Babbitt + DUI

Everskyward said:
I think this event falls under that saying about glass houses.
Click to expand...
Circa 1995 a superior court judge struck a young girl on her bike. She died. It was his 5th DUI in less than 3 yrs. It seems some people are more equal than others.

Also, in that very e-mail you received, mentioned is the NWA crew that overflew their destination. Was that the first time for that crew? Yet Babbitt makes an example of them.
 
Last edited:
Bob Noel said:
Am I the only one that doesn't think a single DUI disqualifies someone from work?

Assuming that this is the only time he screwed up and drove drunk, should he really get canned?
Click to expand...

Because "With great power comes great responsibility." - Voltaire

The greater your authority over others, the greater should be your personal character.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Because "With great power comes great responsibility." - Voltaire

The greater your authority over others, the greater should be your personal character.
Click to expand...

This...

If I went out and got a DUI tonight, I would be out of work tomorrow.

Some jobs just come with "other" responsibilities..

Drunk driving should be a one time offense. You do it, get caught, you forfeit your ability to drive.

Wonder if he had hit and killed someone for "driving drink once" if it'd be ok? Is it ok in this instance because "no one died?"

I'm sure this isn't his first time behind the wheel after drinking and if it is, ohh well. If I can lose my job as a pilot for DUI, the man in charge of my regulatory agency should be able to lose his for a DUI. He knew the consequences.

No one is held accountable for their actions anymore....
 
It's my opinion that drunk drivers have driven drunk on many occasions before getting caught for it... He deserves whatever he's got coming to him and IMHO, the penalties for DUI aren't high enough.
 
John Baker said:
I don't drink, I don't like drunks, and I especially don't like people who feed at the public trough. I do however, question our delight in persecuting and condemning someone who was simply doing what most everyone has done at one time or another in the course of their lives.

Why should a persons entire career be destroyed over one simple act of being human? So, for one night his judgment was impaired and he made a wrong choice, is that really cause to destroy an otherwise good man?

Sure, fine the heck out of him, make him attend a few classes, I agree, he should pay a penalty,but I do not agree that penalty should destroy his life, nor his career.

If he has done it before, or does it again, all bets are off.

John
Click to expand...

Agree.

But his problems are political. I really doubt Mr. Babbitt is sitting at home right now worried about how to retain his medical.

He has 2 levels of management he has to answer to, Sec LaHood of the DOT and the President. They will ultimately decide his fate.
 
It's surprising he came from Eastern and not Northwest Ornament.
 
Richard said:
That's really funny. Further, if he knows it's coming is it really random testing?
Click to expand...
Yes. It's contracted out to large independent firms. Only his MRO sponsor can know, and if the sponsor is smart, he will not have any knowledge (event he sponsor) of when the computer gives the "Pee NOW" call.

I disagree with generalization on the following:
mspAviator said:
It's my opinion that drunk drivers have driven drunk on many occasions before getting caught for it... He deserves whatever he's got coming to him and IMHO, the penalties for DUI aren't high enough.
Click to expand...
I have a poor "sluck" sometimes carpenter, sometimes LEAR captain who got his second .11 DUI in 9.8 years. Chemical indicators- no chronic abuse. SAE evaluation: bad judgement, no life centering on alcohol, no tolerance, BAC's suggesting no tolerance, but he falls into "repetitive use in the face of known consequences" by the federal definition.

I'm sponsoring him in the monitoring program. I think in this one person's instance, the federal response is excessive. But you have to set the line someplace, and there it is.

It need be equally applied, and with the proper monitoring tests (we can detect alcohol use a week prior to the test) it can be IMPOSSIBLE for a guy to have ONE beer. This is TWO years of federally enforced abstinence.
 
Last edited:
Bob Noel said:
Am I the only one that doesn't think a single DUI disqualifies someone from work?

Assuming that this is the only time he screwed up and drove drunk, should he really get canned?
Click to expand...

Should a paramedic or firefighter get a pass? And continue driving emergency vehicles??

By the time the average drunk driver gets pinched, they've been doing it for a while. It's rarely an "amateur night" type of affair.
 
Doggtyred said:
Should a paramedic or firefighter get a pass? And continue driving emergency vehicles??

By the time the average drunk driver gets pinched, they've been doing it for a while. It's rarely an "amateur night" type of affair.
Click to expand...

The clown was driving down the wrong side of the road. That is not something a serious drunk would do at all.

People who have become habituated to alcohol seem able, for the most part, to function fairly normally while on their drug. I know these things because at one time I was married to a drunk, it was actually hard to tell when she had been drinking. She drove and functioned normally after drinking an amount of booze that would turn me into a blubbering idiot.

I seriously doubt if Babbitt is an alcoholic at all. I think he simply drank too much for whatever reason, then proceeded to make judgment calls no conditioned drunk would make.

I think he is indeed an amateur drunk.

John
 
Last edited:
He is now an alcohlic because he will be forced to attend meetings. "Hi my name is Brandy Rabbit and I'm the Administrator of the Alcohol Federation."

<---<^>--->
 
Doggtyred said:
Should a paramedic or firefighter get a pass? And continue driving emergency vehicles??

By the time the average drunk driver gets pinched, they've been doing it for a while. It's rarely an "amateur night" type of affair.
Click to expand...

He's unlikely to crash his into other people while flying his desk at 800 Independence. It's not been a requirement to be a pilot (or even to have an aviation background) to be an FAA administrator in over a decade. The last two were professional bureaucrats.
 
I drove drunk once. Didn't get caught, but learned a lot and now know how it happened and why it won't happen again. Didn't even think about being drunk prior to getting in the car, but quickly found that I was impaired. Parked the car, walked to my office, called home to report, slept on the couch and drove home late the next morning.

In retrospect, I let it sneak up on me. The CPA firm that had worked for out of college announced an alumni reception after work during the holiday season. I was in the tax-incentive investment business at the time, year-end was especially hectic. With a busy appointment schedule, I didn't have time to stop for lunch. Arrived at the reception after 5 pm at the Kansas City Club, and was greeted at the door by the bartender who offered me a drink. Immediately saw my group of old friends at a table, and joined them for a great visit and much reminiscing and laughter along with several more drinks and a couple of appetizers, but no dinner.

When the party broke up at 9pm, the valet brought my car to the door and I drove away without any inkling of my condition, and still thinking about how much fun we had at the reunion. While sitting at the first stop light, however, I couldn't decide what to do when the light changed because I could see both the green lens on one side and the red lens on the adjacent side of the fixture, and wasn't sure which one was for me.

The comedy act continued for another couple of miles and bone-head moves, at which point it was apparent (or as clear as it could have been in the self-induced fog) that I should be relieved of duty.

Looking back, the no-lunch no-dinner evening of hilarity and have another round was the perfect formula for producing a staggering drunk, and one that I have never and will never repeat again. If a cop had seen any of my antics, the end of the story could have been much different regarding many aspects of my career.

Knowing that it can happen and how it happened are no excuse for my stupidity, but the experience has saved me from many other potential trainwrecks. If we're at a party together, you're always welcome to a glass of Pelligrino from the big bottle that will be on my table.
 
Last edited:
I've driven drunk several times as a young and stupid kid. I STOPPED drinking before I was LEGAL to do so..

We all do dumb things. However, there is a point and time in your life where you are held accountable.

I would lose my job over a DUI so I have no issues with Mr. Babbit losing his.
 
John Baker said:
I seriously doubt if Babbitt is an alcoholic at all. I think he simply drank too much for whatever reason, then proceeded to make judgment calls no conditioned drunk would make.
Click to expand...
By definition an alcoholic is one whose drinking interferes with his life. I'd put him squarely in that category now.

I strongly disagree with your theory that somehow experienced drunk drives are less likely to do things like drive on the wrong side of the road. Frankly, I've scraped up enough bodies on the highway to disclaim predicting any attributes to the stinking drunks. I've seen plenty of drunks crossing the centerlines (some who had previous convictions) and I've seen plenty of guys who just ran down the guy ahead of them in their lane.

Strangest one was when a guy rearended a motorcycle that had stopped at the stop sign. We got there and the motorcycle was upright and welded to the front of the car. The cyclist jumped off the hood, reach around and smashed the driver's window and pulled him out by his hair. Fortunately I convinced the cyclist that he should let me check him for injuries in the ambulance before the guy did any real damage to the drunk.
 
Please understand that I am not condoning drinking and driving, or that an amateur drunk is in any way less dangerous than a habitual drunk, in fact, I would say that an amateur drunk is one heck of a lot more dangerous than a habitual drunk. Habitual drunks do not drive like sober people, a good cop can spot em a mile away. An amateur drunk will do insane things like driving on the wrong side of the road, entering exits onto freeways, weave all over the place, and of course sideswipe other vehicles as well as get into out and out wrecks.

The only thing I am doing in support of Babbitt is to say that if this was his first offense, his career should not be destroyed. He should be made to suffer so that he has a clear understanding of the magnitude of his actions and the harm he could have done. That he should be given at least the same consideration as any other first time offender.

John
 
John Baker said:
The only thing I am doing in support of Babbitt is to say that if this was his first offense, his career should not be destroyed.
Click to expand...
FAA Administrator is not a career. Being a captain for Eastern is a career. Being ALPA head is a career.
 
True he won't crash his desk from being drunk

Isn't this the guy who was very harsh on controllers falling asleep? I'm sure that his reasoning was that they were irresponsible and that their actions could have killed someone.

As others have pointed out, Babitt himself has shown he is irresponsible and his actions could have killed someone. I do believe in second chances for people, even for someone who has a DUI. But not for Randy Babbitt.

Below are some quotes from Babbitt re; sleeping controllers.

"None of us in this business can tolerate any of this," Babbitt said of the sleeping controllers. "It absolutely has to stop. ... One mistake is one too many."
This "will not be tolerated," he insisted. "We run the safest system in the world," but these incidents have "cast a cloud."
Click to expand...


His no tolerance policy and "one mistake is one too many" philosophy should apply to him. He needs to go.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately it's really reduced his ability to demonstrate leadership in his organization and he's violated the trust of the people above him. His was in figurehead position. It all originally sounded pretty good, former airline pilot etc. Now the damage is done. I don't see how salvage is possible.
 
Wanna bet he gets full retirement of 170,000+ a year, + medical benefits for life, and is offered a "consultants" job ? :dunno::dunno::dunno::yesnod:.
 
John Baker said:
Please understand that I am not condoning drinking and driving, or that an amateur drunk is in any way less dangerous than a habitual drunk, in fact, I would say that an amateur drunk is one heck of a lot more dangerous than a habitual drunk. Habitual drunks do not drive like sober people, a good cop can spot em a mile away. An amateur drunk will do insane things like driving on the wrong side of the road, entering exits onto freeways, weave all over the place, and of course sideswipe other vehicles as well as get into out and out wrecks.

The only thing I am doing in support of Babbitt is to say that if this was his first offense, his career should not be destroyed. He should be made to suffer so that he has a clear understanding of the magnitude of his actions and the harm he could have done. That he should be given at least the same consideration as any other first time offender.

John
Click to expand...

I disagree, this would be a career ender for a garbage truck driver, He has to go. The sooner the better, like he needs to be filling out his resignation papers RIGHT NOW. This is way beyond "him and keeping his job" the credibility of the agency is at stake and they need to take swift decisive action and he shouldn't let his personal agenda get in the way if he is indeed dedicated to the agency.
 
Welp, 8 seconds after I posted that I saw this.

"Today I submitted my resignation to Secretary Ray LaHood and it has been accepted. Serving as FAA Administrator has been an absolute honor and the highlight of my professional career. But I am unwilling to let anything cast a shadow on the outstanding work done 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by my colleagues at the FAA. They run the finest and safest aviation system in the world and I am grateful that I had the opportunity to work alongside them. I am confident in their ability to successfully carry out all of the critical safety initiatives underway and the improvements that the FAA has planned. I also want to thank Secretary LaHood for his leadership and dedication to the safety of the traveling public."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
That is why I was trying to support the guy. He is a good man once you work your way past his deficiencies in judgment. He obviously has enough good judgment to not burn any bridges on his way out.

John
 
I almost don't know where to start. You're outside the park. And I APOLOGIZE if it sounds hard. But here's to give you some insight on the criteria FAA uses, and it is NOT DSM-4.
John Baker said:
The clown was driving down the wrong side of the road. That is not something a serious drunk would do at all.
Click to expand...
It's not a matter of how much alcohol you have in your blood. It's a matter of how much you have relative to your endorgan tolerance and performance. The better the performance per level, the more the tolerance. A 0.10 who is quite impaired will drive down the wrong side of the road (not too tolerant), but a guy who can tolerate 0.15 and is at 0.20 will also drive down the wrong side and kill an oncoming family.
People who have become habituated to alcohol seem able, for the most part, to function fairly normally while on their drug. I know these things because at one time I was married to a drunk, it was actually hard to tell when she had been drinking. She drove and functioned normally after drinking an amount of booze that would turn me into a blubbering idiot.
Click to expand...
You're right about titrating their levels, but that is when people/employers are looking. Taking alcohol in a setting that creates a public danger is one of the five criteria for chronic abuse (Loss of Control).

The five criteria are: Tolerance, Presence of a withdrawal syndrome, Loss of Control (probalby present), Use in the face of known adverse consequences (this would be Babbitt's), and Preoccupation with use. Any one of these five give him the gold ring and satisfy FAA's criteria for CHRONIC abuse.
I seriously doubt if Babbitt is an alcoholic at all. I think he simply drank too much for whatever reason, then proceeded to make judgment calls no conditioned drunk would make.
Click to expand...
Please rethink.
I think he is indeed an amateur drunk.
Click to expand...
Not by the standards of the agency of which he was the leader. This may also have been a loss of control.
John
Click to expand...
The attachment is the FAA source document. The five "additional factors" are not the DSM (in which you need five of any of this list to get the diagnosis). Any of the five "additional factors" gives you the "chronic" diagnosis per the Federal Psychiatrist, Dr. Chesanow. But it's all moot now.

Thre are about 100 HIMS AMEs in the country. Google it. It's the first hit. We do this stuff all the time. We need the description of his behavior at the roadside sobriety check, to compare with his BAC, but he meets FAA criteria already.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
"I don't drink, I don't like drunks, and I especially don't like people who feed at the public trough."

This was my opening statement in post #37. I just felt that someone should play devils advocate in what was obviously a one sided thread. I do not care what the regulations are as they apply to Babbitt, I just felt that trying to defend him would make us think a little harder before we burn him.

John
 
See also http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45949 post #3. which contains the high resolution explanation of how the situation will be analyzed.

Broad sweeping generalizations like "this is not something a serious drunk would do at all" simply have no foundation. He meets federal criteria for medical evaluation and meets presumptive criteria as promulgated by Mr. Babbitt, for suspension.

John Baker said:
I doubt Mr. Babbitt is an alcoholic at all
Click to expand...
...is so out of the park given Babbitt's definitions, that it warranted a comment. He might not be a chronic. But he certainly meet's FAA definition....
 
Last edited:
:idea:

Perhaps the best way to resolve our drunk driving problem is to simply execute, on the spot, anyone who fails or refuses to comply with a field sobriety test. To compensate officers for having to carry out an execution on the spot, they could be awarded a thousand dollar bonus, which could be charged to the criminals family or estate.

This would encourage all peace officers to be especially diligent in hunting down drunk drivers. It would save jail space and court time, and rid our streets and highways of a scourge on all mankind.

Another benefit to all of us would that it would cut back on the earths population explosion.

Screw em, they're nothing but worthless drunks anyway.

John
 
bbchien said:
He meets federal criteria for medical evaluation and meets presumptive criteria as promulgated by Mr. Babbitt, for suspension.
Click to expand...

That he would be done in by his own rules is kind of sweet (which is NOT to say the rules are good or bad).
 
Don't forget to include those who text and/or use their cell phone while driving. They've been proven to be just as dangerous. And I'm sure no one here has ever done those things either.

Man, between those three groups, we could really cut down on the population, John!

John Baker said:
:idea:

Perhaps the best way to resolve our drunk driving problem is to simply execute, on the spot, anyone who fails or refuses to comply with a field sobriety test. To compensate officers for having to carry out an execution on the spot, they could be awarded a thousand dollar bonus, which could be charged to the criminals family or estate.

This would encourage all peace officers to be especially diligent in hunting down drunk drivers. It would save jail space and court time, and rid our streets and highways of a scourge on all mankind.

Another benefit to all of us would that it would cut back on the earths population explosion.

Screw em, they're nothing but worthless drunks anyway.

John
Click to expand...
 
He had no choice but to resign. I hope he gets the same treatment in court that you or I would.
 
flyingron said:
He's unlikely to crash his into other people while flying his desk at 800 Independence. It's not been a requirement to be a pilot (or even to have an aviation background) to be an FAA administrator in over a decade. The last two were professional bureaucrats.
Click to expand...

Adminstrator of the FAA should be required to have at least one of the damn pilots licenses and probably an a&p too.

<---<^>--->
 
timwinters said:
Don't forget to include those who text and/or use their cell phone while driving. They've been proven to be just as dangerous. And I'm sure no one here has ever done those things either.
Click to expand...

sidejack: the traffic accident statistics from the NHSTA do no support the belief that cell phone usage while driving is dangerous. Over the period when cell phone usage exploded, the accident rates were flat or went down slightly.
 
Swiped ff the net: (so sue me)

In some countries, drinking and driving is punishable by death. A first time offense in El Salvador leads to execution by firing squad, while a second offense in Bulgaria also leads to execution.
In France, drinking and driving is punishable by the equivalent of a $1,000 fine, imprisonment for one year, and loss of license for three years. Finland and Sweden automatically sentence drunk drivers to one-year jail sentences including hard labor. In Norway, a drunk driver is jailed for three weeks with hard labor and loses their license for a year. If they do it again, they lose their license forever. In South Africa, drinking and driving results in a ten-year prison sentence or the equivalent of a $10,000 fine and, in some cases

Read more: http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/drinking-and-driving-the-laws-in/#ixzz1fr46owv8

denny-o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top