI Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 That's what we all should have done in hindsight turbs, dumbest thing that was ever done. But never mind all those crims that handed in their guns are all the better for it. Stupid stupid stupid. But I won't get started on guns. But back to the point of this fast getting wild discussion, I do think it would be nice if there was a little more discretion given to the powers that be (I know that gets abused too) to differentiate between an accident and deliberate negligence. It is never good when someone is killed or seriously injured but I feel that the system could be a little more lenient depending upon the 'intent'. We can't change things after they have happened but if someone has accidently killed/injured someone don't you think they will be punishing themselves enough? For example my better half pulled out of our driveway without looking as good as she should have and got cleaned up by an elderly couple who until then had been happily driving along minding their own business. The end result was a couple of banged up cars, no one was injured just shaken up and in shock (not only the elderly couple but also our two little kiddies and even me who had just crawled into bed after a night on the tractor and heard it all.). Insurance covered everything so no cost to any except the inconvenience for the other couple and of course the excess for us. But the better half still got booked for neg driving. Ok I know she definately was guilty of that, obviously. But can't we as a society accept if it is an accident and no real damage is done and it's obvious that the person is sorry that any extra penalty doesn't really benefit anyone? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 That's what we all should have done in hindsight turbs, dumbest thing that was ever done. But never mind all those crims that handed in their guns are all the better for it. Stupid stupid stupid. But I won't get started on guns.But back to the point of this fast getting wild discussion, I do think it would be nice if there was a little more discretion given to the powers that be (I know that gets abused too) to differentiate between an accident and deliberate negligence. It is never good when someone is killed or seriously injured but I feel that the system could be a little more lenient depending upon the 'intent'. We can't change things after they have happened but if someone has accidently killed/injured someone don't you think they will be punishing themselves enough? For example my better half pulled out of our driveway without looking as good as she should have and got cleaned up by an elderly couple who until then had been happily driving along minding their own business. The end result was a couple of banged up cars, no one was injured just shaken up and in shock (not only the elderly couple but also our two little kiddies and even me who had just crawled into bed after a night on the tractor and heard it all.). Insurance covered everything so no cost to any except the inconvenience for the other couple and of course the excess for us. But the better half still got booked for neg driving. Ok I know she definately was guilty of that, obviously. But can't we as a society accept if it is an accident and no real damage is done and it's obvious that the person is sorry that any extra penalty doesn't really benefit anyone? The law already does differentiate between an accident and deliberate negligence. This is not a piece of legal advice, but you are negligent in an accident, even though you had no intention of hurting anyone, but ought to have forseen the event. e.g. you notice a small crack on a 3PL joint, but it has never failed before. Deliberate Negligence is Culpable Negligence which usually gets you a prison sentence. The example that Kaz pointed out was a good example of where you might finish up with a criminal conviction with some time inside, and that was just a beat up which perhaps other people have done without realising the consequences. Someone has to pay, if the breadwinner is killed, to support the wife and children to the extent that the husband did. I understand your thoughts on feeling sorry after an accident, but so do thousands after being caught in an RBT, even though they didn't harm anyone to that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acro Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Turboplanner you are very wrong, most laws both state and federal passed outside of the crimes act are strict liability offences where means rea is not an element that must be established to prosecute, im done, too many stupids here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDQDI Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The difference between drink driving and a non drink driving accident is obvious, well at least to me, and I would think it would be reasonable to look at a drink driving related accident as being 'more negligent'. Yes I know the system does have different grades per se but I think it could be improved. As for someone paying if the breadwinner is killed, that also is a very obvious point but does sending someone else to jail for that (supposing it was an 'innocent' accident) help pay any bills at all? Of course it doesn't, it just adds to our tax payer bills without any benefit whatsoever. Keep in mind I am not talking about deliberate negligence and I know it may be hard for it to be worded in a foolproof legal sense but what happened to common sense in our legal system. Insurance will or should pay out a sum in these cases which I think we all agree will never be the same as a resurrection of the dead party but it is the only thing that will do even a small amount of good after such an incident. While I think acro has been a bit too enthusiastic in his feelings I think the legal system as it is today is just as far the other way. As a post script I am so grateful I grew up on a farm and had the extra freedom that comes with that, I always felt sorry for young blokes who never had the place or opportunity to throw a few doughnuts and actually enjoy a few skids without upsetting neighbours or police. Did it make me a better driver? I used to like to think so. ABS and traction control has come a long way to fix that gap though now. Maybe local councils should look at having something setup like that for youngsters to go through to let out their steam. I am also glad that it was hammered into me that showing off never ends well, we were taught to go and drive 'silly' by ourselves but if friends were over dad would be in the back seat to supervise. Anyway must be bed time I'm starting to reminisce of the good old days and I don't like feeling old. Truthfully though I'm not yet 30 (quite often obvious by my level of maturity:wink:) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 ...I'm done, too many stupids here That was my point earlier. Kaz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now