135 operations

[AngelKing]

Rodger that...I wasn't digging on you. Just trying to make the correlatoin between possessing "controlled substances" and "illegal drugs". Once again, possession is regulated.

Guess what? When the airliine pilots were tried in FLA, what was the deal there? "operation"!

Hmmmmm...prohibited operations?

Its all good, just clearing up any confusion since you used my post. Or am I creating more confusion? I will shut up now.

AK

 

[A Squared]

If my wife promises to take me to dinner if I fly her in our plane to the mall of America on Saturday, is that an Illegal charter? If not, what made that a "legal Charter"?

Well, there's a number of issues here. First, I don't think you own an airplane at this moment in time, so you're probably going to have to steal one, so there's theft, or larceny, or whatever the kids are calling it these days. Now, I'm fairly sure that you're not going to be doing this for just "dinner", so now we've got a prostitution angle. Also, If I recall correctly, you're in Wisconsin and Mall of America is in Minnesota, so now your transporting women across state lines for immoral purposes, so the feds can get involved. Then you called your buddy in Minneapolis to give you a ride from the airport to the Mall, so that's conspiricy ... probably has RICO implications..... How am I doing so far :laugh:

 

[FN FAL]

I will take a stab at this, you said "our plane" how can it be a charter if you are flying your own plane(yours and wifes), and carrying yourselves? Now if she promised you would get a threesome that night by flying her, that would be considered "good will" :beer: j/k

AK

As long as it's not with that guy that wants to go to Mall of America....eeeeeewwwww! :nuts:

 

[AngelKing]

As long as it's not with that guy that wants to go to Mall of America....eeeeeewwwww! :nuts:

You thought I was talking about another guy? :angryfire

 

[FN FAL]

Well, there's a number of issues here. First, I don't think you own an airplane at this moment in time, so you're probably going to have to steal one, so there's theft, or larceny, or whatever the kids are calling it these days. Now, I'm fairly sure that you're not going to be doing this for just "dinner", so now we've got a prostitution angle. Also, If I recall correctly, you're in Wisconsin and Mall of America is in Minnesota, so now your transporting women across state lines for immoral purposes, so the feds can get involved. Then you called your buddy in Minneapolis to give you a ride from the airport to the Mall, so that's conspiricy ... probably has RICO implications..... How am I doing so far :laugh:

Interstate Commerce in women? Good call. :beer:

RICO...close, but no cigar, not unless there was a pattern of illegal rides to the mall. Maybe the next time he gives that ride, there will be a cigar. :nuts:

Possession of stolen property? Good call. The stolen airplane is not an "illegal" airplane...however, the possession of this stolen airplane would be the issue. Haught Dawg...watch out for those monkeys, they'll bite ya! (apocalypse now reference)

 

[100LL... Again!]

That hardly comes as a surprise...though it's nothing of which to be proud.

The semantics to which you refer were incorrect...the poster to whom you refer is wrong. However, he's not interested in contributing to the the thread, only to his own game. Illegal weapons, illegal charters, illegal parts...the mind game of a tyrant? Such stupidity.

If something is not permitted by law, it is illegal, and as posters above have so stated, can and will be named as such. That's a fact. Spin it semantically any way you desire, and that doesn't change. A charter contrary to the regulation is contrary to the regulation and therefore illegal, period.

Tyrant for stating the facts? I don't think so. Neither do you, and you know it. That would make you a liar.

That would mean your credibility is gone...which is all one can expect from someone who would see fn fal as a hero. Like I said, no surprise there.

Angel King...you did miss the point completely, as I thought.

"I just spent $20 to learn that I'm 'Rounded at the free end!!'"

SOMEONE missed the reference to 'last refuge'. I bet FN got it.

Anyway, bug, for someone who otherwise adds a lot to the board, you have such fragility that I can hardly believe it.

If you insist on using semantics to parry with others, expect them to subject you to similar scrutiny. Also expect them not to automatically buy into your crafty justifications.

This is all "mute", of course, since you're never wrong...