bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
No, not for this thing. The OP contacted me today. He'll be allriglht.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
If the one strike is the failure to disclose, I'd agree. If the one strike is the arrest, I would not. Bruce can explain further.
Speedy
Pre-Flight
I was a cop 32 years. Never heard of a "recinded arrest". If you were not free to go at the time of the traffic stop, you were under arrest bud.
X3 Skier
En-Route
Good news. Glad they got in contact.
Just waiting for the next thread on "What's the Staute of Limitation for reporting on a DUI Arrest?" I know there isn't one but I am still waiting. Didn't feel like searching for the thread.
Cheers
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nah. I am just so DONE with, "I don't think it means this. I can't mean this. If I keep wishing it so it must be so".
I'm tired of repetively, explaining. It's got to have been posted here and on the red board 30 times. Anyone who might try so hard to dance on a pin is just in denial. Fortunately the OP is not one such.
Last edited:
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
That's good. Seems with so many thigs it's one-and-done. Glad some common sense prevails here.
Doesn't make the arrest legal though. I was arrested once for running across the street in San Diego, cop tackled me and had a gun to the back of my head, he accused me of robbing the (closed) liquor store across the street. He took me to jail, the guy at intake said "are you crazy? I can't take him, you better take him home. The next day my conversation with his captain killed his career.
Last edited:
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
The question on the 8500-8 doesn't differentiate. If you were ever in your life arrested for a driving offense involving drugs or alcohol, you must check "yes." Then you explain it below. If the facts are that you weren't doing anything wrong, the FAA will let it go. However, if you fail to report the arrest, you've just violated both 14 CFR 61.59 and 18 USC 1001. If you think there's a legal reason you can check "no" despite having been so arrested, regardless of the ultimate outcome, get an aviation attorney involved to discuss that with the Regional Counsel before you sign and submit the application.
Perhaps the FAA should fix it up like the SF86 (security clearance application) and say "Report arrests even if someone told you that you didn't need to report it" or something to that effect.
bullwinkle
Pattern Altitude
Just FYI on this...I have been a police officer. The number you blow is not really all that important. The 0.08 limit in force in most states is the level of PRESUMED impairment. You can be arrested and convicted at 0.000000001 if the officer can document (usually through field sobriety tests like walking a straight line or saying your ABCs, and dashcam video) that you were impaired at the time of the stop.
Blowing a 0.079 or below will not save you from a DUI/DWI if you are slurring speech, stumbling, etc. At 0.80 you are presumed impaired and are going for a ride, below that it's completely the officer's discretion. The safest policy is not to drive if you have been drinking at all.
Blowing a 0.079 or below will not save you from a DUI/DWI if you are slurring speech, stumbling, etc. At 0.80 you are presumed impaired and are going for a ride, below that it's completely the officer's discretion. The safest policy is not to drive if you have been drinking at all.
bullwinkle
Pattern Altitude
You should have gotten rich over that one, Henning.
Steve Foley
Pattern Altitude
X3 Skier
En-Route
Very familiar with that form from back in the day. If they do add that, then maybe they could adopt the FAA, "Previously Reported" approach. For years, every time my Clearance came up for review, I had to drag out the previous version to copy all the info about schools, positions, places lived, relatives DOB/POB and whatever else was asked. Only took one go around to learn that lesson.
Hope they have changed it to Previously Reported, No Change but who knows.
Cheers
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!! This thinking is what leads people into lying. One DUI is not by itself disqualifying. It's when you lie by failing to disclose that they revoke.
. . . . unless you mean lying is the one strike. In which case you are correct. I just wanted to emphasize the above point though. :wink2:
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Lying is one strike.
The real message I meant to impart (and apparently was misread by you, Bruce, and others...) is that one shouldn't even put themselves into a situation where one might get a "strike" to start with. The risk is simply too high in today's environment.
Here are some examples of "one strike"...
1) If you travel to Canada, a "record" of DUI can get you denied entry to the country. Just one. Yes, there are ways to be deemed "rehabilitated", but that involves time and money.
2) Most job applications ask if you've been convicted of any crime. Some ask if you've been arrested. In today's risk-adverse environment (and especially in the tight job market), employers can/will use that to deny you a job. Or fire you if your job involves travel on company business. Like the FAA, you can get your rear-end in a sling if you lie... and you'll be found out because a majority of employers do background checks.
3) In some states, the applications for professional licenses (everything from lawyer to cosmetologist to liquor store owner) ask about your arrest and/or conviction record.
etc, etc, etc.
In the world of Facebook, YouTube, and similar media, most employers know that they will be on-the-hook to a ton of bad publicity if it turns out that you are a repeat offender while employed by them.
So, the point I was trying to make was "is it really worth it to take the chance of arrest/conviction in the first place?"
Yes, there are ways to mitigate the impact if you take the risk and lose, but do you want to jump through those hoops.
That's all I meant, and I apologize if that wasn't clear to start with.
Skylane81E
Final Approach
I was thinking about Ohio, no legal limit, you are impaired or not, and the amount of alcohol in your system is irrelevant if you are 21 or over. Under 21 and ANY alcohol is OVI.
Hope they have changed it to Previously Reported, No Change but who knows.
Cheers
Nope, it's still pretty much the same. They've moved from paper to filling out a PDF to some web based submittal (which looks for all the world like the same dumbass programmer who wrote Medexpress wrote it).
X3 Skier
En-Route
Yeah, that's the one I did last time but I was hoping for change. I mean how can POB/DOB change and by now that's almost 100 years ago for my parents.
Cheers
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
Am I the only that sees a problem with this logic? We have a legal system with judges and juries to determine quilt or innocence. If you have an arrest and are acquitted or charges dropped, someone in the government can still have a hammer over your head? The FAA should have no right to draw any conclusions or take any actions from a mere arrest.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
Too bad.
They do.
So do employers.
An arrest may or may not be a significant event. But until the details are known, that determination cannot be made.
Getting arrested for DWI may mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to the FAA if the details show the arrest was made in error. On the other hand, as is far too common, multiple DWI arrests with no convictions may still be indicative of an alcohol problem in which the FAA has a legitimate interest.
Lying, by deliberate falsification or omission, is also a behavior in which the FAA has a legitimate interest.
So, first order of business... DON'T get arrested for DWI. If you're going to drink more than one drink, you probably don't want to be driving.
Second order of business. DON'T lie about it or any other thing you're asked to report.
Criminal guilt or innocence is NOT the issue. This is not a criminal sanction.
The issue is whether or not you have an alcohol problem, and having behavior that even makes people suspect you have a problem indicates things that need to be
investigated further.
The poster here actually is probably dodging a big one both with the law and with the FAA. As pointed out already, there is no such thing as the "legal limit." Just because you were under .08 doesn't mean you aren't intoxicated nor does it indicate you don't have warning signs that might indicate an alcohol problem.
Whoever referenced Massachusetts by the way is WRONG. You can be convicted of OUI in Mass with a lower than .08. What you will escape is the mandatory administrative suspension without the per se bac.
The issue is whether or not you have an alcohol problem, and having behavior that even makes people suspect you have a problem indicates things that need to be
investigated further.
The poster here actually is probably dodging a big one both with the law and with the FAA. As pointed out already, there is no such thing as the "legal limit." Just because you were under .08 doesn't mean you aren't intoxicated nor does it indicate you don't have warning signs that might indicate an alcohol problem.
Whoever referenced Massachusetts by the way is WRONG. You can be convicted of OUI in Mass with a lower than .08. What you will escape is the mandatory administrative suspension without the per se bac.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Civil law, not criminal law. The Government is granting you a privilege that can be revoked at any time. (Flying, like driving, is NOT a right - voting IS a right). The government can establish the conditions under which it will grant the privilege. Same holds for employers - you generally don't have the right to any particular job, but if you are employed you have certain rights as to how you'll be treated in the workplace.
ChrisK
En-Route
Drinkers aren't exactly a protected class either. See "fired / refused to hire for smoking" for example.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
You're confusing criminal law with administrative law.
Take Randy Babbitt, for example. There is no question that he was driving while he had a blood alcohol concentration over the legal limit. He was able to avoid conviction on a DWI charge because a local judge ruled that the officer who pulled him over did not have sufficient cause to do so (something several people I know who've seen the cruiser cam tape say was judicial lunacy, but under our system, it is essentially unappealable by the state's attorney). That made the BAC test inadmissible in criminal court per (IIRC) the Fourth Amendment as "fruit of the poisonous tree." The fact that he was not convicted doesn't change the fact that he really does have a drinking problem (there are other incidents to demonstrate that), and the FAA wants people with drinking problems out of the cockpit.
Since the FAA doesn't have to base their decisions on who gets to fly on proof of guilt of criminal law beyond a reasonsable doubt, they have the authority to examine every situation which provides reason to believe the pilot may have a drinking problem, and make a decision on that pilot's flying privileges accordingly. That's the law, it's constitutional, and the PBOR doesn't change it.
Last edited:
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
I'm not confusing anything. The US Supreme Court has already made clear that driving an automobile is a common right not a privilege. If the FAA denied or revoked a certificate based on an arrest with no conviction, it would not survive a legal challenge.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
OK, you go try it, and let me know how that works out for you.
And please cite the case where SCOTUS defined driving as a right. Interstate travel is a right, but nowhere does it define the mode of that travel.
I asked more or less the same thing a day or two ago and no one has responded with a reason.
Who knows, I have a year to go before my next renewal, but they could change the form and ask if I've had any impure thoughts.
Then it would be something out of an old Frank Zappa album. Or an Orwell novel.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
The denial would not be on the basis of the arrest, but rather on the basis of the medical condition of which driving while intoxicated is a symptom, and it will survive any challange you mount. In any event, the issue of whether piloting an airplane is a right or a privilege went to the Supreme Court a long time ago, and the result was in favor of the FAA, not the pilot claiming it was a "right." Read Gesell's "Aviation and the Law" from Coast Aire Press to learn about this subject.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
When someone is going to put you in a position of trust (and yes, that's what the FAA is doing when they grant you a pilot certificate, or what an agency does when they grant you a security clearance), they want to have a reasonable expectation they can trust you.
The FAA doesn't care about a lot of things that many might consider bad character.
Let's discuss infidelity, for example. There's research that shows over 30% of married people (and some think as high as 60%) have at one time or another been unfaithful to their spouse. The FAA doesn't care about this, doesn't ask questions about it. In fact they say that marital counseling is specifically not required to be reported. The standard SF-86 form doesn't ask questions about it either. It MAY come up in a security interview, or a polygraph for a high-level clearance, but what they are looking for is whether a subject will be forthcoming or evasive. They really don't care if the subject has been unfaithful unless there's signs that his sexual needs compromise his judgement or make him a candidate for blackmail. They care about whether he'll lie about it, as that makes it more likely that he'd give in to blackmail. Similar concerns exist about money management.
No, back on point.. Alcohol abuse is something pretty much everybody cares about. It's part of the background investigation for a clearance, it's part of the FAA medical questionnaire, and they are interested for multiple reasons.
First, alcohol abuse impairs your ability to do the job, whether it's flying a plane or programming a computer.
Second, alcohol abuse impairs your judgement, also pretty important for flying or any other sensitive job.
Third, alcohol abuse impairs your ability to recognize your own problems and work on fixing them, and lying about them is evidence of both the problem and your inability to be trusted to manage it.
So... I don't lay awake worrying about the FAA's interest in alcohol abuse, or it's presumption of fire if there's a lot of smoke. I don't worry much about the Gov't checking for impure thoughts, though at various times there have been attempts to legislate morality from both sides of the aisle.
The FAA doesn't care about a lot of things that many might consider bad character.
Let's discuss infidelity, for example. There's research that shows over 30% of married people (and some think as high as 60%) have at one time or another been unfaithful to their spouse. The FAA doesn't care about this, doesn't ask questions about it. In fact they say that marital counseling is specifically not required to be reported. The standard SF-86 form doesn't ask questions about it either. It MAY come up in a security interview, or a polygraph for a high-level clearance, but what they are looking for is whether a subject will be forthcoming or evasive. They really don't care if the subject has been unfaithful unless there's signs that his sexual needs compromise his judgement or make him a candidate for blackmail. They care about whether he'll lie about it, as that makes it more likely that he'd give in to blackmail. Similar concerns exist about money management.
No, back on point.. Alcohol abuse is something pretty much everybody cares about. It's part of the background investigation for a clearance, it's part of the FAA medical questionnaire, and they are interested for multiple reasons.
First, alcohol abuse impairs your ability to do the job, whether it's flying a plane or programming a computer.
Second, alcohol abuse impairs your judgement, also pretty important for flying or any other sensitive job.
Third, alcohol abuse impairs your ability to recognize your own problems and work on fixing them, and lying about them is evidence of both the problem and your inability to be trusted to manage it.
So... I don't lay awake worrying about the FAA's interest in alcohol abuse, or it's presumption of fire if there's a lot of smoke. I don't worry much about the Gov't checking for impure thoughts, though at various times there have been attempts to legislate morality from both sides of the aisle.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
It sure would. And has. Your attitude common, but is sadly misinformed.
The granting/revocation of a medical certificate is on the "best expert advise" and is delegated by Congress to the Federal Air Surgeon.
Why don't you try it out, and report the outcome?
BCampbell is right. Look up his posts.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
So there is a case where a medical was denied/revoked for a DUI arrest but no conviction and survived a legal challenge?
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
I know of no case of a medical being denied or revoked merely because of a DUI arrest that did not result in a conviction. I'm sure, however, that the FAA has cases where a medical was denied due to an alcohol problem first evidenced by such an arrest, and that none of them were successfully challenged merely on the basis that there was no conviction subsequent to the arrest. Bruce no doubt can confirm this.
Keep in mind that the Federal Air Surgeon's concern is not the arrest itself, but on the underlying medical problem which the arrest exposed. If the arrest really was bogus, and you really hadn't been drinking and driving, the matter will end with the evidence you present to show that. If, however, you really had been drinking and driving but due to legal technicalities or deal-making you managed to "beat the rap" (e.g., Randy Babbitt), the FAA has the authority to bring that out and take appropriate medical certificate action.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
I'm going to stop posting here. I have nothing in common with the people who dominate this forum. I suggest you stop also, something may happen to your brain after making thousands of posts.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
I have explained this many many times.
The behavior at the roadside examination is compared with the BAC. The BAC may be below the automatic suspension cutoff, but if the performance at the roadside test is BETTER than what is blown, you are tolerant to alcohol. Tolerance is one of five FAA criteria for chronic repetitive abuse, which is a disqualifying condition.
So you might beat the rap but the medical examination may find your performance too good for your level. You then go to a Certified Drug and Alcohol Evaluator and he looks for: tolerance, withdrawal, loss of control, preoccupation with use, and continued use despite knowledge of consequences. He delves into your workplace and calls your boss, your ex, your spouse, your GF, your colleagues, those who know you well. ANY ONE of those five gets you the diagnosis of chronic alcohol abuse. If the CADC doesn't do the job adequately, the AME has to, or it gets rejected.
We get your multi state driving record to insure that the offense is the one and only.
We get usually liver function studies and look carefully at some aspects of your blood count. If all is clean, but there is any doubt, and if you have tolerance, you get revoked and given a special issuance for two years contingent on" they call you pee" and you pay. You go once a year back to the Evaluator. If you are totally clean for two years, you get your regular certificate back. For this you need a HIMS (Human Intervention and Motivation Study) alcohol trained AME. We are only 100 in number.
If there is no doubt, it's revocation, rehab, 90 AA meetings in 90 days, counselors every month, Sponsor reports, Psychiatrist/+psychologist eval (~$,4000) at 8 months and if all is clean, two years of monitoring. HIMS AME, the SI is issued by NAME to that particular AME.
Yes vintage, you're wrong. The arrest is only a medical index event that gets examined, with a fine comb. The arrest is only a medical sentinel that gets explored medically.
Some are acquited, like my local Life Flight pilot whose wife of 23 years threw him out. He spent the day at a bar and drove out with a floozy. He blew 0.21 but fortuantely he opened the door and literally fell out on the pavement (Proportionate performance for an alcohol naieve individual). Dr. Silberman returned him to service after we checked him out. Now that was 0.210 (!).
Just more evidence that an ignorant man hears but what he wishes to hear. ALL the above explaining. Why do I even bother?
AND to Burt M I did explain, and it was 2 years ago, and it's in this string, start reading around post 90. http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34318&page=5 Feb of 2010 was more than 2 years ago. All you guys who have made up your minds - just never get an alcohol arrest, okay?BurtM said:
Last edited:
Thanks for the info/viewpoint.
Sure, I acknowledge that having a certificate is a privilege, not a right. But as far as public trust/endangerment stuff goes, if I crash, I will probably do less damage augering-in in our 172 than I would hitting a school bus in my wife's Yukon XL. Just saying. The cost part is for the insurance companies to decide. I think the renewal on our 172 this year is about $475 for hull and liability from Global, which is about the same that the Yukon costs to insure.
But what concerns me is someone in DC/OKC can decide on the basis of a form whether I'm good enough of a citizen to exercise the privilege of being a pilot. If some guy with an FAA badge stops me on the ramp, I'm smart enough these days to know to lawyer up, but in lieu of that and he wanted to see if I could still pass the PP PTS, I'd say sure. Do I have an inflated sense of my abilities given the certificate that's been graced me courtesy of the FAA? Maybe, but I don't think so.
I'll stop there because I don't want the otherwise good info in this thread to get flushed into the Spin Zone cesspool.
U
Unregistered
Guest
This is OP of this thread.
I would like to explain this whole situation, it is late and I am tired so please for give any grammatical or spelling errors and read the story not the words.
My wife is very ill going through treatments and I have several young children. My social life was lacking at best due to taking care of my family and working 2 jobs flying and A/C maintenance.
My best friend's brother ( also a good friend) had been working out of town for 4 months and wanted to get together for a social hour with his brother and me. We met at a restaurant at 5:30 we all drink different beers (bud, bud light , miller lite).
I bought a bucket of beer (6 beers) 2 of each mentioned. then BF bought a bucket we finished that, now it is 7 pm I needed to leave to give kids a bath, wife to weak to take care of them. BF's brother bought a bucket while I was in restroom. I came back and wanted to leave but the beer was there ( here is when the bad choice was made)
I DRANK BOTH BEERS IN 20 MIN!! (mind you I drank 4 in a1.5 hours under legal limit and acceptable AT THAT TIME, no longer) I was running late kids needed bath pulled out on 4 lane road. I lived 15 min away should be legal and safe to get home.
Traffic was bad and I needed to merge in less than 3/4 mile to make exit on hwy. Well I sped and there was LEO. I stopped answered questions , asked about alcohol was truthful and cooperative that yes had been drinking took all FST. Placed under arrest and from time pulled over to time of Official Breathalyzer test had been 1.25 hours. Blew a .089 ( now is the time to take a break and read about Rising BAC)
Did you understand the explanation? Paper work showed I only failed HGN.
FWIW on way to station police officer said in not so many word he does not like owner and watches the restaurant closely. Highly illegal, hard to prove called entrapment
Fast forward, calibration of machine showed it read high .005 so now really I blew a .084. Hired an attorney who I told these events to and said I have a good case for "Rising BAC" he explained it. We then hired a toxicologist and SCIENTIFICALLY he was able to prove my BAC at time of STOP. My BAC was approx .068- .070 ( i do not have the exact # in front of me)
I Got my administrative suspension rescinded (MY misunderstanding thank you for your guidance on the board) There was no conviction did not even go to court, was a deal between my lawyer and PA in a back room. paid HUGE fine for speeding.
Now it is time for 1st class med. DO I report? If med deferred Job goes away, Job goes away insurance goes away, Insurance goes away wife cannot get treatment and DIES due to my 2 hours out with friends. This is not a sob story this is the truth, NEVER been in trouble before in my +40 years
I have high moral values and good character can you see why I may not want to disclose this. My Driving record is clear in the state I got the ticket and in the state I live in with a clean NDR
I know there is going to be someone who will say I could of killed some one by drinking and driving, U could also Kill someone when you spill you hot coffee on your lap while driving or answer your wife's phone call or text today.
Some other information that may educate the next person: Say you live in New Jersey and get your DUI in the Big Apple. NY suspends your PRIVILEGE to drive in the state that is not a suspension you have to report under 61.15 Now when NY calls NJ and they suspend your license then you have to report it with in the 60 days to OKC.
This was very hard to post but maybe some of your judgmental attitudes will subside somewhat knowing no job = no mom for kids for a over zealous cop who stalks the restaurant patrons
I did call the security and the medical division to ask if anything was on my record. The security division is the ones who run the NDR for the med they both come back clean.
Sincerely OP.
I would like to explain this whole situation, it is late and I am tired so please for give any grammatical or spelling errors and read the story not the words.
My wife is very ill going through treatments and I have several young children. My social life was lacking at best due to taking care of my family and working 2 jobs flying and A/C maintenance.
My best friend's brother ( also a good friend) had been working out of town for 4 months and wanted to get together for a social hour with his brother and me. We met at a restaurant at 5:30 we all drink different beers (bud, bud light , miller lite).
I bought a bucket of beer (6 beers) 2 of each mentioned. then BF bought a bucket we finished that, now it is 7 pm I needed to leave to give kids a bath, wife to weak to take care of them. BF's brother bought a bucket while I was in restroom. I came back and wanted to leave but the beer was there ( here is when the bad choice was made)
I DRANK BOTH BEERS IN 20 MIN!! (mind you I drank 4 in a1.5 hours under legal limit and acceptable AT THAT TIME, no longer) I was running late kids needed bath pulled out on 4 lane road. I lived 15 min away should be legal and safe to get home.
Traffic was bad and I needed to merge in less than 3/4 mile to make exit on hwy. Well I sped and there was LEO. I stopped answered questions , asked about alcohol was truthful and cooperative that yes had been drinking took all FST. Placed under arrest and from time pulled over to time of Official Breathalyzer test had been 1.25 hours. Blew a .089 ( now is the time to take a break and read about Rising BAC)
Did you understand the explanation? Paper work showed I only failed HGN.
FWIW on way to station police officer said in not so many word he does not like owner and watches the restaurant closely. Highly illegal, hard to prove called entrapment
Fast forward, calibration of machine showed it read high .005 so now really I blew a .084. Hired an attorney who I told these events to and said I have a good case for "Rising BAC" he explained it. We then hired a toxicologist and SCIENTIFICALLY he was able to prove my BAC at time of STOP. My BAC was approx .068- .070 ( i do not have the exact # in front of me)
I Got my administrative suspension rescinded (MY misunderstanding thank you for your guidance on the board) There was no conviction did not even go to court, was a deal between my lawyer and PA in a back room. paid HUGE fine for speeding.
Now it is time for 1st class med. DO I report? If med deferred Job goes away, Job goes away insurance goes away, Insurance goes away wife cannot get treatment and DIES due to my 2 hours out with friends. This is not a sob story this is the truth, NEVER been in trouble before in my +40 years
I have high moral values and good character can you see why I may not want to disclose this. My Driving record is clear in the state I got the ticket and in the state I live in with a clean NDR
I know there is going to be someone who will say I could of killed some one by drinking and driving, U could also Kill someone when you spill you hot coffee on your lap while driving or answer your wife's phone call or text today.
Some other information that may educate the next person: Say you live in New Jersey and get your DUI in the Big Apple. NY suspends your PRIVILEGE to drive in the state that is not a suspension you have to report under 61.15 Now when NY calls NJ and they suspend your license then you have to report it with in the 60 days to OKC.
This was very hard to post but maybe some of your judgmental attitudes will subside somewhat knowing no job = no mom for kids for a over zealous cop who stalks the restaurant patrons
I did call the security and the medical division to ask if anything was on my record. The security division is the ones who run the NDR for the med they both come back clean.
Sincerely OP.
OK, here's the excuse-making part where were supposed to realize you're just a regular guy like the rest of us...OK, got it.
OK, more circumstantial BS that the rest of us go through every day...
Five letter word starting with P comes to mind...
Your story is a complete fabrication, because anyone flying for a living for 40 years like you claim would have a management plan.
You're full of crap. If you were truly working as a professional pilot, you would know there are much better resources than an internet board to cleanse your tainted soul. As the Catholic padres say, may God be with you.
denverpilot
Tied Down
The place where you lost my sympathy was where you picked up the next bottle just because someone had bought a bucket of beers.
You know what? Those beers would have poured nicely down the drain and cost about $5 in wasted beer.
Now if your story is real, you've poured your life down the drain. I hope that beer was damn good.
I've had way too many functional alcoholic family members and friends who had all sorts of excuses as to why they picked up that bottle and poured another drink down the pie hole.
And none of them were truthful when confronted. The reality is, you wanted to drink. And you wanted to drink more than you wanted to be a grown up and not drink in a profession where it's well known that if you drink and drive, your career is over, and knowing you were your family's only breadwinner.
I think for that last reason alone, we're being trolled again. But if not, you are in a world of crap of your own making. Rationalization and excuses won't change that you chose to put the bottle in your face, and pour.
Sorry. No sympathy here. I have my own vices that can revoke my flying privs (smoking) that I'm still (stupidly) choosing to partake in, but even I as a recreational pilot know the FAA doesn't screw around with alcohol and I've never met a professional pilot who didn't know that fact either.
Get on the phone with a professional like Doc and do what they say if your story is real. And get off the Internet. This stuff lasts forever and is archived in lots of places.
The more details you provide about a real situation here, the more likely one of the people bound and determined to make sure you never set foot in a cockpit again without years of treatment if ever, will connect the dots and find the whole back story they need to make their case for certificate revocation.
Bare your soul somewhere you at least have some chance of privacy.
You know what? Those beers would have poured nicely down the drain and cost about $5 in wasted beer.
Now if your story is real, you've poured your life down the drain. I hope that beer was damn good.
I've had way too many functional alcoholic family members and friends who had all sorts of excuses as to why they picked up that bottle and poured another drink down the pie hole.
And none of them were truthful when confronted. The reality is, you wanted to drink. And you wanted to drink more than you wanted to be a grown up and not drink in a profession where it's well known that if you drink and drive, your career is over, and knowing you were your family's only breadwinner.
I think for that last reason alone, we're being trolled again. But if not, you are in a world of crap of your own making. Rationalization and excuses won't change that you chose to put the bottle in your face, and pour.
Sorry. No sympathy here. I have my own vices that can revoke my flying privs (smoking) that I'm still (stupidly) choosing to partake in, but even I as a recreational pilot know the FAA doesn't screw around with alcohol and I've never met a professional pilot who didn't know that fact either.
Get on the phone with a professional like Doc and do what they say if your story is real. And get off the Internet. This stuff lasts forever and is archived in lots of places.
The more details you provide about a real situation here, the more likely one of the people bound and determined to make sure you never set foot in a cockpit again without years of treatment if ever, will connect the dots and find the whole back story they need to make their case for certificate revocation.
Bare your soul somewhere you at least have some chance of privacy.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
The reason the FAA wants to know about things like this is because one mistake like that isn't that big a deal, but if you make a habit of it, it could be a sign of a larger medical problem.
You might want to check that with a legal authority because I do not believe it is true.
Good luck with that. I still think you need competent legal assistance.