CNN: FAA Revokes License of CFI in White House Incident

[Flash]

I agree, this guy got the punishment he deserved. It's a private ticket, so he's apparently not making a living by flying, and probably will not in the future.

But now he can make money on the book deal and the Lifetime made for tv movie of his true story of what happened on May 11th!

In other news, FOX just reported that the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity wants to have the shoot down authority for future airspace incursions, now that's scary!

 

[FN FAL]

the morons at TSA will never get this past the lawyer dominated Congress. They can "make it" whatever they want, however to have a successful prosecution, you need 1) Criminal Act and 2) Criminal Intent

to prove Criminal Intent (bear with me, not "intent", but CRIMINAL intent), thats very tough

don't loose alot of sleep on this one

That's not necessarily true, there have been a lot of laws passed in the last few years that don't require criminal intent or Mens Rea...a "guilty mind".

Take criminal negligence for instance...

 

[FN FAL]

If you wave a gun at a cop, you're going to get shot. Dead. I don't like it, but I know it. The same thing applies here. Don't be stupid; don't get hurt. He was stupid. He's lucky he didn't get hurt.

Wave a cell phone at a cop and you can get shot...especially in MKE county.

The comment on the NASA form? It wouldn't protect him from being charged with a state or federal crime of criminal negligence. State courts don't recognize a NASA form as a "get out of jail free card".

In fact, I remember reading somewhere, AOPA or something like that, that some states have made it a "crime" to violate FARS. There's your "catch all"...you wave a NASA form in the feds face and walk, the state says "not so fast, we still got this little matter of the state law!"

 

[gfvalvo]

If you wave a gun at a cop, you're going to get shot. Dead. I don't like it, but I know it.

Are you saying you would prefer that police officers didn't have the ability to defend themselves against gun-wielding dirt bags?

 

[sky37d]

This guy got off way to easy, if he only loses his pilot's license. All I have heard recently from non-pilot friends, is snide comments about pilots.


There are penalties associated with his contempt of the rules, far beyond the temporary loss of his ticket. He deserves to go to jail.

Oh, and isn't there a law that if you break the law, you can not profit from the experience?

 

[airspeed]

Go to jail??? Give me a break.. Yeah the guy fked up. As usual you and everyone else is overeacting. Yeah, I am going to speak up. I think revocation was not neccesary. Suspension, sure. Remedial training, hell maybe even a 709 ride. I am sure they didnt do this intentionally, if they did then I would agree with revocation. People have made much worse mistakes then this where lives have been lost. But we focus on this because its the ADIZ. Like someone said on here before, you dont see and restictions on Ryder trucks near the capital. They can do a hell of a lot more damage, just look at the attack at WTC before 9-11. I am sure these pilots have been thru a hell of alot of agony, greif, and humiliation. I think as fellow pilots we should be more understanding. How many here on this board live in a glass house???

 

[TonyC]

I think revocation was not neccesary. Suspension, sure. Remedial training, hell maybe even a 709 ride. I am sure they didnt do this intentionally, if they did then I would agree with revocation. People have made much worse mistakes then this where lives have been lost. But we focus on this because its the ADIZ.

As soon as we have all the facts (never) we will be qualified to determine if the punishment fit the crime. It appears that there may have been more ot the story than a simple inadvertent incursion. Complete lack of preparation, complete incompetence in navigation, and "instructing" a student pilot may have been considered as part of the "big picture." Apparently the combination of infractions was considered significant enough to warrant revocation. Bigger picture, the guy's lucky to be breathing.

Like someone said on here before, you dont see and restictions on Ryder trucks near the capital. They can do a hell of a lot more damage, just look at the attack at WTC before 9-11.

I'm getting a bit tired of hearing this lame argument. Certainly a Ryder truck parked beside the White House could do considerable damage. But have you tried to park ANYTHING next to the White House lately? Even the notorious Honda? Have you tried to walk up to the front door of the White House lately? Precautions to prevent disasters from occurring in the vicinity of the White House have been in effect many years, yea decades, prior to the terrorist attack of 2001. It wouldn't take a genius to figure out how to inflict considerably more damage to a structure with a 172 than with a Honda, a Ryder truck, or a semi. (Sorry, if you can't figure it out yourself, I ain't helpin'!)

By the way... since you make a point of the damage done by a Ryder truck...

In the 1993 attack on the WTC, the explosion in the Ryder truck resulted in 6 deaths and damage to the parking garage.

In the 2001 attack on the WTC, the explosions of the airplanes resulted in the loss of about 3,000 lives and the destruction of both towers.

Now, what was that about the Ryder doing more damage?




.

 

[PeteCO]

As soon as we have all the facts (never) we will be qualified to determine if the punishment fit the crime. It appears that there may have been more ot the story than a simple inadvertent incursion. Complete lack of preparation, complete incompetence in navigation, and "instructing" a student pilot may have been considered as part of the "big picture." Apparently the combination of infractions was considered significant enough to warrant revocation. Bigger picture, the guy's lucky to be breathing.




I'm getting a bit tired of hearing this lame argument. Certainly a Ryder truck parked beside the White House could do considerable damage. But have you tried to park ANYTHING next to the White House lately? Even the notorious Honda? Have you tried to walk up to the front door of the White House lately? Precautions to prevent disasters from occurring in the vicinity of the White House have been in effect many years, yea decades, prior to the terrorist attack of 2001. It wouldn't take a genius to figure out how to inflict considerably more damage to a structure with a 172 than with a Honda, a Ryder truck, or a semi. (Sorry, if you can't figure it out yourself, I ain't helpin'!)

By the way... since you make a point of the damage done by a Ryder truck...

In the 1993 attack on the WTC, the explosion in the Ryder truck resulted in 6 deaths and damage to the parking garage.

In the 2001 attack on the WTC, the explosions of the airplanes resulted in the loss of about 3,000 lives and the destruction of both towers.

Now, what was that about the Ryder doing more damage?




.

Wow, talk about a misleading argument. You conveniently omitted the Oklahoma City bombing, and the fact that the WTC was done with AIRLINERS weighing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS.

I've never seen a more clear cut apples-and-oranges argument in my life.

 

[FN FAL]

As soon as we have all the facts (never) we will be qualified to determine if the punishment fit the crime...

...I'm getting a bit tired of hearing this lame argument. Certainly a Ryder truck parked beside the White House could do considerable damage. But have you tried to park ANYTHING next to the White House lately? Even the notorious Honda?

Actually, you try the guy under state code or statutes for reckless endangerment. It's a done deal...no need to bring in terrorism or ryder trucks. People running amok in the streets during an evacuation could be placed in danger...so reckless behavior that led up to this evacuation could be a chargable crime.

To take it a step further, if someone so much as got injured or if there was property damage during the evacuation caused by the errant pilots, you could probably charge them with some sort of criminal negligence.

 

[sky37d]

Okay, maybe he doesn't got jail.

Maybe he can show up at the Frederick Airport, during AOPA open house, in June, and explain how he could be so stupid. So frickin dumb. Maybe someone will actually believe him and his suspension gets lifted.

However, here's the thing. He lived in reasonable proximity to DC, he knew about camp david, and yet, he was 3 MILES FROM THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT AND DIDN'T KNOW HE DID SOMETHING WRONG????

Obviously he needs a vision check.

 

[TonyC]

Wow, talk about a misleading argument. You conveniently omitted the Oklahoma City bombing, and the fact that the WTC was done with AIRLINERS weighing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS.

I've never seen a more clear cut apples-and-oranges argument in my life.

I haven't conveniently ommited anything. I compared two direct attacks on the WTC.

If you think you can park a Ryder truck on the curb beside the White House, as was done in Oklahoma City, then you can compare apples to apples. As it is, you're stuck with a lemon.

I've heard it dozens of times, you can pack more explosives in a Honda Civic than you can a 172. The 172 is not a threat because it is so small. BOLOGNA! You'll never get the Civic within a stone's throw of the White House. Absent the intervention of a missile, you CAN plant a 172 into the wall of the White House - - it HAS been done.

 

[NEDude]

By the way... since you make a point of the damage done by a Ryder truck...

In the 1993 attack on the WTC, the explosion in the Ryder truck resulted in 6 deaths and damage to the parking garage.

In the 2001 attack on the WTC, the explosions of the airplanes resulted in the loss of about 3,000 lives and the destruction of both towers.

Now, what was that about the Ryder doing more damage?

Ask the folks in Oklahoma City about the type of damage a Ryder truck can do. You seemed to have missed that one.

 

[airspeed]

Your right, he probably does need glasses. As far as comparing a Cessna to a Ryder truck well I think anyone can see that a cessna in a restricted area will attract alot more attention then a truck anyday. It really doesnt matter, my point is no matter how much of an example that they make of this guy who busted the adiz and no matter how many tfrs they pass does anyone really think that a terrorist is going to care about this???

 

[TonyC]

Ask the folks in Oklahoma City about the type of damage a Ryder truck can do. You seemed to have missed that one.

You and I posted at the same time, so you didn't get the opportunity to see my response to this issue prior to posting. Let me repeat myself to make this clear.

I am keenly aware of the damage inflicted upon the Alfred Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, its occupants, and our nation. Were it possible to park a similar truck beside the White House, I would consider it a real threat. Given that it is not possible to park a Ryder truck beside the White House, nay, even a Honda Civic beside the White House, I will maintain that a 172 poses a more significant threat than either of those vehicles.

 

[gfvalvo]

You and I posted at the same time, so you didn't get the opportunity to see my response to this issue prior to posting. Let me repeat myself to make this clear.

I am keenly aware of the damage inflicted upon the Alfred Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, its occupants, and our nation. Were it possible to park a similar truck beside the White House, I would consider it a real threat. Given that it is not possible to park a Ryder truck beside the White House, nay, even a Honda Civic beside the White House, I will maintain that a 172 poses a more significant threat than either of those vehicles.

No, but you can park a large truck in front of (or underneath) buildings that are occupied by thousands of people in any major city in this country. So what if it’s not the White House and you don’t get the President? You can kill hundreds like in Oklahoma City. You’d never be able to do that with a 172.