Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Craziest thing I ever heard

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AKBighorn
    replied
    Ok so the guy is coming in for a landing.....accidentally hits an airplaned disabling it. Circles around for a second approach see's the plane he hit, aims for the second to miss the first. He hits the second plane disabling it, decideds maybe he really goofed and should go back to where he stores his plane. He then calls the accident in and reports/admits it. Case closed!

    I don't bloody think so. What happens if you hit someones car and do damage. Don't you get a citation, loose points and have to deal with insurance to get things fixed. Did I forget he must have circled twice and hit 2 different airplanes. Maybe they should have gone and tested him for a DUI and slapped him in the pig pen!

    Leave a comment:


  • martentrapper
    replied
    Yes...........I would have to agree, Mud! This whole scenario was started by pilots!
    I would have liked to be there when the guide/pilot told his insurance agent he wanted to submit a claim............hahahahahaha!

    Leave a comment:


  • AKmud
    replied
    Stirring the pot......

    Originally posted by martentrapper View Post
    Who said I never stir the pot?????????

    MT....you know we can't trust you on this topic!.....you are a pilot!

    Leave a comment:


  • martentrapper
    replied
    8x57..........the liberal/conservative angle is very related to this story. All the problems in this country are caused by liberals. The solutions to those problems are brought forth by conservatives!!!!!!!!!!!
    In this case, 2 consevative aircraft owners were minding their own business enjoying the alaska countryside..........when an obvious liberal, welfare supporting guide swooped down and damaged the conservatives planes. As is normal for liberals.........after the damage was done, he said it wasn't his fault!!!!!!!! Or something like that.
    At least that's the way I see this!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who said I never stir the pot?????????

    Leave a comment:


  • Akres
    replied
    Terms

    Originally posted by 8x57 Mauser View Post
    OK Akres, I'll bite.

    What the Sam Hill does this issue have to do with liberals and conservatives? Did I miss something in this thread?

    Let's see... There was this debate going about whether the wing bouncing incident was intentional or an accident. There was sort of a side debate about whether it even happened. We had hints and echoes of old arguments on whether guides should be criticized, and if so when. Then there was this business about posting police blotters again. All of this set against the backdrop of the 'innocent until proven guilty' vs. 'any fool can see' debate...

    Hmmm... Nope, I missed the liberal/conservative part here. Maybe you're saying the hunting guide was a conservative because he decided to show the upstart intruders the "consequences" of changing the status quo by bouncing their aircraft wings?

    Or maybe you're saying the guide is a liberal because he apologized, and only leftist pinko commies think intention matters and thus, only this guide, Ted Kennedy, and AlleninAlaska ever apologize for anything?

    Or maybe I just missed the liberal/conservative angle here. Maybe you could show it to me?

    Or, hey, I've got another idea. Maybe you could keep the unfounded and largely imagined political slant to the General Discussion forum.
    The terms have been used for eons, before they were generically coined in the political areana. I was referring to individuals thinking processes, e.g. liberal minded vs conservative minded. Geesh a lot of inflection is lost when only the words are used on these types of forums. Nothing political about my post at all, hope others did not miss the point.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlleninAlaska
    replied
    It was a good jousting until the politics became involved.

    Leave a comment:


  • 8x57 Mauser
    replied
    Liberals and conservatives?

    OK Akres, I'll bite.

    What the Sam Hill does this issue have to do with liberals and conservatives? Did I miss something in this thread?

    Let's see... There was this debate going about whether the wing bouncing incident was intentional or an accident. There was sort of a side debate about whether it even happened. We had hints and echoes of old arguments on whether guides should be criticized, and if so when. Then there was this business about posting police blotters again. All of this set against the backdrop of the 'innocent until proven guilty' vs. 'any fool can see' debate...

    Hmmm... Nope, I missed the liberal/conservative part here. Maybe you're saying the hunting guide was a conservative because he decided to show the upstart intruders the "consequences" of changing the status quo by bouncing their aircraft wings?

    Or maybe you're saying the guide is a liberal because he apologized, and only leftist pinko commies think intention matters and thus, only this guide, Ted Kennedy, and AlleninAlaska ever apologize for anything?

    Or maybe I just missed the liberal/conservative angle here. Maybe you could show it to me?

    Or, hey, I've got another idea. Maybe you could keep the unfounded and largely imagined political slant to the General Discussion forum.

    Leave a comment:


  • AKmud
    replied
    Criminal case closed....

    Maybe I should be more specific. Most crimes have a "culpable state of mind" attached to their descriptions. Since there was no one around to give evidence what he did was intentional, negligent, reckless, etc... how will the courts be able to charge/convict him criminally?

    Civil court is the place for the restitution, other expenses, etc.. Sue away!

    Leave a comment:


  • Akres
    replied
    Case Closed????

    Originally posted by AKmud View Post
    Akres....if you are pointing at me saying I'm a liberal you are waaaaaay off. My problem is that I have to work in an environment where innocent until proven guilty is paramount. Everytime I go to traffic court I would love to say "Of course they are guilty, otherwise I wouldn't have written the ticket!" But no, it's on my back to PROVE why they are guilty and subsequently received the citation. I believe OJ is guilty too. I wasn't there though and I can't argue definitively one way or the other. All I was saying is that there were a lot of posts stirring the pot when no one (I looked too) was able to find any information about this to prove that it even happened. Now that it has been found, great, it is a true story.

    Intentions or actions, no one witnessed or has proof of either so how can anyone hang this guy based on hearsay? This is a cold case and will go nowhere in court. Based on hearsay, the guy admitted to hitting the planes, said it was an accident and is willing to pay for damages. Case closed. Let it go. Sorry for the inconvienience.
    Not from what I know and have been kept abreast of. How could anyone possibly think this case is closed? Has restitution been met? What were the consequences for this guides actions? Restitution in my opinion, should not rest with the planes repairs. What about the expenses you and I suffered, as a result of the the investigation. What a crock, to think that this guide should be able to walk after paying for damages. To let it go, is exactly what I would not do. Liberals however have a different perspective and I acknowledge that. I think we can simply state our case and let others state their case. Each of us judge things differently and no amount of discussion is going to change that fact. To think the people of the State of Alaska would ever receive compensation in a Civil Suit is ludicrous. Never happen my friend. We spend a LOT for defending individuals actions, but receive nothing for doing so.
    Last edited by Akres; 10-06-2006, 09:22.

    Leave a comment:


  • AKmud
    replied
    Liberals vs. Conservatives

    Akres....if you are pointing at me saying I'm a liberal you are waaaaaay off. My problem is that I have to work in an environment where innocent until proven guilty is paramount. Everytime I go to traffic court I would love to say "Of course they are guilty, otherwise I wouldn't have written the ticket!" But no, it's on my back to PROVE why they are guilty and subsequently received the citation. I believe OJ is guilty too. I wasn't there though and I can't argue definitively one way or the other. All I was saying is that there were a lot of posts stirring the pot when no one (I looked too) was able to find any information about this to prove that it even happened. Now that it has been found, great, it is a true story.

    Intentions or actions, no one witnessed or has proof of either so how can anyone hang this guy based on hearsay? This is a cold case and will go nowhere in court. Based on hearsay, the guy admitted to hitting the planes, said it was an accident and is willing to pay for damages. Case closed. Let it go. Sorry for the inconvienience.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlleninAlaska
    replied
    As I stated I have no problem apologizing if I was wrong. With that beaing said.


    I'm sorry I was wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Akres
    replied
    Liberals vs Conservatives

    Liberals judge others by their intentions. (Result NO CONSEQUENCES)
    Conservatives judge others by their actions. (Result CONSEQUENCES)
    Just the way it is, and discussion will not change their philosophies.
    The guide in question, might have intended to land or not, only he knows his intentions. We all know the actions he took.
    At the risk of hijacking this thread, it is the same with the Tundra Dummies. They had good intentions (recovering dead caribou). Their actions, welllll... they sort of speak for the group collectively.
    I say there should be consequences for the guide in question. Dang shame that the innocent parties should have to press the issue, to gain some degree of restitution, but that speaks loudly of the civilized society we are all a part of. JUST STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN
    Last edited by Akres; 10-06-2006, 08:22.

    Leave a comment:


  • AkHunter45
    replied
    So are you saying that you still don't believe it? Some people just don't want to believe that a "guide" could do such a thing, we'll there's proof that not every guide plays by the rules. The fact that he damaged their airplanes while they were out in the field tells you how much he cares about his fellow man, the only thing he cares about is his bottom line. Hopefully they will take away his pilots license before he kills someone.

    Leave a comment:


  • AKmud
    replied
    It's all good

    The problem was is there were 41 posts before anyone was able to find anything official on this story. I'm sure most everyone looked through the blotter and didn't find the story buried at the bottom (thanks for finding it Martyv). What's wrong with waiting on judgement until some documented facts are presented. We still don't know the whole story, the blotter is anything but detailed. It does sound bad, but none of us (or anyone else for that matter) were there to get an eyewitness account of what actually happened.

    Maybe it was a freak accident, maybe it wasn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • akhunter02
    replied
    Happy now

    There you go AlleninAlaska, you satisfied now, You are way too trusting of people, trust in human nature not in people. I know that is very cenacle, but thats just the way it is these days.

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X