do i report this to the faa hotline?

When I become too old to fly, I going to call the FAA hotline and report myself every time I think about flying.
 
It’s supposedly a right of all free people to confront their accusers.

Imagine you’re tempted to call the FAA and rat out a neighbor. Now imagine yourself being deposed or worse yet examined in court, explaining what the accused did and how you came to know about it. It’s one thing if you saw him beating a puppy. It’s another if you saw him install an airplane part. “Everyone knows he ignores the rules, and I saw him replace an alternator, and he isn’t an A&P — at least not as far as I know. . .” Are you ready to be that guy, whining, “it’s against the rooowuhls!”? Probably not, but you might rat anonymously.

Anonymous accusations are cowardly, and a detriment to every system in which they’re respected. When the FAA calls, they shouldn’t be able to get away with “we’ve received a complaint. . .” They should have to say, “Joe Blogs called the FSDO and reported. . . .”

If you personally see someone doing something that you think ought not to be done, your options are generally two: 1) talk to him personally or 2) forget about it. In real life, there are other options like talking to a mutual friend, talking to his wife, etc., etc. Of course, there are times when going to the authorities is the only safe and ethical option. There are even times when a witness must be anonymous, but this thread isn’t about reporting organized crime or doomsday cults.


OneCharlieTango,
who isn’t blind to the irony of posting under a pseudonym.
 
Snitch and Rat are terms coined by criminal organizations to intimidate the communities they destroy. In particularly dysfunctional communities, the residents support their own victimization by applying peer pressure against cooperation with LEO.

I'm not the FAR police, but if an accident occurs, the FAA investigates, and I have first-hand information that I believe is directly relevant, I would contact the FAA to provide it. We all depend on a well functioning system that reaches accurate conclusions on accident causes.
 
Ed Haywood said:
and I have first-hand information that I believe is directly relevant
Click to expand...

And here is the rub. The OP does NOT have first-hand information. Nor does the OP claim to have first-hand information. The OP is merely wanting our opinion about whether to report hearsay ("Everybody here KNOWS that the pilot does <xyz>")
 
OneCharlieTango said:
It’s supposedly a right of all free people to confront their accusers.

Imagine you’re tempted to call the FAA and rat out a neighbor. Now imagine yourself being deposed or worse yet examined in court, explaining what the accused did and how you came to know about it. It’s one thing if you saw him beating a puppy. It’s another if you saw him install an airplane part. “Everyone knows he ignores the rules, and I saw him replace an alternator, and he isn’t an A&P — at least not as far as I know. . .” Are you ready to be that guy, whining, “it’s against the rooowuhls!”? Probably not, but you might rat anonymously.

Anonymous accusations are cowardly, and a detriment to every system in which they’re respected. When the FAA calls, they shouldn’t be able to get away with “we’ve received a complaint. . .” They should have to say, “Joe Blogs called the FSDO and reported. . . .”

If you personally see someone doing something that you think ought not to be done, your options are generally two: 1) talk to him personally or 2) forget about it. In real life, there are other options like talking to a mutual friend, talking to his wife, etc., etc. Of course, there are times when going to the authorities is the only safe and ethical option. There are even times when a witness must be anonymous, but this thread isn’t about reporting organized crime or doomsday cults.


OneCharlieTango,
who isn’t blind to the irony of posting under a pseudonym.
Click to expand...
The irony imo is that the faa will take a complaint anonymously just as seriously as any other.
 
A lot of folks here seen to have had very different experiences with FAA investigations than I have. I reported a CFI, with a student on board, who violated several regulations in a deliberate attempt to frighten me and several others for a perceived slight. He also demonstrated, on a frequency recorded by LiveATC, contempt for the FARs he was violating. Several pilots reported this to the FAA. The CFI denied it and the FAA closed the file.
 
Lindberg said:
A lot of folks here seen to have had very different experiences with FAA investigations than I have. I reported a CFI, with a student on board, who violated several regulations in a deliberate attempt to frighten me and several others for a perceived slight. He also demonstrated, on a frequency recorded by LiveATC, contempt for the FARs he was violating. Several pilots reported this to the FAA. The CFI denied it and the FAA closed the file.
Click to expand...
Notice that I didn't actually say they take them seriously.
 
Lindberg said:
A lot of folks here seen to have had very different experiences with FAA investigations than I have. I reported a CFI, with a student on board, who violated several regulations in a deliberate attempt to frighten me and several others for a perceived slight. He also demonstrated, on a frequency recorded by LiveATC, contempt for the FARs he was violating. Several pilots reported this to the FAA. The CFI denied it and the FAA closed the file.
Click to expand...
I hope the call from the FAA at least will give the CFI pause about doing something like that in the future.
 
Doc Holliday said:
The FAA oversees public safety, so by law they are required to investigate all complaints.
Click to expand...
By law, or by FAA rule? What law mandates that every “public safety” bureaucracy has to investigate every complaint leveled anonymously against any citizen?
 
OneCharlieTango said:
By law, or by FAA rule? What law mandates that every “public safety” bureaucracy has to investigate every complaint leveled anonymously against any citizen?
Click to expand...

Start here: 49 USC, Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs.

I never stated "every public safety" bureacracy has to investigate, you inserted that. 49 USC are the laws that the 14 CFR's are derived from, and within those laws it discusses complaints and investigations with regards to safety.

Furthermore, how does an agency determine if a complaint made anonymously is legit or not? If a complaint is recieved, and someone looks at it and says "Nope, not even going to look into this" and throws it in the trash, then a week later it turns out the complaint was legitimate and a bad outcome happened, now what? You can beat that cries of "dereliction of duty!" will come out.



 
Doc Holliday said:
The FAA oversees public safety, so by law they are required to investigate all complaints.
Click to expand...
The “so” here indicates that the FAA is required to investigate all complaints because they oversee public safety. It follows that every agency tasked with public safety is required to investigate all complaints. I didn’t insert that.

I’m not going to dig through 49 USC, etc. What does it say?

And my point is that almost every anonymous complaint should be ignored because every anonymous complaint violates the rights of the accused.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
The “so” here indicates that the FAA is required to investigate all complaints because they oversee public safety. It follows that every agency tasked with public safety is required to investigate all complaints. I didn’t insert that.
Click to expand...

The topic at hand is the FAA.
OneCharlieTango said:
I’m not going to dig through 49 USC, etc. What does it say?
Click to expand...

That complaints will be investigated.

OneCharlieTango said:
And my point is that almost every anonymous complaint should be ignored because every anonymous complaint violates the rights of the accused.
Click to expand...

Case in point: The FAA recieves an anonymous complaint of pilot safety. The FAA looks at the complaint, throws in the trash because that inspector sees no merit in the complaint.

The next day your family boards an airplane with this pilot, and during the flight the pilot does the same thing that the anonymous complaint detailed, crashes and kills your family in the process.

I'm sure you will be relieved to know that the pilot that just killed your family didn't "have his rights violated". :rolleyes:


OneCharlieTango said:
And my point is that almost every anonymous complaint should be ignored because every anonymous complaint violates the rights of the accused.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't understand the differences between civil law and administrative law.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Case in point: The FAA recieves an anonymous complaint of pilot safety. The FAA looks at the complaint, throws in the trash because that inspector sees no merit in the complaint.

The next day your family boards an airplane with this pilot, and during the flight the pilot does the same thing that the anonymous complaint detailed, crashes and kills your family in the process.

I'm sure you will be relieved to know that the pilot that just killed your family didn't "have his rights violated". :rolleyes:.
Click to expand...

No, I’ll be angry that the one who complained was too cowardly to stake his name on it, even though the thing was apparently dangerous enough to cause a crash.

Lindberg said:
Which rights are those?
Click to expand...
As I said above, the right to confront one’s accusers. It dates back to the Romans, at least.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
As I said above, the right to confront one’s accusers. It dates back to the Romans, at least.
Click to expand...

Does that right extend to identifying every single person interviewed or questioned?
 
OneCharlieTango said:
No, I’ll be angry that the one who complained was too cowardly to stake his name on it, even though the thing was apparently dangerous enough to cause a crash.


As I said above, the right to confront one’s accusers. It dates back to the Romans, at least.
Click to expand...
An anonymous complaint is a “tip” that there is wrong doing. The FAA investigates that tip, and if they find it factual through evidence, they are the “accusers”.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
As I said above, the right to confront one’s accusers. It dates back to the Romans, at least.
Click to expand...
The sixth amendment protects your right to confront the witnesses against you in a criminal prosecution. An investigation is not a prosecution, and an anonymous tipper will not be a witness against you, he's just what gets the investigation started.
 
Well, that’s an interesting point. If the only evidence is eyewitness testimony, though, the witness shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind anonymity.

I do see the point about tips, which are essentially witnesses pointing to external evidence.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
Well, that’s an interesting point. If the only evidence is eyewitness testimony, though, the witness shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind anonymity.

I do see the point about tips, which are essentially witnesses pointing to external evidence.
Click to expand...

Under administrative law hearsay evidence is admissible.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
And my point is that almost every anonymous complaint should be ignored because every anonymous complaint violates the rights of the accused.
Click to expand...

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to be confronted with the witnesses against him...."

I'm not sure whether the rights of the accused in an FAA enforcement action are the same as in a criminal prosecution, but I would think that the "witnesses" would be any non-anonymous people that the investigation turned up. I would be very surprised if an anonymous complaint by itself would be sufficient to sustain the enforcement action.
 
Palmpilot said:
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to be confronted with the witnesses against him...."

I'm not sure whether the rights of the accused in an FAA enforcement action are the same as in a criminal prosecution, but I would think that the "witnesses" would be any non-anonymous people that the investigation turned up. I would be very surprised if an anonymous complaint by itself would be sufficient to sustain the enforcement action.
Click to expand...

An FAA enforcement is an administrative action, not a criminal prosecution.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
And my point is that almost every anonymous complaint should be ignored because every anonymous complaint violates the rights of the accused.
Click to expand...
So I guess you think Crime Stopper and whistleblower programs violate rights as well? And they get paid for their anonymous tips. Imagine if the FAA paid the same rate for tips....
 
OneCharlieTango said:
No, I’ll be angry that the one who complained was too cowardly to stake his name on it, even though the thing was apparently dangerous enough to cause a crash.


As I said above, the right to confront one’s accusers. It dates back to the Romans, at least.
Click to expand...
The right to confront one's accusers, if it gets to a hearing. But if someone anonymously accuses a pilot of doing something, and a cursory investigation reveals it's likely true, the tipster is out of it. Many crimes are solved with anonymous tips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top