Page 3 of 3

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:28 pm
by dhmartens
Ushpa offers the land owner free liability insurance so they may have used that as leverage to get him to ban you.

The land owner is just playing the free market to get the best deal he can as is Ushpa.

Their methods of intimidation are not going to be overlooked and if they all get the Raske Claw, they will know where it came from and why.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:52 pm
by Bob Kuczewski
Bob, on Jul 17, 2019 2:14am wrote:I am, however, concerned that the RAF (likely backed by USHPA operatives) may try to convince the landowner to keep Scott from flying there.

Scott, on Jul 25, 2019 8:07pm wrote:Rick Paruski was 20 years old at the time. Three years my junior. Since his father's passing he now owns the farm. 

Yesterday he told me I was no longer welcome on his property. This will be the case until Rochester Area Flyers (RAF) convinces him that there need not be any conflict between myself and this U$hPa chapter. Since I didn't start the "conflict" it is up to RAF to resolve the issue. Rick Parulski has, at this point in time, kicked me out because of RAF's criminal behavior.

I'm sorry to say that I could see this coming. The RAF got exactly what they wanted from the situation they created. They're flying and Scott is not.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:59 pm
by wingspan33
The last flyable day at Mt Washington, the president of RAF flew and a relative newbie crashed in the valley LZ and broke his arm. Example - RAF pres, newbies are a bigger risk than that pilot who started flying 44 years ago.

Hey! :evil: Who said something about "KARMA"? :think:

"Karma means action, work or deed; it also refers to the spiritual principle of cause and effect where intent and actions of an individual influence the future of that individual. Good intent and good deeds contribute to good karma and future happiness, while bad intent and bad deeds contribute to bad karma and future suffering."

I think sometimes bad karma may rub off on to an innocent person.

Very much like, . . . "You shall reap what you sow." [God?]

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:22 am
by dhmartens
We have enough to start California and New York Lawsuits against Ushpa at the same time (Class action?)

Or, we could watch cat confrontation videos, there is mild violence at 7:44.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:46 am
by wingspan33
DH, One major problem with class actions is that you have to hire a lawyer in a class action suit. So unless you can afford to pay their fees, or they work Pro Bono, it can cost a lot of $. Filing a civil action as an individual allows a person to only pay a couple hundred $ filing fee. Or, if they are like me, and only have a limited income, the fees are waved.

All this works very well for an individual plaintiff acting Pro Se, if they are suing a corporation. Since the corporation HAS to hire a lawyer. An individual member of the corp. can't represent the "group". So a low income Pro Se plaintiff pays nothing, while the corp. has to pay many dollars to even begin to defend themselves - before a trial ever starts.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:52 pm
by Bob Kuczewski
Phone call to Paul Voight

I spoke with Scott earlier today and I asked if Scott would mind if I called Paul Voight (USHPA Director in Scott's region). Scott said that was fine and he relayed the phone numbers to me.

Paul and I spoke for about 20 minutes, and it was a reasonably pleasant conversation.

Paul relayed that Scott would be able to fly at the site (Mt. Washington, aka Hammondsport) if he joined USHPA. Paul also relayed that Scott would not have to join the RAF to fly there.

Paul further relayed that if Scott joined USHPA, then the RAF would remove all of the objections they've raised with the land owner against Scott flying there.

I reminded Paul that Scott was on the U.S. Hawks Board of Directors, and Paul didn't raise any objections on that basis.

In short, Paul assured me that Scott would be able to fly at the site if he simply joined USHPA. I've been trying to call Scott to let him know, but after about 15 phone calls, I haven't been able to reach him.

As a side note, my expulsion was also discussed, and Paul told me that he had abstained on that vote. I believe the record would show otherwise, but USHPA has not provided me with even a voting record on my own expulsion.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:23 pm
by Bob Kuczewski

I wanted to keep that last post to just the facts of the call without clouding it with my opinion.

It is worth noting that this situation again points out that USHPA operates monopoly control over most reasonably safe flying sites in the United States. Scott pointed out that he could try flying another site, but it was a much longer glide over trees to reach a safe landing zone. That reflects what I've found here in California. It's been suggested to me, for example, that I could use alternate launch and/or landing zones at Sylmar and Crestline. But those are more difficult launches and/or landing zones with increased risk of injury or death. So while USHPA likes to claim an interest in the safety of hang gliding and paragliding, their policies can have the opposite effect.

It's also worth noting that the behavior of the RAF in this case has turned a non-exclusively USHPA site into an exclusively USHPA site. This happens because of the predatory nature of USHPA's insurance policy. Scott was flying just fine before the incident, but because of the RAF's actions, Scott is now forced to join USHPA. This is very similar to gang-like behavior. Scott must either join or leave their "turf".

My advice to Scott is to accept Paul Voight's arrangement, and rejoin USHPA to continue his flying. I know that joining USHPA is repugnant (Joe's very appropriate term) to some, but there are situations where the benefit outweighs the cost. I think this is one of those cases. Even though USHPA did claim to expel me for starting the U.S. Hawks, they have never moved to expel any other U.S. Hawks members or Board Members. They know that was inappropriate, and it has cost them in many ways (and many yet to come). So there is little chance that USHPA would dare reject Scott's membership based on his affiliation with the U.S. Hawks.

Finally, there seems to be little down side to Scott taking Paul's offer. Scott can still take any legal actions against the RAF or other parties. Scott can still work to build the South Central New York hang gliding club, and Scott can still work to build the U.S. Hawks and to spread the word about the recreational use statutes in protecting land owners. Furthermore, being able to fly will improve Scott's ability to work with other pilots and landowners to eventually remove some of these barriers. That's much more difficult when USHPA uses their monopoly to ostracize pilots from other pilots.

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 10:01 am
by Bob Kuczewski
Update: Paul Voight called me yesterday to let me know that he was wrong about Scott not having to join RAF to fly. It appears that Rick's farm is controlled by both USHPA and the RAF who demand membership for anyone to fly there.

Is it any wonder the sport of hang gliding is declining?

Re: Violent Confrontation with USHPA Chapter Officer

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 2:46 pm
by dhmartens
"Is it any wonder the sport of hang gliding is declining?"

"Among the restrictions of FAA's FAR Part 103:

Used only for sport and recreation"

This may be the problem. The AI is looking at it and it is stuck.
The delivery service at 1:45 is illegal and soon will be taken over by drones, not humans.

You can deduct your hang glider and expenses if you have your company logo on the sail, other wise, buy a drone and deduct your expenses 100%
Does far103 need to be adjusted?

RAF has been loosing flying sites so they need to turn that around and then market to NYC bed and breakfast lesson program.
You can market through facebook for $10 I've tried it. If we used Ushpa salaries on facebook/youtube marketing over a few years we could reach one billion people.

I'd prefer to hold off my attack on Ushpa California Business & Professions Code section 16600 violation

That would take away our initiative:
the ability to assess and initiate things independently.

Ushpa wants us to attack now so they can blame the reorganization on us.