In article .net,
Rick wrote:

Jeff Morris wrote:

You keep claiming to have some secret knowledge about how the world works.
Why
don't you just share it?

I have not nor do I now claim any secret knowledge of any sort. The
point I am struggling to make is that a kayaker has every right to be
there. I never said it is immune to any law or regulation. That is how
the world works, get used to it.

So, what you're saying is that a kayak has the *right* to be in a
designated shipping channel, in fog?

No matter how much it annoys you the kayaker can be there.

There's a big difference between 'can be there' and 'has every right to
be there'. Whch one are you arguing?

How many
times do I have to state that the kayak is required to adhere to the
rules just as the tanker does. That is how the world works, get used to it.

Yeah and you evade the point. In fog, a kayaker in a shipping channel
cannot tell if they're impeding or going to impede commercial traffic
and they have an obligation not to. Therefore, they should *not* be in
a shipping channel under such conditions.

If a tanker runs onto the rocks to avoid a kayak then the CG hearing
will apportion blame. That is how the world works, get used to it.

That'd be fun. The skipper of a tanker has a choice between running
down a kayaker who is in violation of the Colregs by defn - impeding
commercial traffic - or causing an environmental disaster if the tanker
runs aground, gets holed and oil leaks out, not to mention putting the
crew at risk. I know what I'd do.

That's how the world works, get used to it.

PDW