Rick,

Should I assume that you hold an anti-government position? Perhaps it's more of an anti-bad government position.

I myself have doubts about many of the individuals elected to political positions. We may be on the same side of the issue on this one.

From my point of view I would modify your first sentence in the following way -

The only thing worse than bad things happening is when bad and/or incompetent government (or a similar politician) attempts to fix it.

Lots of good things happen when competent government agencies/departments do their job. Where I live, the streets are paved, the highways maintained, there are short lines at the DMV, the electricity stays on (99.9% of the time). Water flows from the faucets and the sewers work. Fracing was outlawed statewide. Many things could be better, but the world isn't perfect - particularly the human world.

Regarding your other comments -

I agree completely that the original idea was that hang gliding was intended to keep an eye on itself. That doesn't seem to be working as well these days.

Very honestly, I believe that money and politics have corrupted the U$hPa. That process began with the possible admission of powered ultralights (which didn't end up happening) then the actual admission of the faltering US paragliding (only) association back in ~ 1989 or 1990.

That move was meant to "bolster" declining membership numbers. That membership decline, however, resulted from the absence of the USHGA maintaining any kind of positive self promotion in the media. Such positive promotion was needed in order to counter the years of bad press the sport had faced beginning in the mid 1970s and on through the early 1980s. The USHGA should have invested in a professionally made documentary on the tremendous safety improvements in HG technology which began in the early 1980s. Instead of doing something positive like that, the USHGA took the easy way out and was propped back up by a bunch of collapsible canopy members.

And I'll say this, collapsible canopies were dying off in the US, until the USHGA effectively endorsed and supported them by including them in their one time HG only association. As a result of USHGA's support, paragliding marketing in the US gained strength and also tended to rob members who were (once upon a time) more likely to have taken up hang gliding.

So money, in the form of collapsible canopy member dollar$, helped corrupt USHGA's "mission". And as the collapsible canopy contingent grew, its political power also grew, at the very least, influencing how the now U$hPa approached its (altered) goals.

After writing all the above, I would completely agree that, with the U$hPa identified as gliding sport aviation's "governing" body, things only get worse when they get involved. That's why I didn't call them to fix the problem of Max Marien taking children on dangerous, high risk tandem rides within the PGDMC above Torrey Pines City Park.

I posted this idea to the Waiver Thread. Reposting here. This idea would reduce the joy ride aspect of Tandems considerably. This idea will probably not happen until USHPA goes away, but here is the idea.

The problem I see with the USHPA Waiver, the TORREY Waiver, and all Waivers is this,
They are too easy to sign.

An exam needs to be in place that all wannabe pilots are required to pass. An Exam that tests their knowledge and understanding of the Waivers they want to sign in order to fly.

Can the Wannabe Pilot fully explain the legal mumbo jumbo of the Waiver they have just signed in terms that both we and they can understand?

A Wannabe pilot must pass this Exam with a perfect score. 100%

This exam should not be multiple choice but require written essay type responses to questions.

This is really the only measure that would convince myself that a wannabe pilot fully comprehends what rights he/she desires to sign away.

We can take video of actual signings but that still does not provide proof a wannabe pilot fully understands what rights he/she is signing away. Video only proves they signed it.
Only a written Exam constitutes actual proof in my opinion.

They manner in which such an exam may have altered the outcome of who gets to fy and who does not is this:
Since the parents involved in the Torrey incident probably had to sign the Waivers for their children, both the parents AND the children would have to pass this exam.

This would automatically weed out Tandem Joy rides for children too young to comprehend the Waiver.
This would also force parents who wish to sign a Waiver for Their childs joy ride to take that waiver home and study it thoroughly before they take an exam and pass with a 100% final score.
So joy rides would cease to be a spur of the moment, impulse decision. They get a chance to sleep on it....AND study. They have to want their children to fly so badly they are willing to do a little study.
If they do not want their children to fly strongly enough to expend a few brain cells studying a waiver, then that flight is simply not going to happen.

USHPA should have thought of requiring exams that cover waiver knowledge 20 years ago.
The ease with which we let just anyone sign a waiver without taking such an exam could be viewed as highly irresponsible on USHPAs part in the eyes of a court.

I really like this idea RS. I even liked it the first time I read it.

The big problem still exists. It's not impossible for a 10-12 year old smart child to pass the test - but not truly understand the real meaning of "serious injury or death".

Since, in most US States, child endangerment is to one degree or the other against the law, I would promote that no one under 18 be able to become an active pilot member of the U$hPa. Sure, adults could or should take the test you're recommending because they too can get hurt or killed while doing a tandem "ride".

Connected with a test, I think the U$hPa waiver should include a statement: "In all or most US States a parent or guardian who allows a child to paraglide/hang glide/speed wing, either tandem or solo, can be considered to be committing a criminal act."

There are "grey" areas where a 14 or 16 year old could be trained under close supervision on a small training hill and not be at a significant risk (any more than playing baseball or soccer, as examples). But a minor of even 14 -16, at altitude (over 100 feet) as a tandem passenger - or as a solo pilot - is equally at risk of serious injury or death.

The U$hPa (or maybe the US Hawks!) should create a Youth Membership Program where a good, well designed flight simulator is available (as a computer game?) as part of membership. They could "learn" to fly at a training hill then move up to higher hills, then to mountain sites. I don't quite think a cell phone app would make the grade, but, . . .

How about, "Only parents can take their children hang gliding."
That solves a lot of it.
And, "Ratings are issued only to those who have reached the age of legal consent."
That solves even more.
This doesn't prevent kids learning to fly hang gliders.
It just protects the association by prohibiting any involvement with children.
Period.
And forget trying to change U$hPa.
They are a corporation filled with members invested to the hilt with all the things harming the sport.
I'm talking about the US Hawks.
That's where we need to focus.

- Wear a helmet when banging one's head against a brick wall -

i couldnt agree more with Ricks sentiment. Any struggle to change an existing paradigm usually strengthens the existing paradigm and acknowledges the authority that paradigm has over our life.
My girlfriend and I came to an agreement about a year ago to stop trying to change the system (paradigm) we find ourselves a part of in this world but to create our own paradigm. Create a new way to live.
Simply walk away from the programmed way of doing things.
That instantly makes a person a leader instead of a follower, and if the new way is better than the old way.
Its like a pilot trying to win a meet by trying to keep up with the top dogs.
But the top dogs are the top dogs because they are not trying to keep up with anyone. They are flying their own game.
we need to just fly our own game, create our own paradigm and let the competitors try and keep up.

"hangdigm"

Cute.
We are building the new hangdigm.
It follows the collapse of the old paradigm.     
----------------

Not at all.
Unfortunately, citizens often get the government they deserve
rather than the one their children deserve.