Pilots detained in Brazil

[FN FAL]

Yep, that would sure fix the problem.

"Hey Joe, do you want to die in a fire in the next 5 minutes?"

"Sounds good....how would you like to spend the next 6 weeks in the hospital, be paralyzed for the rest of your life and have my death and those of every person in back weighing on your conscience until your dying day?"

"Sign me up! Set takeoff thrust........WAIT! Wait just a dang minute Joe!"

"What?"

"Some genius at FlightInfo.com clued me in that we might face criminal charges if we screw up! I can't have manslaughter charges filed against me - how would I ever defend myself while hooked up to a respirator?"

"You're right - I'd hate to have those charges hanging over my greiving wife and kids. Let's re-evaluate everything we've done up to this point."

Thank you random FlightInfo.com legal genius!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's all interesting and everything, but what prosecutor would prosecute a case on a person who's conviction would require the state to pay for medical bills and the inconvenience of having to use correctional assets to escort them to the hospital all the time?

None that I can think of.

Prosecutors want "winner" cases, that bring them "winner" convictions...they don't want to buy someone else's problems. Prosecutors have discretion and they use it on a case by case basis.

As far as the spirit behind your post, there is no exemption from criminal prosectution at the state level just because the crime occured with an aircraft.

Buzz someone's house and get caught, get nailed for "reckless endangerment".

Buzz somoene's house and crash, killing a passenger or a person on the ground, get nailed for "reckless homicide".

Buzz somone's house and then the engine quits because you "forgot" to fuel and someone dies, get nailed for "negligent homicide".

It's not random, its not rumor, it's the law. You just haven't heard much about it because most the time pilots die in the crash. Cite the "airplane" or "pilots" exemption from state law? You can't.

 

[pilot141]

Dude, you need to honor that factory recall notice.

You know, the one that replaces your faulty "humor" and "sarcasm" detector chips.

And I'm not going to get in a legal argument with you when every one of your examples uses the word "buzz".

 

[FN FAL]

And I'm not going to get in a legal argument with you when every one of your examples uses the word "buzz".

Ha, buzz? You got some catching up to do.

 

[handlesaregay]

You know I was reminded of this thread driving home tonight. There was a kid standing on the sidewalk under a streetlight after dark. I was driving by wondering what this kid was up to and as I glanced in my rearview mirror I saw another kid standing on the opposite side of the street completely in the shadows where I had just been. My heart skipped a beat because I was completely unaware of his presence until after I passed him because I was momentarily fixated on the other kid. If he would have been standing in front of my car I would have run right over him. Sure I could have said there were mitigating circumstances, poorly lit street, he was standing in the middle or the road, etc. But you could argue that I have the responsilbity to watch where I'm going at all times and if I hit something be it a kid, a dog, whatever.. it's my fault no matter what my "excuses" are. (Like taxiways under construction, poor runway markings, outdated charts, inattentive controller....)

Bad things happen. Charging people with involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide every time there's an accident where somebody is at "fault" is not going to prevent bad things from happening. If we re-establish debtors prisons for people who can't pay their bills will that make people more financially responsible? No! It just means more people will be in jail. And even if it did reduce the amount of deliquent bill payers, is that really the kind of country you want to live in?? Throwing people in jail for so called "crimes" is a Nazi-esque mentality that some people seem to have no problem whatsoever cozying up to.

 

[FN FAL]

You know I was reminded of this thread driving home tonight. There was a kid standing on the sidewalk under a streetlight after dark. I was driving by wondering what this kid was up to and as I glanced in my rearview mirror I saw another kid standing on the opposite side of the street completely in the shadows where I had just been...

check your state laws, pedestrians cannot dart out in front of traffic and expect to be exempt either:

<B>

346.24 Crossing at uncontrolled intersection or crosswalk.​

(1) </B>​

​

At an intersection or crosswalk where traffic is not
controlled by traffic control signals or by a traffic officer, the operator
of a vehicle shall yield the right−of−way to a pedestrian, or to
a person riding a bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility
device in a manner which is consistent with the safe use of the
crosswalk by pedestrians, who is crossing the highway within a
marked or unmarked crosswalk.
​

(2) ​

​

No pedestrian, bicyclist, or rider of an electric personal
assistive mobility device shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk, run, or ride into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is difficult for the operator of the vehicle to yield.
​

(3)​

​

​

Whenever any vehicle is stopped at an intersection or
crosswalk to permit a pedestrian, bicyclist, or rider of an electric
personal assistive mobility device to cross the roadway, the operator
of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake
and pass the stopped vehicle.​

History:​

​

​

1985 a. 69; 2001 a. 90.

The duties of drivers and pedestrians under ss. 346.23 and 346.24 are discussed and compared. Schoenauer v. Wendinger, 49 Wis. 2d 415, 182 N.W.2d 441 (1971).​

​

 

[pilot141]

Ha, buzz? You got some catching up to do.

While you're at the dealer, have that "logic" chip replaced as well. It seems to be malfunctioning. Also have them check out the "comprehension" chip.

handlesaregay never said anyone "darted out" in front of him. Your argument, while followed up by a cut-and-paste of some legalese, is as worthless as all of your others.

Your mom didn't pay for your DSL upgrade so you could post here - that was supposed to be for homework assignments!

 

[FN FAL]

handlesaregay never said anyone "darted out" in front of him. Your argument, while followed up by a cut-and-paste of some legalese, is as worthless as all of your others.

I'm sorry, he must have been looking for some boi's to have some fun with. I thought he was saying that he drove down the street and looked in his rearview mirror at some people he could have rolled up under his wheel wells by "accident" had they darted out in front of him.

 

[FN FAL]

Your mom didn't pay for your DSL upgrade so you could post here - that was supposed to be for homework assignments!

Ha, that's even funnier...I was digging Republic F-105 Thunderchiefs out of the Chesapeake Bay, long before you were a gleam in your daddy's eye. Nice try though.

 

[pilot141]

Wow. That's even sadder that I thought it could ever be.

I'd rather you be a pimply 15-year old, because if you actually had anything to do with the Thud many years ago then it means that you are spending your retirement days on a stupid FI.com messageboard.

I come here when I'm bored on trip. You apparently have nothing better to do in retirement......

If I retire and ever come on FI.com you ALL have permission to shoot me on sight. Have some mercy and point me toward the local whorehouse first, so I can at least have a good day but you still must END IT ALL.

 

[handlesaregay]

"darted", stood in the middle of the road, whatever. Whether or not there's a specific traffic code that might have gotten me off the hook is beside the point. Whatever the circumstances are the only thing that matters in my book is A) I didn't do it on purpose, B) I wasn't driving 80 mph through a residential area (gross negligence), and C) I wasn't impaired. However some people might feel that's not good enough, that any negligence is a crime. That's what we're debating here.

Edit: Before anyone gets confused here let me re-emphasize we are talking about a hypothetical situation, I did not actually run down anyone with my car.