What Do You Think?
The blog is late this week but I have a good excuse. My wife left me. Oh, she’s coming back tomorrow, after a week at a retreat for church choir members (seems harmless enough), but it has been a rough week. Wives should leave more often, just so husbands will appreciate them more. I don’t know who misses her more—me or the dogs and cat.
AOPA interviewed a pilot who is in jail after he crashed his Stearman into a river, killing his passenger (go to http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pilot/2008/accident0807.html). He was jailed for only a 30-day sentence, but it raises many questions.
One of my first reactions to this story was that Ted Kennedy served no time at all for crashing his auto into a river, killing a passenger. His case seems to me to have involved far more egregious behavior than did the pilot’s accident.
The pilot was indeed guilty of bad behavior (all of this is only my opinion), but criminal behavior? He did knowingly break regs and the accident resulted because of that violation. Was this criminal? As Bill Clinton might have said, depends on the definition of criminal.
In cars, DUI is criminal by law and by custom and can bring jail time. Speeding and failure to stop at a stop sign seldom do. On the other hand, when they cause fatal accidents, both can bring liability lawsuits in the millions of dollars. So, can such suits be brought against pilots? (The pilot in question faces such a lawsuit right now.) We’re used to that and buy liability insurance to protect ourselves. But jail? You just can’t buy a “Get-Out-of-Jail-Free” card except in the game of Monopoly.
My non-flying friends seem to be in favor of the pilot going to jail. My flying friends vary all over the board between “hang him” and “no pilot should go to jail for an accident.” What do you think? AOPA would like to know (see their link above) and so would I.
We’d love to post your comments. Please click the tab at the top.
Sean–
Well, bless your heart for writing, and for addressing the real issue. Good summary of the situation, too.
I assume you’re the Saratoga owner on AVSIG?
Thanks,
Ralph Hood
Hi Ralph. I know the opinions are quite polarized on this issue. I’m a private pilot and airplane owner, and I frequently fly passengers (never for compensation) who are not family members. I understand and accept that I’m risking financial doom in the event of an accident or mistake on my part.
I’d hate to think that I’m risking incarceration on top of all of that. However, what this pilot did was not an “Accident” or “Mistake” - it was stupidity. He was flying too low, over unknown territory. It was irresponsible and illegal.
If an auto driver were to go the wrong way up an exit ramp, or drive 90mph in a 50mph zone, or drive down a sidewalk - they’d be subject to criminal penalties, especially if someone is hurt or killed as a consequence. I see no reason we as pilots should be exempt from criminal action for the functional equivalent (flying under a bridge, buzzing a house, or flying too low along a river).
Sammy, you are right, you really do not know much about it. Neither do I really, but I do remember the simple fact that John Kenedy was not trained to read the instruments, and he flew in New England haze. Have you ever flown in that haze? You need the instruments!
I do not know much about the JFK Jr. case as some of you; but if I recall that had more to do with weather conditions and judgement. I followed it more as a pilot. Most of us pilots follow a case like that just as a standard lesson- I know I did. Do we know if the case here with this pilot in the article had anything more faulty than the regulations which were broken? Weather? Instruments? The case of JFK Jr. was more an experience issue. Also, no insult on the Kennedys, but they always thought they could walk on water when it came to airplanes. No insult on the Kennedys like I said, but on the airplane issue they took chances. Everyone spoke about a curse years ago, but when you temp fate you get accidents sometimes. Wasn’t the JFK Jr. issue the faulty weather report he got on the internet? Even though when Kennedy went to the airport it was hazy and he still took off. At the same time Kennedy took off from that airport the other pilots near him were grounding themselves. Take care all. Great article! Thanks.
Accident? Yes. Criminal? No (unless there was intent or substance abuse). Negligence? Definitely (an experienced flyer should always know what to do to preserve the life of passengers notwithstanding storms and other acts of G-d causing interference). Compensation should be made to the family for their horrific loss. I think rather than comparing (an inebriated) Ted to this situation the better comparison would be the disorientation of John F. Kennedy, Jr.
Derrick–
At last–a comment on the original question. I gotta admit that I agree with you. But BTW, I am NOT a “Dr”
I just barely escaped from college with a BS degree.
Thanks so much for writing,
Ralph Hood
I guess what the story teaches us is think before we have passengers in our planes; and if we do, DO NOT break those regs. Regulations are there to protect us all-passengers and pilot. Seems unfair to me in many ways what happened to him, but breaking those regs. is his downfall.
Thank you for mentioning “Promise Keepers” the last poster. That is why I decided to speak up here, although the article was superb. Thank you Dr. Hood. Great article! Promise Keepers is part of the reason my marriage stayed together. So I had to speak up this one time.
Great comment Jim. And true! Inspiration can change us for the better if we use it productively. Those meetings are great. Unity meetings!
The real threat here that everyone missed is the “week at the retreat” sentence. A few years ago, a wife sent a note to the Promise Keepers organization. “My husband went to your meeting last week never came home. A fellow who LOOKS a lot like him did and I like him much better. If you ever find my husband you can keep him!”
I’m just sayin….. JH
Betty–
Thanks so much for your comment. (Readers: Betty is a fireball general aviation supporter in Alabama.)
Thanks also to Robert Henry,Chez, et al. I ‘preciate all y’all.
Ralph Hood
Ralph,
You continue to make us smile! May your wit and perspective never cease. Your Fan, Betty
Robert, I agreed with everything you wrote until you said Kennedy was decent. I usually do not comment but I had to on that.
This has been entertaining. I have seen people who are fans of the Kennedys and they are defensive over anything which is written about the family. Most of these fans do not realize that the Kennedys probably would not defend them back. I did not think the first comment insulted the writer personally though, I thought the guy was just mentioning how it was out of line in the article to mention Kennedy at this time, which is sort of naive. We cannot have a moratorium on talking about Ted Kennedy because he is suffering. We all feel for Senator Kennedy, but he is a public figure after all. Ted Kennedy has not always been on the level. He seems like a decent man, but he has always had problems with staying out of trouble-even in 1991 with his Nephew.
Brad & Clyde–
Thanks so much to both of you for the encouraging words. I believe much of the criticim was of the nastiness of the debate after I reacted to Mr. Giolli. Thanks again to everyone who commented.
Ralph Hood
Mr. Hood, When I saw the comment about Ted Kennedy I immediately (and probably correctly) assumed that you were using it simply because it is an event which helps provide a counter-point to the pilot’s situation by comparing how perceptions of laws impact aircraft vs auto accidents in different ways. I also assumed you used it because Senator Kennedy’s accident is well-enough known to most people that it wouldn’t require much in the way of additional explanation thus taking the focus away from the aircraft accident (which makes sense, it is an aviation publication after all). Senator Kennedy’s unfortunate medical situation certainly isn’t any factor in what happened and how it contrasts with the subject of your article. It is unfortunate that others have responded they way they did but that’s just part of their freedom of speech. I personally enjoy your articles and the wit and witticism that they contain. Keep up the great work.
Mr. Hood, Thank you for an excellent and spirited blog. One of the great things about America; everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Thank Goodness! I’m sure ALL of your readers share this feeling.
Clyde
Okay, Everybody—
This has gone a lot further than I wanted or expected. I over reacted to Mr. Giolli’s original posting–which I did and do believe insulted me personally–and I am the one who got off track. I apologize to readers, and will try not to get off subject in the future.
Ralph Hood
I came here wanting to read an article and I find this babble. Clyde, your manner is offensive.
I think Mr Giolli comes from an era of defending the liberal way of life apparently-which is not the way to go for a smooth government. Ted Kennedy cannot be associated with a smooth government,but actually big spending. Although I think for people on here to insult someone responding to a post where he defends
someone he admires is a little hypocritical. That is what we are doing right now and that is what we all do. If you do not want people to post then why have this posting area up. But Ted Kennedy is not a man to admire in some circles. But you have to give Senator Kennedy credit in other areas. Mr. McDonald you cannot consider yourself a moderate liberal and then call Ted Kennedy a pathetic fool. Even moderate libs. think highly of good ole Teddy. I did not really see where Mr. Giolli ranted about politics. I just saw a comment about class and insulting a man with brain cancer.
Mr. Hood,I very much admire your restraint in dealing with with such an uninformed fool as Mr. Giolli. He obviously has too much time on his hands and has picked a pathetic hero to worship.He would do well to check Mr. Kennedy’s FULL record before bestowing such adulation. BTW,I consider myself a moderate liberal and I find Mr.Giolli’s rant a bit embarrassing for us all. Clyde
Tom–
Funny.
Please understand, however, that the pilot in this case was NOT, repeat NOT, accused of drunk flying. Alcohol was not mentioned as a factor at all.
Thanks for writing,
Ralph Hood
http://udadd.com/images/bush.jpg
As webmaster of Underage Drinkers Against Drunk Driving, I must say I made political hay also. Drunk driving, drunk boating or drunk piloting are dangerous but never an excuse to impose alcohol regulations on the innocent.
Readers–
I do not know Mark Giolli, but a quick Google of his name indicates that he spends a LOT of time defending and adoring the entire Kennedy clan. He obviously has his computer set to kick up any mention of the name Kennedy. If you wish to read more of his opinions just Google his name. I will not print any more of his thoughts here. BTW, in all of his info, I found no mention of how he makes a living. Interesting.
Ralph Hood
Ralph Hood
Mr Hood, I give you alot of credit for responding to my comment. Sounds like you do not think much about Senator Kennedy, which is your right. I do admire him and think he is a fine man and legislator. Being a relatively young man of 43 years old, I see him as a role model as to what makes the country great. Many people (on the right usually)want to distract from Senator Kennedy’s importance as a legislator by mentioning the unfortunate incident which occured in 1969. The story you were talking about was not really in the realm of politics, yet there are similarities obviously. The mentioning of Chappaquiddick by many makes Ted Kennedy’s life seeem like the 1969 incident is the only significant event in his life on this earth, as I am sure the life of this fellow Strub is not all about the unfortunate air incident at this branch of the Wisconsin River. The denigration I mentioned was in reference to Chappaquiddick, which has been a favorite topic of the right wing for many years now and which you mentioned. Had this pilot been a politician, I am sure that his opponents or detractors would have used this case of his plane in the river as a reason for his political downfall, regardless of it being his fault or not. Yet the case would have nothing to do with his role as a politician or as a man, as Ted Kennedy’s situation off Martha’s Vineyard had nothing to do with his role as Senator or as a person. As for the story you talk about. I cannot comment on the pilot whose passenger died since I know nothing about it really except what I read, and commenting on it would be disrespectful to either person. What I was commenting on was more the attitude which many take of Senator Kennedy (usually on the right) and how his life is encapsulated by one incident, instead of the many successes and accomplishments he has incurred. Thank you for commenting back. Mark Giolli
Mr. Giolli–
I said nothing that denigrated Senator Kennedy. I was simply comparing two very similar accidents with two very different outcomes. The very idea that I might envy Ted Kennedy is repugnant. Lack of class, huh? What kind of class does it take to get kicked out of college for cheating, as did Ted Kennedy? “People like you”–to steal your phrase– should learn that there are many of us who do not want to be anything like Ted Kennedy.
I will quit, now, before I get carried away and bring up all of the other things that have caused me to hold him in such contempt.
Other than that, thanks for writing.
Ralph Hood
Mr Hood, The comment about Ted Kennedy should not be mentioned. It is a lack of class shown by you and others, which comes up when you (and these others) mention Ted Kennedy and aspects of his life, when he is suffering from cancer. Before his cancer came up, people like you would mention that issue from 1969 as a way to denigrate Senator Kennedy, as though that would somehow lesson his effect in the Senate or as a man. Almost come across as envy. Envy of Senator Kennedy and the talents he does possess in life as a Senator and a leader. Poor sportsmanship Mr. Hood. Mark Giolli