"Rick" wrote in message
k.net...
The original poster ... long since lost in the fog ...
stated categorically that it was illegal, prohibited by
COLREGS. The fact is it is not and that was what I was
trying so hard to get across.

I never said that - Here's the original quote:

The problem is that small boats without radar, that are not good reflectors,
will be invisible. They have no business being out in fog.

I absolutely never "stated categorically that it was illegal"; that is a
boldface, cowardly lie!

There is one place that I said that I didn't think they had the right to do it,
but that was after I said that the ColRegs never talks about "rights," something
we know you understand. And I'll stand by that: I don't think someone has the
right to do something where the inevitable result is breaking the law and
endangering people. They may have the "legal right" to do it, but that doesn't
mean that they have the right to do it. And while you may not agree with me, it
isn't a outrageous position to take. There are many ways to define "rights"
and many legal actions that most would agree someone doesn't have the right to
do.

The only time I mentioned the ColRegs was to claim that rules 9 and 10 (and
possibly 2) imply that the kayak shouldn't be there because they state
responsibilities that the kayak can't fulfill. I've agreed that it isn't
strictly illegal until a vessel is impeded, you've agreed that being there is
probably foolish and foolhardy. Why are you so bent out of shape? Take some
medication, Rick!


Anyone posting that an act is illegal when it is not is
doing a great disservice to those who come here for information.

Where did I say it was illegal? Another lie!


That doesn't mean that is the last word on the subject, nor
does it mean that there are circumstances where a seemingly
legal act could be actionable by the CG to prevent problems.

You are absolutely correct. I cannot recall any post by any
poster claiming kayaking in dense fog across a busy shipping
channel or VTS was prudent. Every single poster other than
myself claimed without qualification that there was one
reason or another that it was illegal, prohibited, or a
violation of some such clause of some law or another.


Saying "they have no business being there" or "they shouldn't be there" is not
the same as claiming its illegal or prohibited. This is all your fantasy!


There is a big difference between stupid and illegal, most
of the posters here seem to have trouble differentiating.

There is a big difference between saying some is wrong and something is illegal.
You seem to have missed that.