Threads such as this always seem to bring posters with very extreme views out of the woodwork.
At one extreme we have (for example) heli-cal who not only has no sympathy himself for the pilot but boldly declares that there is no reason for anyone else to hold a different view and those who do are ‘moaning tediously’.
He applauds not only that the pilot is now in prison but also the fact (if true) that he will never be given another chance - helpfully adding a 
to his post in case readers had difficulty believing he actually meant what he appeared to be saying.
I wonder if heli-cal has read the posts by LProuse on this thread:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/2...ml#post3028066
Lyle is a retired Northwest Airlines Captain ….. and a former federal prison inmate. His posts, which start at #52, had a big impact upon many Ppruners at the time - especially upon those who have the capacity to see things in more than simplistic ‘black and white’ terms.
At the other extreme, we have one professional pilot who, as well as making some good points, appears (unless I’ve misunderstood) to think it’s acceptable to embark on a flight with one of the pilots clearly suffering from the effects of alcohol on the basis that he’ll sleep it off during the flight.
FrequestSLF is astonished by the idea that a colleague who appears to be over the alcohol limit should be advised not to fly, and reported only if he refuses to accept the advice.
Given that FSLF thinks someone fractionally over the virtually zero aviation limit is "drunk", perhaps his astonishment his not surprising. He’s now altered what he said, after the error of that absurd proposition was pointed out by others, but the original comment is very telling.
Is he suggesting that every suspicion should be reported and that anything less is unacceptable?
Heli-cal says:
"Publicly complaining about how the guy should have been treated so much more leniently is unprofessional"
What utter nonsense.
Judges are not protected from criticism either by law or by convention - nor should they be - and professional pilots are very well placed to express informed opinions about matters such as this. The notion that they are being ‘unprofessional’ if they express disagreement with a sentence is ludicrous.
IMHO the various differing opinions expressed by those in the same profession as the man sentenced are far more interesting than the emotive, and often manifestly uninformed, twaddle emanating from some posters on this thread.
I express no opinion whatsoever about the sentence, but surely most sensible people would accept there are respectable arguments both ways regarding whether a prison sentence is too harsh or indeed serves any useful purpose in cases such as this.
See, for exampe, the sentence imposed in this case:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...cohol-law.html
FL
(Edit)
ScottyDawg
Other professions ..... have systems in place where if - a member of said profession commits an offense (civil or criminal), then an duly elected board of their peers decide the relevant penalties with regard to their careers - i.e. lawyer or doctor etc.. 'struck off' and prevented from practising their profession.
This guy has been subject to appalling treatment at the hands of the judiciary. - and they should be ashamed of themselves.
Professional misconduct is dealt with by the professional bodies concerned; criminal offences are dealt with by the courts. I see the force of the point you make, but pilots do not have a professional body governing their profession. Perhaps they should?
NB: The judge did
not make any order regarding whether the pilot will be allowed to fly again.
IF it's correct (as some press reports claim) that a CAA spokesman said the pilot will be refused security clearance for ten years because of this conviction, then I wouldn't be surprised to see such refusal challenged in the courts.
.