risktaker

Finally, someone who gets it. There is so much that is unclear about the regs. I picked one very simple MassDOT regulation that is published, I have read it. And yet some officials and some DZs say it doesn't apply to tandem jumpers. It does, or it doesn't. And you guys can't even talk about it without paranoia and insults. And you want me to tell you who I am? Are you kidding me? I'm a guy who likes to do things right. Hard to do in this world I guess.

Nit-picky bureaucratic excuse to cause trouble? So, wearing a life jacket is nit-picky if you land in the water. Why bother with a backup chute? Just nit-picking. So you don't support MassDOT rules? you're quite a rebel.

I repeat, not an FAA reg, a Mass. reg. Now we're defending foul language and belittling people who live near airports? That seems a little harsh. Where do you live? Are you a townie? You make fun of people's houses because they might not cost as much as your house? Are you maybe just a little off base here?

I have asked the good folks at MassDOT aeronautics. They won't answer. Do you have special access that the rest of us don't? I went to this sight because MassDOT doesn't talk to people. Maybe you could find the answer and post it: Are floatation devices required for jumps within a mile of water or not? If yes, are there any exceptions? It is absolutely bizzare to me that people are so threatened by this one rule.

I know nothing about the health care law, but that would be a federal law. I'm talking about Massachusetts.

So, Canada has a floatation device rule and incredibly it's well know and they are not afraid to discuss it. Good for Canada. As for sucking on...hot knives, we don't do that kind of thing down here. Each to their own as they say.

So, this site is all about NOT following the rules? Are you threatened because I want to understand the rules. Lawyers use the law. I'm just asking a question. Why does that bother you? Are you defending unsafe practices? Is that what this site is all about? The account name was just being silly. It meant nothing.

It's a MassDOT regulation. I'm not a lawyer. You are very suspicious. What's that all about? It's a Mass regulation and no one that I know of pays any attention to it. I just wonder why. Does the law not apply to tandem jumps? Do you guys get a lot of lawyers on this site? It's a chat room, not a court.

To "confirmed cynical sarcastic bastard", I inquire because there appears to be some confusion in Massachusetts regarding the floatation device requirement. Some people say it does not apply to tandem jumpers. That sort of doesn't make sense. Tandem jumpers can drown at least as easily as singles, maybe more easily. Safety regs should be clear and unambiguous. My question is clear: Are floatation devices required for tandem jumpers within a mile of water, or not? Why do I inquire? Because there is a lot of confusion out here about what the rule is. I don't get it. Is it a rule or not? I understand that it is clever to respond to a question with another question (if you are cynical), but this really is a pretty straight forward question without a clear answer, at least in my neck of the woods. By the way, I do admire cynicism, just not in this case.

They tell me here in Massachusetts there is a law that says you have to wear a floatation device if you jump within a mile of water. That's a pain in the neck if you jump tandem. The instructors are experienced and control their chutes. No one uses floatation devices and there is water all over the place. We even jump over the ocean. We just avoid the water. What's the deal here? Is this law for real? New to all this.