I must be bored out of my skull to even chime into this never-ending debate. The fact is there are no facts out there that can prove or even conclusively imply that low-timers are a cause of higher accident rates. It is often quite the opposite if these flights (which I remembered off the top of my head) are a guide:

United 173- Oregon

KLM/ Pan Am- Tenerife

American 1420- Little Rock

American 965- Cali, Colombia

There are many more accidents where the experience level of the crew could not possibly be called in to question and even if the next 20 RJs that were lost were due exclusively to low-timers, they would still not approach the lives lost with very experienced crew-members.

Though I cannot stop other members from posting their opinions (nor would I want to), I've found that this site has taken a decided turn for the worse in the past few months. I used to read here for over a year before I joined and I must say the quality of the information in the average posts has declined significantly. There are about 10-20 posters that spew their repetitive opinions apparently apparently hoping that saying the same thing in a hunderd different posts may make it fact; these posters must be fans of Stephen Colbert and the Colbert Reports 'wikiality' (look it up).

There are some that are dead-seat against low-timers, whatever definition they use, and there are some that think they deserve a chance. The facts and statistics do not support those that are against low-timers, only their opinions do.