Dan Gryder banned from Airventure

Status
Not open for further replies.
Half Fast said:
Nah, it was usually sometime after 9a.m. Your mom and I weren’t interested in getting up at dawn.
Click to expand...
Nothing like a little fratricide in the morning
 
Llewtrah381 said:
When our kids argued with each other excessively we’d enforce a 10-second hug. Worked every time.
Click to expand...
My 2 1/2-year-old grandson was giving his 9-month-old sister a hug last week…I was encouraging him to be gentle. He did ok until he released the hug, at which time he knocked her over.
 
DaleB said:
Watching that clip, I'd have expected @wanttaja to have posted it...
Click to expand...
I was thinking more along the lines of, "Pistols for two...breakfast for one...."

Irish Code Duello​

Adopted by the Clonmel Summer Assizes, 1777, for the gentlemen of Tipperary, Galway, Mayo, Sligo and Roscommon, and prescribed for general adoption throughout Ireland.​
​
THE TWENTY-SIX COMMANDMENTS​
​
I. The first offence requires the first apology, though the retort may have been more offensive than the insult. Example: A tells B he is impertinent, etc. B retorts that he lies; yet A must make the first apology, because he gave the first offence, and (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology.​
​
II. But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after two shots each (but in no case before), B may explain first and A apologize afterwards.​
​
N.B. The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger class than the example.​
​
III. If a doubt exists who gave the first offence, the decision rests with the seconds. If they will not decide or cannot agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or to a hit if the challenger requires it.​
​
IV. When the lie direct is the first offence, the agressor must either beg pardon in express terms, exchange two shots previous to apology, or three shots followied by explanation, or fire on till a severe hit be received by one party or the other.​
​
V. As a blow is strictly prohibited under any circumstances among gentlemen, no verbal apology can be received for such an insult. The alternatives, therefore, are: The offender handing a cane to the injured party to be used on his back, at the same time begging pardon, firing until one or both are disabled; or exchanging three shots and then begging pardon without the proffer of the cane.​
​
N.B. If swords are used, the parties engage until one is well blooded, disabled, or disarmed, or until, after receiving a wound and blood being drawn, the aggressor begs pardon.​
​
VI. If A gives B the lie and B retorts by a blow (being the two​
​
greatest offences), no reconciliation can take place till after two discharges each or a severe hit, after which B may beg A's pardon for the blow, and then A may explain simply for the lie, because a blow is never allowable, and the offence of the lie, therefore, merges in it. (See preceding rule.)​
​
N.B. Challenges for undivulged causes may be conciliated on the ground after one shot. An explanation or the slightest hit should be sufficient in such cases, because no personal offence transpired.​
​
VII. But no apology can be received in any case after the parties have actually taken their ground without exchange of shots.​
​
VIII. In the above case no challenger is obliged to divulge his cause of challenge (if private) unless required by the challenged so to do before their meeting.​
​
IX. All imputations of cheating at play, races, etc., to be considered equivalent to a blow, but may be reconciled after one shot, on admitting their falsehood and begging pardon publicly.​
​
X. Any insult to a lady under a gentleman's care or protection to be considered as by one degree a greater offence than if given to the gentleman personally, and to be regarded accordingly.​
​
XI. Offences originating or accruing from the support of ladies' reputations to be considered as less unjustifiable than any others of the same class, and as admitting of slighter apologies by the aggressor. This is to be determined by the circumstances of the case, but always favourably to the lady.​
​
XII. No dumb firing or firing in the air is admissable in any case. The challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offence, and the challenged ought, if he gave offence, to have made an apology before he came on the ground; therefore children's play must be dishonourable on one side or the other, and is accordingly prohibited.​
​
XIII. Seconds to be of equal rank in society with the principals they attend, inasmuch as a second may either choose or chance to become a principal and equality is indispensable.​
​
XIV. Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to be challenged intends leaving the place of offence before morning; for it is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.​
​
XV. The challenged has the right to choose his own weapons unless the challenger gives his honour he is no swordsman, after which, however, he cannot decline any second species of weapon proposed by the challenged.​
​
XVI. The challenged chooses his ground, the challnger chooses his distance, the seconds fix the time and terms of firing.​
​
XVII. The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their mutual honours that they have charged smooth and single, which shall be held sufficient.​
​
XVIII. Firing may be regulated, first, by signal; secondly by word of command; or, thirdly at pleasure, as may be agreeable to the parties. In the latter case, the parties may fire at their reasonable leisure, but second presents and rests are strictly prohibited.​
​
XIX. In all cases a misfire is equivalent to a shot, and a snap or a non-cock is to be considered a misfire.​
​
XX. Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation before the meeting takes place or after sufficieint firing or hits as specified.​
​
XXI. Any wound sufficient to agitate the nerves and necessarily make the hand shake must end the business for that day.​
​
XXII. If the cause of meeting be of such a nature that no apology or explanation can or will be received, the challenged takes his ground and calls on the challenger to proceed as he chooses. In such cases firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may be varied by agreement.​
​
XXIII. In slight cases the second hands his principal but one pistol, but in gross cases two, holding another case ready charged in reserve.​
​
XXIV. When the second disagree and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals. If with swords, side by side, with five paces' interval.​
​
XXV. No party can be allowed to bend his knee or cover his side with his left hand, but may present at any level from the hip to the eye.​
​
XXVI. None can either advance or retreat if the ground is measured. If no ground be measured, either party may advance at his pleasure, even to the touch of muzzles, but neither can advance on his adversary after the fire, unless the adversary steps forward on him.​
​
N.B. The seconds on both sides stand responsible for this last rule being strictly observed, bad cases having occurred from neglecting it.​
​
N.B. All matters and doubts not herein mentioned will be explained and cleared up by application to the Committee, who meet alternately at Clonmel and Galway at the quarter sessions for that purpose.​

Ron Wanttaja
 
trying to collect my CFI earnings from last week. Oh man, the pressure is on...I have one more chance to get it right...come on lucky number 3!
1f602.png
 

Attachments

  • a9vd6g.jpg
    a9vd6g.jpg
    61.1 KB · Views: 43
Gryder's account of the events

the AI summary of the video segment related to this topic:
  • Saturday Night Assault: On a Saturday night, he was beaten up at his local airport (1:47-1:52). He approached an individual because all three paths to his hanger were blocked by the individual's vehicles. The individual had numerous hangers filled with "non-aeronautical stuff" (2:01-2:38). The individual became aggressive when Gryder saw the contents of his hanger, which were crammed with cars, boats, jet skis, motor homes, and appliances (2:22-2:38). Gryder states he got away only by pointing out a security camera the assailant didn't know about (2:49-2:58). He then called 911, and a police report was taken, but no arrest was made that night due to lack of video footage (3:00-3:19).
  • Discovery of Assailant's History: After the incident, Gryder Googled the assailant, identified as Tracy Daryl Wallace, and discovered he had a history of beating and kidnapping people (3:27-3:40).
  • Sunday Morning Confrontation & Arrest: Fearing for his safety, Gryder went to the airport on Sunday morning with a .38 special in his hip pocket (3:47-4:19). While inside his hanger, the same individual pulled up, exited his car, and advanced towards Gryder (4:01-4:12). Gryder removed the gun from his pocket to show he was armed, without brandishing it, and told the individual to leave (4:22-4:41). As soon as the individual saw the weapon, he left (4:41-4:42). Gryder called 911 again, reported the incident, and explained he had shown the gun (4:43-4:55). Despite being in a "stand your ground" state (Georgia), Gryder was arrested for aggravated assault for brandishing a weapon (4:55-5:12).
  • Media Coverage & Disregard for Facts: Gryder mentions that "Aero Network News," specifically Jim Campbell, was the most aggressive in covering the story. He states that Campbell called him multiple times, and despite Gryder providing a detailed text message statement, Campbell "disregarded that statement and ran what he wanted to" (5:30-6:21). Gryder believes that "the actual facts of the matter didn't matter to Jim Campbell" (6:21-6:25). He asserts that any reasonable person would see his actions as self-defense within his own property (7:42-7:58). He concludes by stating he stands by his actions and hopes others are also armed for self-protection (8:00-8:13).
 
baboss said:
Gryder's account of the events

the drunk uncle summary of the video segment related to this topic:
  • Saturday Night Assault: On a Saturday night, he was beaten up at his local airport (1:47-1:52). He approached an individual because all three paths to his hanger were blocked by the individual's vehicles. The individual had numerous hangers filled with "non-aeronautical stuff" (2:01-2:38). The individual became aggressive when Gryder saw the contents of his hanger, which were crammed with cars, boats, jet skis, motor homes, and appliances (2:22-2:38). Gryder states he got away only by pointing out a security camera the assailant didn't know about (2:49-2:58). He then called 911, and a police report was taken, but no arrest was made that night due to lack of video footage (3:00-3:19).
  • Discovery of Assailant's History: After the incident, Gryder Googled the assailant, identified as Tracy Daryl Wallace, and discovered he had a history of beating and kidnapping people (3:27-3:40).
  • Sunday Morning Confrontation & Arrest: Fearing for his safety, Gryder went to the airport on Sunday morning with a .38 special in his hip pocket (3:47-4:19). While inside his hanger, the same individual pulled up, exited his car, and advanced towards Gryder (4:01-4:12). Gryder removed the gun from his pocket to show he was armed, without brandishing it, and told the individual to leave (4:22-4:41). As soon as the individual saw the weapon, he left (4:41-4:42). Gryder called 911 again, reported the incident, and explained he had shown the gun (4:43-4:55). Despite being in a "stand your ground" state (Georgia), Gryder was arrested for aggravated assault for brandishing a weapon (4:55-5:12).
  • Media Coverage & Disregard for Facts: Gryder mentions that "Aero Network News," specifically Jim Campbell, was the most aggressive in covering the story. He states that Campbell called him multiple times, and despite Gryder providing a detailed text message statement, Campbell "disregarded that statement and ran what he wanted to" (5:30-6:21). Gryder believes that "the actual facts of the matter didn't matter to Jim Campbell" (6:21-6:25). He asserts that any reasonable person would see his actions as self-defense within his own property (7:42-7:58). He concludes by stating he stands by his actions and hopes others are also armed for self-protection (8:00-8:13).
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
Folks, I am so DONE with all the stories about Dan Gryder. Just ignore him until he goes away. Please!

-Skip
 
GaryM said:
Hip pocked carry of a .38 special? Wrong on several levels.
Click to expand...
S&W makes a nice little scandium framed, hammerless 5-shot that would work for that. My Model 28, maybe not so much.
 
DaleB said:
S&W makes a nice little scandium framed, hammerless 5-shot that would work for that. My Model 28, maybe not so much.
Click to expand...
Nice gun, but it's still going to print conspicuously a hip pocket, and pocket carry without a pocket holster is a bad idea.
 
Lindberg said:
Most people don't do things that cause them this much fear for their safety. Some might characterize this as "looking for trouble."
Click to expand...
"One time in a hundred a gun might save your life; the other ninety-nine it will just tempt you into folly."
- Robert Heinlein

Ron Wanttaja
 
GaryM said:
Nice gun, but it's still going to print conspicuously a hip pocket, and pocket carry without a pocket holster is a bad idea.
Click to expand...

Which is why I carry my .38 snub in a pocket holster!

(But nothing I know about DG would cause me to think he has that much common sense.)
 
Restraining comment because I already had Zoom call my boss claiming I threatened to shoot him.
 
flyingron said:
Restraining comment because I already had Zoom call my boss claiming I threatened to shoot him.
Click to expand...
Ha! In my case, an "anonymous person" called Dave Martin (KITPLANES editor) and asked, "Why are you buying articles from that devil-worshiper, Ron Wanttaja?"

Not to mention Campbell calling me a "dupe of terrorists" in the pages of the magazine.

I had a high security clearance back then. One of my obligations was to report anything negative about myself. The security guys were having a real hoot, with the litany of "offenses" Campbell was ascribing to me.

"Hey, Warren! I'm a terrorist this week!"
"Hey, Doc! I'm stalking his female employees!"
"Hey Warren! I've committed conspiracy!"
"Hey Doc! The FBI is about to arrest me!"

Fortunately, when this started happening, I'd been working with the same security team for ten years, so they had a pretty good take on my character. One of them (Warren) was actually ex-Air Force OSI. Since this was about the same time as the threat to the POTUS, he gave me a good description of how they handled people like Campbell.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Yeah, the president of the company calls me and says, "Who the F is Jim Campbell?" and then I knew I stepped in it.
 
wanttaja said:
Ha! In my case, an "anonymous person" called Dave Martin (KITPLANES editor) and asked, "Why are you buying articles from that devil-worshiper, Ron Wanttaja?"
Click to expand...
Super disappointing to find out you're a devil worshipper yet it fails to result in more interesting posts on PoA...
 
172andyou said:
Super disappointing to find out you're a devil worshipper yet it fails to result in more interesting posts on PoA...
Click to expand...
Oh, great, now he can say "It has been confirmed by others!!!" :)

Don't worry, though, as a journalist, he *never* has to reveal his sources. Even when they're soaked in Preparation H.....

Ron Wanttaja
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
Can’t leave us hanging like that, man?! WTF…
Click to expand...
Been almost thirty years, don't remember much in detail. It was on the lines of Placate and Document. Tell the person what they want to hear, reassure them that they're being a good citizen, and make sure everything is written down in case something comes back to bite later.

Most of what I was told was in regards to the threat against the President. Someone started an AOL account in the name of my lawyer (who also represented Campbell's soon-to-be ex-wife in the divorce proceedings) and posted a threat against President Clinton. My lawyer had a great time telling the story. He'd just moved into a new house when there was a knock on the door. Opened it, and found a pair of black SUVs criss-crossed in front of his house with a lot of men in dark suits.

Invited them into his den, where he was still unpacking. He'd already unpacked and put on display his bayonet collection, which seemed to bother the Secret Service guys a bit. Next thing out of the box was a framed certificate, noting that Tony was approved to argue cases in from of the US Supreme Court.

He said the emotional temperature in the room went down quite a bit, at that point.

I filed a FOIA request on this case a few years later, but all the names and any identifying information is redacted.

Anyway, I of course brought this up to my security guy. He said, if they determined that there was no actual threat, they'd take it no further. But...every time the POTUS came to town, there'd be a car with USSS agents parked in front of the main suspect's house.....

Ron Wanttaja
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top