Comment Re:Wait for it... (Score 1) 752
my friends and family in Eastern Ukraine
Your friends and family shot a plane with my friends out of the sky and then looted their belongings and passports.
So Fuck you, Fuck Ukraine, Fuck the Russians.
my friends and family in Eastern Ukraine
Your friends and family shot a plane with my friends out of the sky and then looted their belongings and passports.
So Fuck you, Fuck Ukraine, Fuck the Russians.
Russian separatists give themselves a huge black eye.
Not just the Russian separatists. The same goes for the irresponsible idiot who allowed these terrorists access to surface-to-air missiles, as well as the idiot in the Kremlin, who approves these activities.
In my book, everyone in that region is considered an idiot. Just nuke the damned area and get it over with.
where they have different laws.
Yes, like the ECHR, providing roughly the same protection.
Cars on the ground can, with little exception, stop any time they feel like giving up the chase and turning themselves in to the officers. Aircraft have no such ability, and if you were being actively closely pursued by another aircraft it could even prove fatal to try and land. That doesn't even take into account the risks involved to the people on the ground below, who the police in this case endangered by engaging in pursuit -- the correct action would be to have the ATC track the belligerent until it landed, and arrest the pilots there. Following it at high speed, closely, it precisely what FAA regulations were intended to prevent.
I could not agree more. One addition:
In the air, pilots have the authority to deviate from every rule in the book, if they deem it necessary for the safety of the flight. This is even stressed out by the FAA themselves in every WINGS seminar on this topic I've attended. Roughly the same authority goes to Air Traffic Control when a pilot declares an emergency.
Yes, my non-pilot friends, you read that correct. If a pilot declares an emergency, he is the ultimate authority in the sky over what he does, with ATC being his best wingman with broad authority to divert anyone else. That includes everyone with a badge as well.
Obviously, with authority comes responsibility. Once the flight has ended, the pilot must usually attend a hearing where he (or she) must explain their actions and may even lose their license on it. Every pilot is expected to show good airmenship, and the helicopter pilot pursuing a drone may have been making some judgements that are open for discussion.
Since I'm here, I'll point out that cops do the same thing on the ground.
But they are not. And while they are police officers, they generally have no authority in the air. What flies in the air is all subject to the FAA and a regular officer (even those flying a police helicopter to assist ground units) are limited to FAA rules and regulations.
Unlike ground vehicles, a police helicopter will not be exempt from FAA flight rules and regulations. If the pilot is flying VFR, he is to maintain VFR separation from other flying objects, whether they are in the air lawful or not. The reasoning behind this is obviously that if he fails to do so and somehow crashes into it, his badge will not protect anyone on the ground from getting hurt from the crashing helicopter or whatever object he flies into.
Furthermore, his badge will give him police authority, but the FAA can simply revoke his pilot's license and ground him.
Please educate.
They were under ATC. ATC can track objects in the air, even if they're not using a transponder. Using primary radar, ATC will be able to provide traffic advisories. Police helicopters usually fly under "flight following", meaning they would like to be informed of other traffic.
How is it reckless endangerment when the police were supposed to be in the area and did their job by investigating something suspicious?
Basic VFR separation guidelines still apply, even to a police helicopter.
People are not disappearing in the UK
Campaign leader Dr Stephen Frost said: "The continuing cover-up of the truth of what happened is a national disgrace and should be of concern to all British citizens."
in any way incriminating yourself?
This. Exactly this. When any law enforcement agency suspect that I am guilty of a crime, I have the right to remain silent. With these "tiny little" exceptions, governments are getting onto a slippery slope. Right now it's just passwords. The next step will be the location of harddrives with evidence. Then it will be "tell us where the body is so we can convict you, if you don't tell us you'll go to jail anyway".
In my opinion, the right to remain silent is absolute. No matter how you look at it, this man is being jailed for remaining silent in a criminal investigation. And that, my friend, are Soviet practices.
Not being able to prosecute certain crimes for lack of evidence is the cost that a society pays for having a level playing field and a fair trial.
It's later than you think, the joint Russian-American space mission has already begun.