FAA asking for more info after reporting DUI

RJM62 said:
It's more difficult for police to tell when someone's texting while driving than to tell when they're speeding.

Speed's easier to monitor, and thus easier to prosecute. The problem is that speed limits and speeding laws / fines / enforcement stopped being based on safety decades ago. There is a scientific method of determining and setting speed limits, but it's pretty much ignored these days in favor of a method that maximizes revenue.

L
Click to expand...

That 85th percentile method has been around for a long time. I remember a question on that when I sat for the PE exam in Colorado over 30 years ago.
 
RJM62 said:
It's more difficult for police to tell when someone's texting while driving than to tell when they're speeding.

Speed's easier to monitor, and thus easier to prosecute. The problem is that speed limits and speeding laws / fines / enforcement stopped being based on safety decades ago. There is a scientific method of determining and setting speed limits, but it's pretty much ignored these days in favor of a method that maximizes revenue.
Click to expand...

Ghery said:
That 85th percentile method has been around for a long time. I remember a question on that when I sat for the PE exam in Colorado over 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

In many States you can challenge a speeding violation in a Prima Facia zone (posted speed limit isn't absolute) by reverting to the County or State road department's engineering report on that section of road, which establishes the design speed, which is normally significantly higher than the posted speed.
 
Ah, NJ municipal courts. Gotta love the revolving door of "justice." When I would practice, my clients would never went to court before were just amazed at the whole process. My colleagues in other states can't believe you can go to jail for 6 months in NJ with no jury trial. That said, I have only seen a handfull of DWI cases won.

deltaindia said:
This was how it played out in the hearing. To challenge it further the way you suggest, and try to challenge the state cop's credibility, I would have had to take it to trial. That would have been $3500 in legal fees, with no guarantee of winning of course. It's not uncommon (in NJ, at least) for courts to rely on the officer's field observation when a breathalyzer test is ruled inadmissible. Especially, in my case, there were 3 officers on the scene so they could have all been called in as witnesses. I would have a very slim chance of holding up against the testimony of 3 decorated state troopers in a jury trial.

My lawyer was very familiar with the court, the judge, the prosecutor and how cases tend to go. He could have encouraged me to go further and take it to trial if he really felt we had good shot at winning and that would have been $3500 more in his pocket. So, faced with spending the additional money and <unpaid> time off of work to deal with more court dates, I opted to just take the medicine and get it over with. The 3 months of no driving were challenging, but went by quick enough that I can put it all behind me rather than agonizing over a court trial.
Click to expand...
 
steingar said:
Drinking out is the second biggest waste of money in America. Biggest waste is of course smoking.
Click to expand...

Wasteful spending, on a personal level, is subjective of course. Some would claim that recreational flying that we all do is a waste of money, too...

To each their own.
 
steingar said:
I suspect that trend is more due to wealth begin drained out of the middle class. Cheaper to drink at home. Drinking out is the second biggest waste of money in America. Biggest waste is of course smoking.
Click to expand...

I suppose if you factor in health care costs. I don't smoke anymore but I did years ago for a while. A four dollar pack of cigarettes lasted me a week. a ten dollar twelve pack of beer lasted me a night.
 
deltaindia said:
Wasteful spending, on a personal level, is subjective of course. Some would claim that recreational flying that we all do is a waste of money, too...

To each their own.
Click to expand...

You can drink the same stuff at home for a fraction of the cost. Drinking isn't particularly wasteful (indeed moderate alcohol consumption has positive health benefits in many people), drinking in a bar is.

Smoking is wasteful and stupid no matter where you do it.
 
steingar said:
You can drink the same stuff at home for a fraction of the cost. Drinking isn't particularly wasteful (indeed moderate alcohol consumption has positive health benefits in many people), drinking in a bar is.

Smoking is wasteful and stupid no matter where you do it.
Click to expand...

First of all, that depends on what you drink. Some bars have cocktails that I couldn't make at home. I mean, I could if I had the exact recipe and practiced and bought a ton of ingredients, but for that matter, I could also learn how to make something they make at a restaurant exactly the same, theoretically.
Even if you are not big on cocktails (and I'm not really), you also pay for the service (ok, pouring a drink is no big deal, but still), and the ambiance.

If you are meeting 6 friends at a bar, sure, you could do it at home, but then you'd have to clean up the mess too.

Plenty of ways to justify any superfluous expense one way or the other (even smoking).
 
Johann said:
If you are meeting 6 friends at a bar, sure, you could do it at home, but then you'd have to clean up the mess too.
Click to expand...

And that only works for 1 out of 7 of you. The rest still have to drive home lest you find them crashed out on your living room sofa. Of course at least around here typically it just means they headed down the runway on the golf cart in the wee hours. Fortunately, EAA security doesn't patrol our strip.
 
steingar said:
You can drink the same stuff at home for a fraction of the cost. Drinking isn't particularly wasteful (indeed moderate alcohol consumption has positive health benefits in many people), drinking in a bar is.

Smoking is wasteful and stupid no matter where you do it.
Click to expand...

Trying to remain loosely on topic….drinking in a bar is wasteful <spending> to some people, but a worthwhile expense to others. To you, it clearly is wasteful and that's certainly your right to have the opinion. But it's not a fact by any means.

People choose to spend their discretionary income in many ways. It's only wasteful spending if the spender didn't feel that they got any value out of it.

If I spend $100 on a night out with friends catching up, socializing, laughing and just plain enjoying myself, that $100 is not wasteful to me, personally. To another person, that kind of money might be put to better use and therefore be considered wasteful.

Now, some would argue that…owning or renting a plane is excessively wasteful if you're just using it to take trips that you could just as easily take on an airline or even in the car for far less money.

Again..to each their own.
 
Just be careful. And don't have another "oops"... God Forbid you prove the FAA stats correct..
 
steingar said:
You can drink the same stuff at home for a fraction of the cost. Drinking isn't particularly wasteful (indeed moderate alcohol consumption has positive health benefits in many people), drinking in a bar is.
Click to expand...

Depends on whether it's cheaper than Ashley Madison dot com or not.... :D:D:D
 
Just when we thought this thread was falling off the active list...

An update on my progress with the Aeromedical Center:

The letter I received, dated March 14, required response with 60 days with the info I listed in the original post. Several of you strongly urged talking to my AME and also getting a lawyer.

I first talked to my AME to see what his experience is with pilots who have been in my situation, with similar scenarios (first offense, low BAC, etc.). He said my personal statement should be very short and explain the circumstances of the evening of the violatioN. I wrote a very short, factual, concise statement which, to paraphrase, said that I was at a long dinner, had several drinks, and have no history of abuse.

As he recommended, I sent it in with the other required info (police/BAC report, court records, 10 year driving record, records of treatment/classes). What I almost really screwed up on was the 60 day limit...They received it on May 14 which was technically 61 days! I called on May 19th and they informed me that it was received and was being processed, and that I would hear back "within 8 to 12 weeks".

Well, on May 24th I received a letter dated May 20th - JUST UNDER ONE WEEK after they received my paperwork - informing me that they have "established" that I am eligible to retain my medical certificate.

They cautioned me that any further alcohol offenses or evidence of abuse will involve re-evaluation and/or denial of my medical certificate. Fair enough.

Their letter was short and <bitter> sweet, and now the entire DUI incident that goes back to August is completely behind me, save for the additional insurance premiums I'll be paying until 2016.

I never did contact a lawyer after talking to my AME who seemed to have some experience in helping pilots work through these kinds of first, low tier offenses.
 
Thank you for the follow up information. It is good to hear that you were successful.

Now, go forth, and commit some sober Aviation.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top