blonde poker forum

Sure this guy deserved to be imprisoned for a little while.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40045599

But 10 years for being stupid?

Seems excessive.

What would you deem a fair sentence for endangering the lives of dozens and dozens of people?

Pffft seems perfectly reasonably for stupidly risking the lives of so many people....

A person who gets behind the wheel of car steaming drunk is risking killing people.

They will just get a 1k fine and lose their license for a couple of years.

I think a year, maybe 18 months seems about the right sentence here.

The car driver is "only" endangering the lives of 3 or 4 people, tops. More likely to injure than kill, too.

The geezer on the aircraft is endangering the lives of several hundred people. Won't be any survivors, either.

A paper fire in a toilet?

That's a bit of a stretch to say he was endangering lives. Surely all the material in the toilet apart from the paper is inflammable?

If it was so easy to start a fire on a plane, why haven't any terrorists tried it yet?

I'd have thought any fire on a plane has the potential to be catastrophic.

Seems a bit strange that we are allowed to carry lighters and matches on planes then, but not a bottle of water bought outside security.

Always makes me smile when i watch all those old airport films and everyone's sparking up left right and centre and the captain sitting there smoking a pipe..

Did a plane ever come down with someone accidently setting fire to something when they were all allowed to smoke 33,00 feet up ?

Flight 820's problems began when a fire started in a rear lavatory. Crew members moved to the front of the airplane toward the emergency exit, as many passengers in the body of the plane inhaled smoke. Prior to the forced landing, many of the passengers had already died of smoke inhalation. The aircraft landed at a field 5 km short of the runway, in a full-flap and gear down configuration.
Only one passenger survived, while the major part of the crew left the plane by the emergency exit at the top of the cockpit. The captain of this flight, Gilberto Araujo da Silva, disappeared 30 January 1979 while flying Varig Cargo Boeing 707 PP-VLU over the Pacific Ocean.[1]

A possible cause of the fire was that the lavatory waste bin contents caught fire after a still lit cigarette was thrown into it, the FAA issued AD 74-08-09 requiring "installation of placards prohibiting smoking in the lavatory and disposal of cigarettes in the lavatory waste receptacles; establishment of a procedure to announce to airplane occupants that smoking is prohibited in the lavatories; installation of ashtrays at certain locations; and repetitive inspections to ensure that lavatory waste receptacle doors operate correctly".

Not confirmed but the above caused 123 deaths.

CAAC Flight 2311 was a scheduled passenger flight from Changsha Huanghua International Airport to the former Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport. On 24 December 1982 it was flown by an Ilyushin Il-18B (registered in China as B-202), when after landing at Baiyun Airport a cabin fire produced toxic smoke whereupon the crew stopped the aircraft on the runway and evacuated the passengers.[1] The fast-developing fire killed 25 passengers and seriously injured 22 passengers and four crew members.[1] The fire, which was started by a passenger's cigarette, destroyed the aircraft.

I agree with Keith here. Intent and deterrent are the crux issues IMO. The bloke didn't intend to endanger life, and a two year sentence would be just as effective as a deterrent.

But then would someone get two years for just being caught smoking, or does it have to cause a fire to be serious enough for the 2 years?

This is it. If he intended to endanger life, life for attempted murder would be correct IMO.

Does no one know why we are allowed to carry lighters on planes? Seems such a weird position considering the paranoia about what we cannot carry.

Arson sentences always seem severe.  I have had this discussion in the past (not this case obv) and it is around the fact that fires can go out of control and you frequently can't be sure you won't kill anyone.  Very few arsonists intend to kill, but that doesn't mean there wasn't a good chance of it happening.  So bored teenagers starting a fire can get 5 years.  In this case, the bloke seems incredibly reckless to me and is clearly putting a lot of lives at risk.  My immediate reaction was that is a long time, but I can see how they got there.

On drink driving, I can't disagree.  Sentences often look very lenient to me.  

I can't C & P this, as it is from The Times which is behind a paywall.

On the flight in question, there had, by chance, been an earlier incident when a fire began in a different toilet which activated the smoke detectors. 2 of the aircraft's 4 hand-held fire extinguishers were used to quell the first fire, so they were down to 2 hand-held extinguishers now.

The pilot, a little concerned at the situation, came on the PA & warned passengers about the "moronic" (his actual word) practice of smoking on board a passenger aircraft, especially in the toilet, & especially now they were down to 2 extinguishers.  

So the guy, who was pissed as a fart, was clearly warned not to do it, but persisted.

In that context, whilst 10 years might seem harsh, I don't have an iota of sympathy with him.

As chance would have it, a fire prevention officer was on board as a PAX, & he helped deal with the problem.

Once again, excess alcohol (or inability to hold alcohol) is at the root of the problem.  

Interesting. That does shed a different light on the matter somewhat.

However, why airlines allow people on board who are clearly pissed is beyond me.

I could not agree more.

Aircraft cabins are almost unique places - we sit there, effectively trapped in our seats for long periods, often 10 hours or more. Being trapped in my seat next to a piss artist is a thoroughly dreadful experience.

I'd ban all alcohol consumption at airports & on aircraft, but here, of course, the Airports & Airlines share some blame, as they seek to maximise revenues by selling the stuff.

Did you not fancy making a donation? ;)

Read something similar this morning. Steaming drunk and then goes and has a cig in the bogs, and doesn't even try to put it out properly. I wouldn't have liked to sit on that plane, having to endure an emergency landing, all because some twat thought he could light up in the toilet.

I'd like to say that when he gets out, I doubt he'll do anything like that again, but people are, you know, stupid.

Leave the alcohol alone though please, some of us can handle our booze on a plane :)

Yup.....  :)up