It wasn’t me that started a thread titled (if my memory serves me correctly) “strict liability a threat to air safety” a while ago.
And it isn’t me that’s running a campaign, on behalf of the membership of a well-known pilot association, to remove strict liability from the “new” regulations.
Evidently at least the starter of that thread and the management of that association believe the issue of strict liability is relevant to your cockpit Ding.
I actually share your conclusion as to relevance to the cockpit, but for reasons different from yours. It’s irrelevant to you because you’re blissfully ignorant. It’s irrelevant to me because I’m informed but not scared of it.
The point I continue to press is this: The people who are arguing that there should be no strict liability under the “new” regulations, on the basis that it will pose a threat to air safety, have a formidable (and in my view fatal) fact in the way of their argument – it’s been strict liability for a long time, yet the sky hasn’t fallen in. If strict liability continues under the “new” regulations, there will be no objective change in the risk (if any) arising out of strict liability. Everyone will continue (like you) to be blissfully ignorant of it, or (like me) to be informed but not scared of it