It wasn't the DOG OIG and the US Attorney that jailed him. It was the judge.
Yeah, after the FAA suspends, revokes, perhaps levies civil penalties, and still can't get someone to stop, the process of referral to the Inspector General for investigation and ultimately to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution (there is a federal statute requiring a pilot certificate, not just an FAR) begins. I see maybe a half dozen of these a year.
Well, if we’re going down that road, it wasn’t the judge that jailed him, it was the bailiff.It wasn't the DOG OIG and the US Attorney that jailed him. It was the judge.
It wasn't the DOG OIG and the US Attorney that jailed him. It was the judge.
My point was that people seem to believe that flying without a license is somewhat harmless. I’ve heard “So what’s the FAA gonna do, take away something they don’t have?”
As mentioned above, pilot licensing falls under 49 USC, and is a law. Break the law and it triggers possible prosecution by the US Attorneys.
At that point the FAA is the least of your problems.
Nobody said YOU have to follow the federal law. Have at it.
Nobody said YOU have to follow the federal law. Have at it.
Or cutting a tag off a pillow
So some laws, when judged "petty" by the perpetrator, are OK to break?
BTW, in case you missed it, this thread is not about lightbulbs or mattresses.
Taking undersized lobsters that someone thinks (probably incorrectly) is a violation of Honduran law. Eight years sought.
I heard reports, many years ago at a nearby airfield, that a man would land there with his Luscombe. Most believed he had no certificate and the plane hadn't been inspected for ages. The tip off, according to witnesses, was the fact that he was usually enjoying an adult beverage while flying ...
Out of curiosity, is that a state law or a federal law? And how do they want light bulbs to be disposed of?
That same freedom also gives hope to those who don’t believe there is folly and arbitrary nature to certain things and that no change is necessary. Correct?
How so? For example, the FAA routinely leaves itself open to criticism from anyone every time they propose a change to a rule. Yet rarely does anyone criticize them via the established methods. Have you participated in this process? I have on a number of occasions with zero hints of treason or suspicions in return.
I mean, they have the right to defend their illogical positions, with free speech, sure.
It's still not an truly representative process. Yes, I've left public comments, but most of the ones we're discussing aren't and haven't been up for public comment anytime recently. Also, your mileage may differ, but I've had pretty close to direct threats from FAA inspectors over simply asking questions, as have others I've known.
Thanks. Sounds like most incandescent bulbs are not included in that.
That's basically people thinking the FAR is all there is and certificate suspension and revocation the only penalties for violations. Pretty common knowledge gap.
Ha. And here I thought you were handling the illogical side to the debate.
And it's not meant to be. The representative side ends with congress which pass the framework for the administrative side. So if you have an issue with the admin side the direct path to cause change in that is through your representative path as only they have the power to change the framework.
But there is a path to change the older ones as well which has been done in the past. Unfortunately, the majority of your fellow pilots and owners don't care to change it.
If actual threats there is a method to address that as well. Myself and others have taken several ASIs to task over various "threats" to include requesting they issue an LOI which is the initial requirement to pursue action against a person. But while you believe it to be "elitist" to have a knowledge of the FAA system it is that knowledge that allows me to address the same issues you complain about. And it's that lack of system knowledge that also takes away some of the validity of your argument.
So where would the "reasonable" part stop and who would you suggest to make that determination? But considering all current rules had the opportunity for people like yourself to comment on, 99% of owners/pilots don't bother to comment. Why? The Piper fuel selector decal AD is a prime example. Instead of every Piper owner commenting (10,000+) to make it a pilot function, only handful did at something like 105 people. So the problem about which rules are reasonable is not as much an issue caused by the FAA but rather the lack of input and time spent by the very people the rule will affect the most.
Ha. And here I thought you were handling the illogical side to the debate.
And it's not meant to be. The representative side ends with congress which pass the framework for the administrative side. So if you have an issue with the admin side the direct path to cause change in that is through your representative path as only they have the power to change the framework.
But there is a path to change the older ones as well which has been done in the past. Unfortunately, the majority of your fellow pilots and owners don't care to change it.
If actual threats there is a method to address that as well. Myself and others have taken several ASIs to task over various "threats" to include requesting they issue an LOI which is the initial requirement to pursue action against a person. But while you believe it to be "elitist" to have a knowledge of the FAA system it is that knowledge that allows me to address the same issues you complain about. And it's that lack of system knowledge that also takes away some of the validity of your argument.
So where would the "reasonable" part stop and who would you suggest to make that determination? But considering all current rules had the opportunity for people like yourself to comment on, 99% of owners/pilots don't bother to comment. Why? The Piper fuel selector decal AD is a prime example. Instead of every Piper owner commenting (10,000+) to make it a pilot function, only handful did at something like 105 people. So the problem about which rules are reasonable is not as much an issue caused by the FAA but rather the lack of input and time spent by the very people the rule will affect the most.
.... I shoulda known.....Thanks.!!