|
Coming To A Boat Near You?
I know this has been suggested in the past and sure,
they're only talking about commercial boats right now, but how long till the "do-gooders" use this accident to demand that anybody on _any_ boat be forced to wear a life jacket at all times? Of course this would give the aqua-cops a perfect opportunity to hand out needless tickets (just like seat belt laws). South Coast Today.Com Time to strengthen life jacket regulation The National Transportation Safety Board has sent investigators to Lake George in the Adirondack Mountains this week to investigate the deaths of 20 elderly tourists who died Sunday afternoon when a 40-foot tour boat capsized with 49 aboard. This accident that took the lives of older tourists, many from the same town in Michigan, raises the issue of whether we are doing all we can to protect tourists on similar tour boats. New York state and Coast Guard rules, which regulate boats in Massachusetts, require that tour boats of this size have enough life jackets for all passengers, but do not require these jackets be worn while aboard. The boats typically have the jackets in a convenient location, under seats or in a large bin. This accident should raise the question whether it is time to strengthen this regulation and require that passengers wear life jackets while on the open water. Tour boat operators give a number of reasons for not supporting such a requirement. The manager of a local whalewatch and fishing charter company said there is the problem of having jackets that properly fit people. And there are issues of people not wanting to wear a life jacket that may have a perfume smell or that a person may be allergic to. But these seem small issues when compared with the chance that wearing a jacket might have saved some or all of the 20 tourists who perished in Lake George on a beautiful autumn Sunday afternoon. The issue of requiring life jackets be worn should be raised in New York, Massachusetts and in every state that regulates tourist boats. The same manager of a charter boat operation who does not favor requiring life jackets be worn by passengers also insists that his own young child wear a life jacket when the child is on one of the company's whalewatch or fishing tour boats. If it's good enough for our own children, shouldn't we think about it for our grandparents, our parents and any tourist aboard a boat that could capsize on a clear autumn day? |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 5 Oct 2005 17:00:15 -0700, "Ed Stasiak" wrote: I know this has been suggested in the past and sure, they're only talking about commercial boats right now, but how long till the "do-gooders" use this accident to demand that anybody on _any_ boat be forced to wear a life jacket at all times? I think it's a great idea and should be an enforceable protocol for marine law enforcement. I would agree but only up to a point. Certain craft,(such as small, open, runabouts), are greater risks than others. Should everybody gathered around the dinner table on a 40-footer be wearing a life jacket? Probably not. In our state, kids under 12 are required to be in life jackets on any boat less than 19-feet in length. That's not a bad law, because the kids lack the experience and judgment to make an informed decision to accept the greater risk associated with doing without a PFD. It gets a bit sticky when one tries to be philosophical about whether a parent has the "right" to deliberately expose a kid to additional risk- so I like the law in our state. Certain situations, such as single handing, call for PFD as well. I wear an inflatable pfd when I take our 36-footer out by myself. To me, it only makes sense to do so. I don't plan on falling overboard (and 99% of the people who do fall overboard don't plan on it, either), but if I'm by myself and fall in nobody is going to hear me holler for help or notice that I'm gone. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Ed Stasiak wrote:
I know this has been suggested in the past and sure, they're only talking about commercial boats right now, but how long till the "do-gooders" use this accident to demand that anybody on _any_ boat be forced to wear a life jacket at all times? Of course this would give the aqua-cops a perfect opportunity to hand out needless tickets (just like seat belt laws). South Coast Today.Com Time to strengthen life jacket regulation The National Transportation Safety Board has sent investigators to Lake George in the Adirondack Mountains this week to investigate the deaths of 20 elderly tourists who died Sunday afternoon when a 40-foot tour boat capsized with 49 aboard. This accident that took the lives of older tourists, many from the same town in Michigan, raises the issue of whether we are doing all we can to protect tourists on similar tour boats. New York state and Coast Guard rules, which regulate boats in Massachusetts, require that tour boats of this size have enough life jackets for all passengers, but do not require these jackets be worn while aboard. The boats typically have the jackets in a convenient location, under seats or in a large bin. This accident should raise the question whether it is time to strengthen this regulation and require that passengers wear life jackets while on the open water. Tour boat operators give a number of reasons for not supporting such a requirement. The manager of a local whalewatch and fishing charter company said there is the problem of having jackets that properly fit people. And there are issues of people not wanting to wear a life jacket that may have a perfume smell or that a person may be allergic to. But these seem small issues when compared with the chance that wearing a jacket might have saved some or all of the 20 tourists who perished in Lake George on a beautiful autumn Sunday afternoon. The issue of requiring life jackets be worn should be raised in New York, Massachusetts and in every state that regulates tourist boats. The same manager of a charter boat operation who does not favor requiring life jackets be worn by passengers also insists that his own young child wear a life jacket when the child is on one of the company's whalewatch or fishing tour boats. If it's good enough for our own children, shouldn't we think about it for our grandparents, our parents and any tourist aboard a boat that could capsize on a clear autumn day? Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
OlBlueEyes wrote: Don White wrote in : Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. Everything the 9/11 hijackers carried onboard was legal. So much for federal regulations providing "a bare minimum of protection". It amazes me how many people who have utter contempt for George Bush or Ted Kennedy want THEM dictating what we must wear on a tour boat. It is now coming to light that a contributing factor to the tour boat tragedy was the boat owner attempting to get by on the cheap. He was required to have a skipper and two crewpersons aboard- but too damn cheap to pay for crew (or remotely possible just unable to find some) he ordered the boat to set out short handed. Hope he's happy with the few extra bucks he made. How many would an additional two trained crew persons have managed to save? If even one person, the cheap arse boat owner has blood on his wallet. Would someone keeping watch have been able to warn the pilot of the large wake in time for him to change his angle of approach? All the pfd's in the world won't save people from a profiteering ******* trying to make some extra bucks by ignoring safety regulations. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
I know this has been suggested in the past and sure,
they're only talking about commercial boats right now, but how long till the "do-gooders" use this accident to demand that anybody on _any_ boat be forced to wear a life jacket at all times? Unless the United States goes into complete collapse, I think it's inevitable. In the same way that I think dogs, guns, and cars capable of going faster than 30mph will be made illegal. I think it's a great idea and should be an enforceable protocol for marine law enforcement. OlBlueEyes wrote: Idiot. Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: And you base this on what? He must be a liberal, after all arent' they the guys who call names? DSK |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
One of my neighbors used to be involved in the greyhound rescue system and he had several who could do 35. That would be illegal on 2 counts! They are unbelievably fast. At our local dog park, when the dogs are running around in frantic circles, the whippets & greyhounds are running rings around the whole pack. A friend of mine was claiming that his dog (some kind of small shepherd breed) was faster than a whippet... not so, the whippets ran rings around his dog too. He must be a liberal, after all arent' they the guys who call names? I think it was more of a reaction to the possibility of being told to do something that apparently bothers him. No worries. Personally, I don't think PFDs should be made mandatory. 1- it's just welfare for PFD makers 2- there is no possibility that the world can ever be made totally idiot-proof 3- there are plenty of other laws to keep police busy But the gov't has to do something... just to prove it can, I guess... and sooner or later they'll get around to making everything forbidden, unless it's made compulsory. And of course it will change with every new Administration. DSK |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
"Ed Stasiak" wrote in message oups.com... Of course this would give the aqua-cops a perfect opportunity to hand out needless tickets (just like seat belt laws). Big difference between life jackets and seat belts...apples and oranges. But if you drive a car without a seat belt, you should get a ticket...period. In fact, I would support higher fines for those who dont buckle up. What I dont get, are the motorcycle helmet laws. Why would a state, require auto restraints, but allow bike riders to go helmetless? Stupid. -- -Netsock "It's just about going fast...that's all..." http://home.columbus.rr.com/ckg/ |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare
minimum of protection wherever they go. Who's preventing a tourist from wearing a life jacket when they go on a boat? |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
wrote in message oups.com... All the pfd's in the world won't save people from a profiteering ******* trying to make some extra bucks by ignoring safety regulations. Chuck, Do you know the owner was a profiteering ******* who ignored safety regulations for some extra bucks? |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:28:06 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
This summer, we had the perfect case on the Connecticut River - guys heading back in a 18 foot Aquasport, operator drunk on his ass and ran right into the #33 can right below Portland Bridge. All thrown out of the boat, two unconscious, one saved by buddy holding him out of the water until one of the residents along the river got to them, other guy drowned. I'd point out, that in this case, and the case of the two young ladies drowning, you've cited drinking as a contributing cause. I respectfully submit, that is already against the law. What makes you think a law requiring wearing PFDs is any more enforceable? I'll agree trying to keep people alive is an admirable task, but I'm an adult. I don't want my Uncle, as in Sam, to become my Daddy. Geez, these nitwits can't do what they were hired to do, why would you want to give them anymore power over your life? |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 08:12:36 -0400, "Netsock" wrote:
"Ed Stasiak" wrote in message roups.com... Of course this would give the aqua-cops a perfect opportunity to hand out needless tickets (just like seat belt laws). Big difference between life jackets and seat belts...apples and oranges. But if you drive a car without a seat belt, you should get a ticket...period. In fact, I would support higher fines for those who dont buckle up. What I dont get, are the motorcycle helmet laws. Why would a state, require auto restraints, but allow bike riders to go helmetless? Stupid. Why cross post? I agree with your helmet comments. -- John H "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Larry Bud wrote:
Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. Who's preventing a tourist from wearing a life jacket when they go on a boat? Not just the life jacket... how about regulating/inspecting the tour boat/captain. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 18:01:56 -0700, chuckgould.chuck wrote:
Certain situations, such as single handing, call for PFD as well. I wear an inflatable pfd when I take our 36-footer out by myself. To me, it only makes sense to do so. I don't plan on falling overboard (and 99% of the people who do fall overboard don't plan on it, either), but if I'm by myself and fall in nobody is going to hear me holler for help or notice that I'm gone. Trouble is, when singlehanding in the waters we do, a PFD simply means you'll die from hypothermia rather than drowning. Wear a harness!! Going overboard is BAD, especially in cold water, rough seas (poor chance of being sighted), etc. I feel the PFD is overrated: many feel "safe" just because they have one on. Sure, wear one (there are some comfy, stylish ones out there!), but don't think you're safe just because you're wearing one. Case in point: the original accident cited in the OP. Several victims were trapped in the boat: a PFD makes it pretty much impossible to escape from inside a boat. But I agree with Chuck about situations: I ALWAYS wear one in a sailing dinghy, almost never in the 36-ft sailboat (although I do sometimes wear a harness) Lloyd Sumpter "Far Cove" Catalina 36 |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
"OlBlueEyes" wrote in message ... What affront to the general populace is a driver without a seat belt causing? The fact that they are not wearing one does nothing to me, BUT, when they get in an accident, and splatter their face on the windshield, who do you think pays for them sitting in an ICU in a coma? Who do you think pays for a $1500 MRI every 3 days while they are in there? Who do you think pays for any needed surgeries? Insurance companies recoup their costs by raising our rates. If they are uninsured, the hospital recoups by increasing medical costs, and in some cases, increased taxes. End result is WE pay for their ignorance. -- -Netsock "It's just about going fast...that's all..." http://home.columbus.rr.com/ckg/ |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
In article .com,
Ed Stasiak wrote: [...] The issue of requiring life jackets be worn should be raised in New York, Massachusetts and in every state that regulates tourist boats. The same manager of a charter boat operation who does not favor requiring life jackets be worn by passengers also insists that his own young child wear a life jacket when the child is on one of the company's whalewatch or fishing tour boats. If it's good enough for our own children, shouldn't we think about it for our grandparents, our parents and any tourist aboard a boat that could capsize on a clear autumn day? When I took people out in my boat, I insisted that kids wear life preservers unless the parents refused to allow them to. For adults, I told them where the life preservers were and that its THIER choice to wear them or not. -- Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 15:35:54 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
How do you feel about seat belt laws? I don't like them, or helmet laws, for that matter. Don't get me wrong, I'd wear a seat belt with or without a law. Same with helmets. I wear a PFD when canoeing, or in my small runabout, but I'm from the school that every law is a bad law. It's just sometimes, not having the laws is worse. Perhaps, that is a bit of an overstatement. I can see laws requiring children to be protected, seat belts, bicycle helmets, etc. But once we reach the age of reason, I don't want some nitwit in Washington, or Trenton, to protect me from myself. That is my responsibility, not theirs. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 15:42:44 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
And no thunder, I don't have a cite for that - I'm trying to find it from the last time I had this discussion with somebody, but can't locate it - I will though. :) Don't bother, I believe you. That is just the way bureaucracies work. Similar story, my sister is a health care worker. We were discussing aids. She told me, that if you were gay, an IV drug user, and had aids, you were put down in the gay grouping, not the IV drug grouping. Seems to me, that would be a rather large skew. And, I don't have a cite, don't know if it is still like that, and don't know if it was just in this state. But that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;-) |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:05:33 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
I will be the first to admit that my opinion is strictly based on my own experiences over 50 some years of owning and operating boats - then again, sometimes that's all we have to go by. That's enough. Look, safety devices are great ideas, I'm all for using them. I just question the law part of it. I'm always amazed when I drive through Connecticut, how many bikers don't wear helmets. I'm always thinking dumbass, but it is their life, not mine. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
thunder wrote in message ... On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:05:33 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: I will be the first to admit that my opinion is strictly based on my own experiences over 50 some years of owning and operating boats - then again, sometimes that's all we have to go by. That's enough. Look, safety devices are great ideas, I'm all for using them. I just question the law part of it. I'm always amazed when I drive through Connecticut, how many bikers don't wear helmets. I'm always thinking dumbass, but it is their life, not mine. I ride and I personally don't like wearing a helmet. I've heard all the arguments and statistics from both sides of the fence - that helmets have little or no effect on motorcycle fatalites to how helmets save thousands of lives. Either way, I still don't like 'em, but wear one when required. In MA they are required. Contrary to popular belief, Florida *does* have a helmet law but you are permitted to ride without one if you carry proof that you have personal medical insurance. Eisboch |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
What affront to the general populace is a driver without a seat belt
causing? Netsock wrote: The fact that they are not wearing one does nothing to me, BUT, when they get in an accident, and splatter their face on the windshield, who do you think pays for them sitting in an ICU in a coma? Who do you think pays for a $1500 MRI every 3 days while they are in there? Who do you think pays for any needed surgeries? Insurance companies recoup their costs by raising our rates. If they are uninsured, the hospital recoups by increasing medical costs, and in some cases, increased taxes. End result is WE pay for their ignorance. True enough, and there's a further cost when the emergency team has to go get them... that's expensive. And it can be dreadfully expensive to you, personally, if you have an accident yourself during the time that they're busy rescuing Mr Self-Inflicted Injury from his folly. You'll just have to wait and if you don't make it, too bad. DSK |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Would someone keeping watch have been able to warn the pilot of the large wake in time for him to change his angle of approach? Good question. I rode a tour boat (not the same one) in that area a few months ago. I remember a larger boat passing by us and the captain of OUR boat turned right into the wake until it had passed. I wondered what the point of that was, exactly. I guess I didn't realize while I was on the tour boat that tour boats are so easily capsized. -Dave |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
Red Cloud© wrote:
It's a halfway measure. OUTLAW TOUR BOATS AND RECREATIONAL BOATS NOW!!! rusty redcloud Good idea Rusty! We have four or five of these monsters polluting our downtown trying to entice guillable tourists for a land/sea sightseeing trip. http://www.harbourhopper.com/main.html# |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:02:52 GMT, OlBlueEyes wrote:
"Netsock" wrote in : Why would a state, require auto restraints, but allow bike riders to go helmetless? Strengthening the gene pool. The fact that motorcyclists who *don't* wear a helmet are mentally imbalanced greatly supports your assertion. -- John H "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:39:47 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote: thunder wrote in message ... On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:05:33 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: I will be the first to admit that my opinion is strictly based on my own experiences over 50 some years of owning and operating boats - then again, sometimes that's all we have to go by. That's enough. Look, safety devices are great ideas, I'm all for using them. I just question the law part of it. I'm always amazed when I drive through Connecticut, how many bikers don't wear helmets. I'm always thinking dumbass, but it is their life, not mine. I ride and I personally don't like wearing a helmet. I've heard all the arguments and statistics from both sides of the fence - that helmets have little or no effect on motorcycle fatalites to how helmets save thousands of lives. Either way, I still don't like 'em, but wear one when required. In MA they are required. Contrary to popular belief, Florida *does* have a helmet law but you are permitted to ride without one if you carry proof that you have personal medical insurance. Eisboch Put on a helmet. Have someone hit you up side the head with a baseball bat. Then take the helmet off, and have the person repeat the stroke. If you can't tell the difference, then you don't need a helmet! -- John H "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
PocoLoco wrote in message ... Put on a helmet. Have someone hit you up side the head with a baseball bat. Then take the helmet off, and have the person repeat the stroke. If you can't tell the difference, then you don't need a helmet! -- John H Ok. I'll try i ...... WAIT A SECOND! ..... you trying to fool me????? Eisboch |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 18:02:54 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote: PocoLoco wrote in message .. . Put on a helmet. Have someone hit you up side the head with a baseball bat. Then take the helmet off, and have the person repeat the stroke. If you can't tell the difference, then you don't need a helmet! -- John H Ok. I'll try i ...... WAIT A SECOND! ..... you trying to fool me????? Eisboch As an MSF instructor, that's what I'd tell my students. I swear, I think a couple actually tried it! -- John H "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
|
Coming To A Boat Near You?
OlBlueEyes wrote:
Don White wrote in : Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. Everything the 9/11 hijackers carried onboard was legal. So much for federal regulations providing "a bare minimum of protection". It amazes me how many people who have utter contempt for George Bush or Ted Kennedy want THEM dictating what we must wear on a tour boat. Well, I certainly wouldn't want to have Ted Kennedy in charge of my own safety on or near a body of water. OTOH, I wouldn't want Shrub in charge of my safety under ANY circumstances. -- Get Credit Where Credit Is Due http://www.cardreport.com/ Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 20:10:56 -0700, Antipodean Bucket Farmer
wrote: OlBlueEyes wrote: Don White wrote in : Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. Everything the 9/11 hijackers carried onboard was legal. So much for federal regulations providing "a bare minimum of protection". It amazes me how many people who have utter contempt for George Bush or Ted Kennedy want THEM dictating what we must wear on a tour boat. Well, I certainly wouldn't want to have Ted Kennedy in charge of my own safety on or near a body of water. OTOH, I wouldn't want Shrub in charge of my safety under ANY circumstances. What d you mean? He's already proved he's willing to take a pretzel for the team! |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
"Don White" wrote in message ... Larry Bud wrote: Should be a 'federal' regulation. That way a tourist could expect a bare minimum of protection wherever they go. Who's preventing a tourist from wearing a life jacket when they go on a boat? Not just the life jacket... how about regulating/inspecting the tour boat/captain. They are. |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:27:50 -0400, DSK wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: One of my neighbors used to be involved in the greyhound rescue system and he had several who could do 35. That would be illegal on 2 counts! They are unbelievably fast. At our local dog park, when the dogs are running around in frantic circles, the whippets & greyhounds are running rings around the whole pack. A friend of mine was claiming that his dog (some kind of small shepherd breed) was faster than a whippet... not so, the whippets ran rings around his dog too. I had a whippet when I was a kid - great little dogs. He must be a liberal, after all arent' they the guys who call names? I think it was more of a reaction to the possibility of being told to do something that apparently bothers him. No worries. Personally, I don't think PFDs should be made mandatory. 1- it's just welfare for PFD makers That's a good point I suppose, but then again, seat belts are welfare for nylon webbing manufacturers no to mention air bags which quite possibly are the most criminal act of government do gooderism. 2- there is no possibility that the world can ever be made totally idiot-proof Also true - unfortunately. 3- there are plenty of other laws to keep police busy Also true - three in a row!!! Not to mention that there aren't enough police officers as it is. But the gov't has to do something... just to prove it can, I guess... and sooner or later they'll get around to making everything forbidden, unless it's made compulsory. And of course it will change with every new Administration. Yep. I'll admit it's a damned if you do/damned if you don't kind of thing - one step over the line - falling dominoes, etc... But based on my own experiences, both falling off a boat unintentionally twice and that experience I related earlier (I recovered one body myself in a sweep and I was on the boat when we found the second body) which haunts me to no end, I'm on the side of wearing one period while underway - I'm not boorish enough to insist on wearing one if below making dinner or such. This summer, we had the perfect case on the Connecticut River - guys heading back in a 18 foot Aquasport, operator drunk on his ass and ran right into the #33 can right below Portland Bridge. All thrown out of the boat, two unconscious, one saved by buddy holding him out of the water until one of the residents along the river got to them, other guy drowned. I've got to believe that these aren't isolated incidents nationwide - if it's happening in Connecticut, it has to be happening other places. I know you can't help stupidity and that's what insurance is for, etc., but still - you got to wonder. But the body I recovered, drowned when he fell off a dock trying to climb down to unsnag a fish. Make people on docks wear PFD's? |
Coming To A Boat Near You?
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 02:42:40 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: But the body I recovered, drowned when he fell off a dock trying to climb down to unsnag a fish. Make people on docks wear PFD's? Yes because I've seen it happen. He conked the noggin while doing a stupid thing. We can not protect everyone from doing stupid things. Did see a neat license plate frame while in June Lake this weekend. "Sorry, I was having a senior moment" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:07 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com