IamMe90 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 I'm confused.Are there people so non-judgemental that they feel a mass murderer of 150 people should NOT rot in hell? (Assuming he did indeed do what is suspected.)Interesting. Well, some people believe that the concept of eternal damnation and suffering/torture shouldn't apply to anyone... just food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 On depressed people: http://www.buzzfeed.com/laurasilver/this-is-what-depression-really-looks-like#.elNeOrbqR Simply put, depressed people don't all look/act the same, and do have a capacity to 'act normal/be happy' etc. It's simplistic to imagine all depressed people have the same indentifiers/ (Yes, I realise I linked to buzzfeed, dammit!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacuna Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 How about a remote override by ground control, in case the pilots are unresponsive and the plane goes off course or veers outside an air corridor? According to an article I read (in Norwegian), the technology basically exists already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gears of the Beast Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Well, some people believe that the concept of eternal damnation and suffering/torture shouldn't apply to anyone... just food for thought. Religionists who are brought up thinking that hell is such a great part of their theology often have a hard time seeing how immoral the concept of hell is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kikajon Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 I'm confused. Are there people so non-judgemental that they feel a mass murderer of 150 people should NOT rot in hell? (Assuming he did indeed do what is suspected.)Interesting.of course it's easier if you are not personally striken, but we still don't know and probably never will know anything about the co pilot, what was he thinking, in what way he was thinking.Possibly he was thinking to act at the best for him and those people, like mothers who jump out of windows with their babies, it is to protect them, not to harm them.I this case I would hold judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3CityApache Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 How about a remote override by ground control, in case the pilots are unresponsive and the plane goes off course or veers outside an air corridor? And then what? Remote landing? I've just read these "significant discoveries" made by Police are supposed to be related to co-pilot's heartbreak. If that's the case, I can't imagine the state of mind you must be in not to think about 150 innocent people sitting behind you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 In any case, this case raises serious questions about the extent to which mental health issues should be treated as relevant factors for recruitment evaluation purposes. As much as one wants to avoid discrimination based on health issues, one cannot divorce this from the danger presented to innocent civilians. Reports are emerging that he had a serious depressive episode requiring lengthy treatment at a clinic 6 years ago. Given the stakes, I would not be against any such incident disqualifying you from a profession like piloting an airplane for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacuna Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 And then what? Remote landing? [...] Why not? It's something a computer should be able to do, since there's no emotional or intuition component to landing a plane so far as I can imagine. it's pure procedure and input-output, no? Then again, I am in no way a pilot, so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egalitarianism Always Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Why not? It's something a computer should be able to do, since there's no emotional or intuition component to landing a plane so far as I can imagine. it's pure procedure and input-output, no? Then again, I am in no way a pilot, so... The mechanical mind i.e binary computers is too simplistic. Pot limit poker and chess they can 'master', something involving nuanced variables like wind, air temperature and rain/ice leaves the mechanical mind unable to cope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 In any case, this case raises serious questions about the extent to which mental health issues should be treated as relevant factors for recruitment evaluation purposes. As much as one wants to avoid discrimination based on health issues, one cannot divorce this from the danger presented to innocent civilians. Reports are emerging that he had a serious depressive episode requiring lengthy treatment at a clinic 6 years ago. Given the stakes, I would not be against any such incident disqualifying you from a profession like piloting an airplane for life. Problem: About 30% of all professional pilots are depressed. The vast majority of them do not kill 150 people at once. Punishing all of them for one madman's behavior is very harsh... and it also creates a workplace where people fear to ever tackle their mental illness when it appears. In addition, all those pilots would have to be replaced... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 If 30% has to go, so be it. How can you not do it, given the stakes involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 If a person with mental health issues cannot own a gun, how on earth can he be allowed to fly a jumbo jet with hundreds of people on board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Mental issues don't equal suicide/homicide. How would you make the distinction? Further, where is it guaranteed that someone who is not depressed at this point in time, will never be depressed? Seems simplistic. More details on Lubitz' mental health: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/27/germanwings-co-pilot-andreas-lubitzs-background-under-scrutiny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Crixus I'm talking about a policy position. The practicality of identifying those that don't meet policy standards is a separate issue. It goes without saying that guys who have not revealed their issues, or where it has not yet been diagnosed, cannot be identified. But at the very least, medical records should not be secret. (I don't know if they are, but if so, mandatory access should be a given). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 In Germany, medical records are secret by law. A specialist can't even get information from another specialist about their patient unless the patient gave his explicit permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Well that law should change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Mental issues don't equal suicide/homicide. How would you make the distinction? Further, where is it guaranteed that someone who is not depressed at this point in time, will never be depressed? Seems simplistic. More details on Lubitz' mental health: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/27/germanwings-co-pilot-andreas-lubitzs-background-under-scrutiny Bild as a 'reliable source'? :bang: :bang: :bang: Well, perhaps by British standards, but if so, poor UK. @FNR: Not going to happen. It's based on our constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 How does it work when someone applies to own a gun? How do you then prevent someone with a history of psychosis from buying a firearm, if you can't access medical records? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Bild as a 'reliable source'? :bang: :bang: :bang: Well, perhaps by British standards, but if so, poor UK. Do you mean the Guardian? It's making the rounds on other news sites too, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 You have to bring a letter from a psychiatrist certifying you're sound of mind, dated back no more than a month. In order to be allowed to use a gun and buy ammunition, you also have to show you need the gun (for hunting, your job or sports) and reapply every three years with a new letter certifying your mental health. ETA@Crixus: Yep, the Guardian cited Bild, Germany's most successful tabloid, as a source. The information has also been found on other, more respectable newspapers, so why not cite one of them?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.