This is an important clip, even before this week's awful plane crash ~ we need to figure out how to improve "human fallibility", especially when lives are at stake ~ Sooz


The Rachel Maddow Show 3/26/15
Weak link in airline safety: Humans

Rachel Maddow reviews the circumstances of past cases pilots or co-pilots trying to crash a plane, with the lessons of some instances contradicting the lessons of others, and the only common thread being the human fallibility of the pilots.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/weak-link-in-airline-safety-humans-418880067647

Human infallibility is incurable.

But there ARE ways to limit its impact, oskar ~ that's what I'd like to discuss ~

Sooz

Gun control would be a start.

Considering that more people die from guns than from airline disasters, I think Oskar makes a good point.

I agree oskar makes a solid point, John, but we already know what we must do to counteract the gun craze ~ some of us are actively working on that ~ and in a gun incident, you have a chance [slim, but a chance] of surviving ~ but there are also many other ways people are killed via "human fallibility"/mistakes ~ people die on operating tables and in accidents ~ suicides [especially from depression] are epidemic ~ the pilot intentionally flying a plane with 150 people onboard into the Alps is the most recent horrifying example ~

I guess what I'm asking is how do we identify incompetency from an honest mistake? ~ are "honest mistakes" always acceptable? ~ and how do we limit [if that's even possible] "honest mistakes"?

Sooz

I understand your point Sooz. And it is a valid one.

Above you asked about 'how to improve "human fallibility"'. Obviously we cannot totally eliminate death and destruction from human error (nor do I think you were implying we could), so that leaves us with the question;

Can we do better than we do now? Regarding at least some situations, I would think we can.

This ties into something I want to bring up for discussion. I hope to do that soon.