Give everybody eat!

[The Voice of Reason]

Hello all,

It's been at least a year since I last graced this forum and provoked the participants herein to think for themselves.

I admit up front that I have not read a single message in many months, therefore the sentiments I express may have already been expressed by others, however any duplication is purely coincidental, making these thoughts my own.

My thesis statement is simple... the Safety program has gone too far and it's time to put it in its place.

My participation in CAP often reminds me of the book Catch-22.  In this case, I am referring to Captain Black and the Loyalty Oaths.  Officers and men were signing oaths and reciting pledges to get in the chow line, to get their food, to sit down, to get back up, etc etc etc... etc.

All of this was finally put to a stop when a peturbed Major ____ de Coverly, refusing to sign the loyalty oaths said "Gimme eat!" then observing the distress of other officers caught up in the cumbersome process of drawing chow said "Give everybody eat!" thus breaking the pointless crusade.

Look, I'm not saying we shouldn't be safe, but if we as an organization have reached the point where safety is this much of a pain in the balls, maybe it's time to re-evaluate.

Have we taken on new and unsafe duties?  Has the quality of our personnel dropped to the point where we have to spoon feed everyone everything?  It has been said that the result of protecting a fool from his folly is that you fill the world with fools.

Every once in a while, Darwin has to take a stroll through the neighborhood.  If people can't be trusted to act with common sense, it is our fault for putting them in a situation they can't handle, and theirs for not stepping back.

We have to get away from the idea that we can regulate common sense, and we have to stop creating new rules for situations that are already contrary to existing rules and basic common sense.  If  what we're doing is so dangerous that we need safety briefings for every little thing, either our people are too stupid to live, we are involved in things that are way too dangerous, or someone is using the safety program as a means to a power grab.

Enough is enough.  I have much more to say, but I'm curious to see the response this draws.

[Spike]

If people can't be trusted to act with common sense, it is our fault for putting them in a situation they can't handle, and theirs for not stepping back.

You gave yourself the answer. 

However, we need to know the situations and our peoples abilities and if they are capable of making a decision for themselves. 

I think that no matter how good a decision is, it will always lead to a bad decision.  So ALL decisions ultimately are bad decisions.

We need to stop letting our egos dictate our lives.  Stop making choices based on gut and personal feelings.  Let our logical brain guide us and we all will be fine.

Face it.....I can't help the guy who drives his plane into the side of a hangar when I am 1500 miles away from him.  No matter how many safety videos I watch or tests I complete that guy will still make bad decisions that lead him to his bad action.  Also, there is no such thing as an accident.  Accidents do not "just happen".  We or someone else made wrong choices that led us to the situation.

So, to make sure we all operate safely....enough with videos and tests, and accept that things happen because people either are not smart enough or don't care enough. 

For the guy taking out the hangar with his plane while pulling it up to park.....he needs to be shown the door.       

[ZigZag911]

I believe the exact phrase was "Give EVRYBODY bean!"

[The Voice of Reason]

I have observed that though this message has been read a substantial number of times, there seems to be no dissenting opinion.  Perhaps the leadership of this fine organization will take note, butch up a bit, and focus on something worth focusing on, because in the end, if they're posturing for policy or grandstanding, nobody will take them seriously for very long.

...Remember (another Catch-22 reference)... Lieutenant Scheisskopf rose quickly to the rank of General by focusing on parades in a war zone.  We don't need any more Scheisskopf's around this organization.

---

For the sake of precision only, I offer the following reference:

   "Give him eat," he (Major ____ de Coverly) said.
   Corporal Snark began giving Major ____ de Coverly eat.  Major ____ de Coverly turned from the counter with his tray full and came to a stop.  His eyes fell on the groups of other officers gazing at him in mute appeal, and, with righteous belligerence, he roared:
   "Give everybody eat!"
   "Give everybody eat!" Milo echoed with joyful relief, and the Glorious Loyalty Oath Crusade came to an end.

Catch-22, Dell Publishing, Second Printing 1979, Chapter eleven, Page 120, Para's 4,5,6 & 7 (partial)

[Hawk200]

I have observed that though this message has been read a substantial number of times, there seems to be no dissenting opinion.

Wow. Are you sure it's a case of no dissenting opinion? Absoulutely sure?

Did the thought ever occur to you that maybe people read the hubris in the first line, and then backed out because of it?

But I'm sure you'll rationalize your self-granted intellectual seniority somehow.

Just because people may have agreeable ideas doesn't mean that you're the one who gave it to them.  And giving yourself the moniker of "The Voice of Reason" doesn't mean it's what you actually are.

People were thinking for themselves long before you came along.

But, let's see if you actually have any conviction about what you're parrotting. What have you done to solve the problem? My money is on absolutely nothing.

[Eclipse]

Did the thought ever occur to you that maybe people read the hubris in the first line, and then backed out because of it?

+1

[SarDragon]

When you posted this time, I had to go back and look at your prior posts. What a mistake. I want that four minutes back.

Every post you have made is a rant about all the things you see wrong with CAP, usually lacking any mention of real world solutions to the problems you're bring in up. Why waste your, and our, time here? I'm sure /ete_insights/cap_insights.html]Ray Hayden wouldn't mind listening for a while.

[The Voice of Reason]

I reaffirm everything I said, especially the part about people turning to insults and childish behavior whenever anyone draws their attention to a different point of view.

From what I know of the situation, I think Ray H. is a bit of a kook.  I as much as said so before it was "redacted" by the thought police.  Why on earth would you liken me to him when I so obviously side against him.  The childishness continues.

Where is your intelligent, yet dissenting opinion, or do you simply choose to argue for the sake of argument?

Perhaps your high post-count is indicative not of your contribution to the discourse of this forum, but rather to the abundance of free time on your hands.

I do not feel the least bit challenged by what you've said.  Instead I am disappointed that my words and thoughts were wasted on someone who is evidently incapable of thinking their own thoughts.

I don't wish to get nasty, but if we start flinging mud, believe me, you've given me plenty of ammo to play with.

[PHall]

We usually ignore Trolls.

[lordmonar]

Time to lock this one.

We have already ranted and raged about CAP's safety program. If you want to find our opinions about do a search.

You do not offer any solutions now or in the past. 

[The Voice of Reason]

It is my contention that the safety program has either grown beyond its mandate, or is ineffective and must be scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up.

It has been my experience that what you expect from people, you get.  If you treat people like they're retarded, or can't be trusted to use common sense, they'll act in a retardedly untrustworthy way.  In addition, if they come to expect that every potential hazard will be accompanied by half a dozen briefings, a full scale ORM, an afteraction report, a CISM debriefing, some talk therapy, and some handholding, they'll stop relying on good ole' common sense.

Some situations do require a safety briefing or special instruction.  Occasional reminders of basic safety are appropriate, but if we can't rely on our people to think for themselves, it's time to pack it in for the night.

Also, it's kinda disturbing that when a dissenting opinion (mine) emerges, there's a desire to censor rather than discuss, and I again reiterate my observations that when people resort to attacking the messenger, they usually have no case.

Time to lock this one.

You do not offer any solutions now or in the past. 

My solutions are:
1). Expect people to think for themselves.
2). Maintain integrity in all aspects of you/our/my conduct.

[Hawk200]

I reaffirm everything I said, especially the part about people turning to insults and childish behavior whenever anyone draws their attention to a different point of view.

Most people agree. And the insults are a result of your showing up and acting like it's your idea. The childish behavior is yours in acting like you had something new. Everyone here had the thoughts the the day the program was put out. Folks here view you in much the same manner as a previous Vice President that claimed he invented the Internet.

From what I know of the situation, I think Ray H. is a bit of a kook.  I as much as said so before it was "redacted" by the thought police.  Why on earth would you liken me to him when I so obviously side against him.  The childishness continues.

That's a case of "if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck...". You claim the same issues.

Where is your intelligent, yet dissenting opinion, or do you simply choose to argue for the sake of argument?

The only thing being argued is your worthless self aggrandizing behavior. Come up with something fresh and new, and maybe people will pay attention to your content. Of course, it can't be insulting content such as every post you've ever made.

Perhaps your high post-count is indicative not of your contribution to the discourse of this forum, but rather to the abundance of free time on your hands.

That's hilarious, you talking about free time. It's also a sign of ignorance on your part, since you obviously don't know how to determine when my free time actually is.

I do not feel the least bit challenged by what you've said.  Instead I am disappointed that my words and thoughts were wasted on someone who is evidently incapable of thinking their own thoughts.

Doesn't surprise me. Maybe the regulars on this board are smarter than you give them credit for, so you don't understand the challenge in the first place. We think our own thoughts, the problem is that you try to take credit for them. There's a word for that, but I bet you don't know what it is.

I don't wish to get nasty, but if we start flinging mud, believe me, you've given me plenty of ammo to play with.

You've got plenty of something, but it ain't mud. And blatantly lying in a post shows it.