Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nonsense...Pure nonsense. Just the weird view people have of flying. It does not require you to walk on water.
We just had a 24 year old put his car into a bus stop. Doing something close to 100 mph and lost control. The initial reports was he was drunk but it appears he may have been almost sober just hurrying to return the car. Four Dead - four more hospitalized. Only blocks from home.
That is an irresponsible kid.
An airplane is no place near that dangerous even in the hands of an inexperienced pilot. If he is sober and trying not to do anything interesting and operating out of an uncontrolled airport it is not a terrible thing.
A kid drunk or stoned in the family automobile is as much more hazardous situation.
You people who are presenting this "Aw, what he did wasn't really that dangerous" are missing the point entirely.
The point isn't how dangerous it could have been (though I think if something had gone wrong, it could have been disasterous).
The point is that he violated the rules, he violated the law, and he violated his parents' trust.
He was given a right because he supposedly was able to demonstrate good judgment and responsibility.
When he demonstrated that he clearly deserved neither the trust and the responsibility, THAT is where the problem begins. This is where the rights become terminated.
My youngest son is older than this mentioned 16 year old...I try to paint the worst possible scenario of what COULD happen if you do certain things. I don't pull any punches...It's like the wages of sin is death..You break the law and go screaming down a one way street- there is in time going to be deadly impact..It's the physics of life.
The other morning I hear a radio report that a motorcyclist has crashed into the side of a cement truck and is dead on the road...I say to my self....."oh my God that is his route to work...it could be him"....At that moment I realized something...I keep thinking that I am a tough old guy and can endure anything life tosses my way...but I was sick inside thinking of my son as a corpse....I don't think I could bare it.....which brings me to the real point here.
This father regarding the breaking of laws and regulations as far as his son is concerned and the joy ride in the sky...well- I don't think this dad is honest with us..It's not the law...it is not the rules..it is not the shame of having a law breaker in the family- This seemingly tough and proper aviator dad...Love his son with all his heart and could not stand the idea of harm coming to his boy...Maybe he should tell him once...How dearly he loves him........"I do not love him because he is good, I love him because he is my little child".
I don't know what the motivation is. But this is good advice regardless of the situation.
You people who are presenting this "Aw, what he did wasn't really that dangerous" are missing the point entirely.
The point isn't how dangerous it could have been (though I think if something had gone wrong, it could have been disasterous).
The point is that he violated the rules, he violated the law, and he violated his parents' trust.
He was given a right because he supposedly was able to demonstrate good judgment and responsibility.
When he demonstrated that he clearly deserved neither the trust and the responsibility, THAT is where the problem begins. This is where the rights become terminated.
What is so confusing about that to you people?
The other day my son and daughter were playing. My son was using a splitting maul as a play battle axe. My husband freaked out and started lecturing about how inappropriate the use of a tool as a toy was. I stopped him right there. I looked at my son and daughter. You know we always want you to take responsibility for your actions, deal with the consequences? They both looked at me and nodded. There are some consequences that are too awful to deal with. One of the possible consequences of playing with a splitting maul as a toy is accidentally sticking it in her head or spine and killing her. Would you like to live with those consequences? NO! So take this as a lucky opportunity to learn that some consequences you never ever want to deal with. That sobered them up.
You people who are presenting this "Aw, what he did wasn't really that dangerous" are missing the point entirely.
The point isn't how dangerous it could have been (though I think if something had gone wrong, it could have been disasterous).
The point is that he violated the rules, he violated the law, and he violated his parents' trust.
He was given a right because he supposedly was able to demonstrate good judgment and responsibility.
When he demonstrated that he clearly deserved neither the trust and the responsibility, THAT is where the problem begins. This is where the rights become terminated.
What is so confusing about that to you people?
This is a family member - not some stranger standing before a civil judge. You do not treat a family member as if they were a stranger. You can not be more loyal to the state and it's laws than you are too your own family...That is called a suck up. Yes there was a beach in law concerning safety...and yes there was an insult to the fathers trust. What I see is someone overly concerned about what the neighbors think than about family.
Looking back at my wife..and her father the cop...who's father was also a cop..We were renting a house and a big chunk of land..My wife went to the landlord who is a wealthy man too pay the rent..He was very disrespectful of her...and talked down to her and insulted her.
Later my wife spoke to her father the retired cop...who admired those that were wealthy....She said to her father..."The land lord treated me as if I were white trash"....The father's disloyal reply was - "He is a millionaire and yes YOU are white trash" - I was shocked that these words came out of his mouth.
My parents had seen war- revolution and starvation...There perception of authority was different...FAMILY LOYALTY was paramount...as for the system....It was just that- a heartless mindless thing....Law are important...But as for loyalty towards a son. The son comes first.
I lived on a lake as a kid..Float planes came over the house constantly - one day there was a crash..The pilot managed to get out and the plane sank. I took the boat out later..put on my fins and mask...I dove down and entered the plane and salvaged all sorts of interesting stuff..I was about 12 years old...I eventually set up a **** pit in my room- seats and compass etc...
The pilot came by one day and wanted his plane parts back...I stood at the door with my mother...She defused the situation...She struck me hard on the face in the presence of the pilot...The poor guy was stunned...and he said "Why did you do that- you did not have to do that"....he felt sorry for me and left..no police no charges...My mother was shrewd...She protected me from possible criminal charges...I came first..not the system...That was the only time she ever struck me across the face..she was not angry..she just did what had to be done to save her son.
I don't agree with turning him into the authorities; I do agree with a very strict punishment. Teen-agers never see the danger in a situation.
Just like driving and texting with passengers; flying a plane with 'innocent' passengers can result in their death.
The OP would be held responsible IF they keys were easily accessed by his son.
This is not a matter the OP can just brush off. Doesn't mean he doesn't love his son; in fact, he loves him enough to want to keep him safe OR causing injury to others. Teen-agers that kill others in accidents have to live with that fact the rest of their lives.
The other day my son and daughter were playing. My son was using a splitting maul as a play battle axe. My husband freaked out and started lecturing about how inappropriate the use of a tool as a toy was. I stopped him right there. I looked at my son and daughter. You know we always want you to take responsibility for your actions, deal with the consequences? They both looked at me and nodded. There are some consequences that are too awful to deal with. One of the possible consequences of playing with a splitting maul as a toy is accidentally sticking it in her head or spine and killing her. Would you like to live with those consequences? NO! So take this as a lucky opportunity to learn that some consequences you never ever want to deal with. That sobered them up.
I am very honest with my kids in this manner as well. I think it's important to lay all the cards on the table. A young boy committed suicide earlier this week. Apparently, he was the victim of bullying. Instead of talking to someone, he took his father's gun and killed himself.
Last night, I had a brutally honest discussion with my older son about the situation. It scares the crap out of me that kids will hide such pain that will cause them to end their own life instead of talking to their parents, teachers, coaches - hell, the school janitor! ODS is very responsible and sensitive to other people's feelings. I do think part of this stems from our (DH and me) way of talking to him in a mature, but age appropriate, manner.
Chris, knowing how to use a firearm is a useful skill, but do you think this is a good reason to allow continued weapons access to a teenager caught indiscriminately firing a stolen gun around town to impress a girl?
This kid, if he exists, should be made to read all the literature about small aircraft accidents that exists and shouldn't be allowed to pilot anything with a motor, sail, wings or wheels. Not even a tricycle.
Knowing to use a firearm is like driving a car. Its not that useful (compared to everyone else. . .a lot of people can do it). I mean sure, if you are shooting a gun and can qualify for Olympics but the army won't recruit you because you can shoot. . they can train that quickly
A more adapt analogy, I think, is that a kid creates a virus/hacks a bank. 16 year old.
You must enforce/discipline in such a way that discourages the irresponsibility but doesn't hamper the actual useful skill (flying/computer hacking).
I don't agree with turning him into the authorities; I do agree with a very strict punishment. Teen-agers never see the danger in a situation.
Just like driving and texting with passengers; flying a plane with 'innocent' passengers can result in their death.
The OP would be held responsible IF they keys were easily accessed by his son.
This is not a matter the OP can just brush off. Doesn't mean he doesn't love his son; in fact, he loves him enough to want to keep him safe OR causing injury to others. Teen-agers that kill others in accidents have to live with that fact the rest of their lives.
If I was the girls father, I think I would turn him in. . .there is a lot of irresponsibility here that goes beyond the kid/pilot
But of course, that same responsibility makes me doubt the veracity. You expect me to believe someone without night training gets the runway on, takes off, flies in the dark without inncedent (think Kennedy plane crash), then landing on a runway (which means turning the lights back on)
I think he is wanting to take away every possible source of enjoyment, and the kid likes to eat dessert. It won't fix his broken ability to make judgments, but at least the kid will remember the punishment.
Chris, knowing how to use a firearm is a useful skill, but do you think this is a good reason to allow continued weapons access to a teenager caught indiscriminately firing a stolen gun around town to impress a girl?
This kid, if he exists, should be made to read all the literature about small aircraft accidents that exists and shouldn't be allowed to pilot anything with a motor, sail, wings or wheels. Not even a tricycle.
Of course with firearms, the parent is expected to keep them lock and key.
I'm sure he been flying at night, at some point as part of his training.
Turning the light on the runway is not hard, (the number clicks and radio freq to do it on is printed on the approach plat for the airport, and the radio freq is printed on every VFR chart for the each airport, and the 'clicks' are standardized. ) If he been flying (before his dad has his student licence), I'm sure he's seen his dad do it, and have done it many many times when he was sitting in the right seat..
Kennedy plane crash is a totaly different story... Low Time IFR pilot, letting the plane (Fast/complex) get ahead of him, Going from VFR to IFR.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
