Not so much!
Again the sort of flying that is quite acceptable with troops in a combat zone but with fare paying pax and young kids???????
But...why? Leaving aside the issue of kids, why should adults not be allowed to have such a ride? Is it not their choice to do so? As long as there is no danger to people on the ground, of course.
Hell, people love to take chances. Bungee jumping. Skydiving (tandem--trying to keep in the realm of the passenger). Flying down the highway on the back of a motorcycle. Rafting down river rapids. Jet boating up river rapids. Rides in aerobatic aircraft. Rides in rally cars, race cars, on the back of race bikes on a racetrack. Parasailing. Banana boat rides (and other inflatable tow-behinds). The list is endless of passengers who willingly place themselves into obvious danger, into obviously risky situations, because they WANT to be thrilled.
The idea that anything dangerous or risky is improper or illegal and should therefore be banned is a very, very dangerous idea. It's a slippery slope because pretty soon they'll be taking away all of your sharp kitchen utensils. Oh wait, they are already doing that in the UK, aren't they?
Here in 'merica the "fun police" need not apply, although we have plenty of overly helpful "legislators". Remember, nobody ever gets into politics to leave you alone.
If somebody wants to risk balling up a machine in the middle of cornfield (and this can be risked while still meeting all FAA regulations), and people are willing to risk being in that ball, they should be allowed to. They might have to be self-insured, or not insured, to do so, but that's totally fair.
And that's just passenger thrills. That doesn't even get into first person thrills like skydiving for yourself, SCUBA diving, skiing, mountain climbing, again the list is endless, and some activities are quite extreme, e.g. low level wingsuit flight. Should all these people stay home, too?
Just because it's not for you doesn't mean it shouldn't be for anyone.
Yeah, yeah, I know, just when you thought aa777888 was sane. What can I say, I'm a BIG believer in personal freedom.
Finally, remember what I wrote above about rides appropriate to your audience and venue. You may have noted from the video that this took place at a major US skydiving drop zone. These people do not have the same risk tolerances as the average person. I should know, because I am a skydiver as well. And they have a high believe in personal freedom. It is therefore unsurprising that the ride took the form it did. If that 222 had gone down there would have been a celebration of life for all who perished, that they had died doing what they loved, and not a bunch of lawsuits on top of lawsuits. If it had been Aunt Martha and Uncle John at the local agricultural fair, it's a good bet the ride would have been quite a bit different, and that there would be lawsuits if by chance something bad did happen while they were getting the aviation equivalent of a hay ride.
"We don't do that kind of flying here. It's dangerous and irresponsible."
"Too many lawsuits."
"Well, who does?"
"He does."
"Hey Hawk. This guy wants a scary ride."
[YOUTUBE]
[/ YOUTUBE]