Creamy, sorry if I appear to be "rubbishing the thread while reading and responding repeatedly". Perhaps you will need to prove I intended to.........nar don't bother.
I am not interested in the treatement of car drivers or television either. We are ( I thought) talking about aviation here.
BrianG
It's a long time since I have been involved in any film/tv script, a fellow dingo blotted our collective cv's a few years ago at a certain Rock
Sorry if I seem to harp on the subject but I feel I must say this again.
Aviation Regulation in this country has nothing to do with safe flight operations, it's all to do with gaining a prosecution with punitive measures attached.
BrianG has said as much "SL does not directly improve safety, but it makes it easier to prosecute someone and so should make at least some people modify their behaviour so they don't act unlawfully. Proper training and airmanship "should" achieve the same thing.
"If flying lawfully and flying safely are one and the same thing (which in some cases they are and in some cases they are not) then SL may indirectly improve safety". BrianG, I take it that statement is one of those choice "lawyer" statements that can't be proven or disproven!
A colleague has demonstrated to my satisfaction that being compliant doesn't necessarily mean it is safe. The matter related to Flight Manuals but I will say no more that that.
Quite frankly when I am flying I am only interested in safely and efficiently completing the (flying) task at hand. Monday morning quarterbacks will always find something to bitch and scream about and then beat their chests in indignation at the affront of it all.
I am a normal person, not a lawyer.
ding