Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.



Tinkerntom wrote:
And John, if a person jumps into the crosswalk, and crashes into the
side of the truck already passing on the road, no one would hold the
truck driver responsible. Especially if it is dark such that the driver
could not reasonably be expected to see the pedestrian running in an
erratic fashion toward the crossing! A paddled boat, cannot maneuver
itself to take the right of way, and assume the right of way, by
placing itself in jeopardy.

Seems to me that a vessel turning, in the dark, without a required
forward watch, and then crashes into another larger vessel, probably
has little claim to right of way, if I read the story correctly. Yes it
is sad to lose someone, especially someone as full of life as to get up
early and go for an invigorating paddle. However it sounds like the
four paddlers took their activity for granted, and possibly became too
familiar. I read nowhere of any of these paddlers having a PFD on, or
even available. Does a sculling team need to abide by other standing
regulations, or do they just go do their thing, and the rest of us have
to stay out of their way. I doubt it!

Now I don't mean to assign blame, so much as to learn a lesson for
myself. I find it easy to get overly familar with what I am doing, and
then expose myself and others to unnecessary danger and injury. I of
course would feel really bad about someone being hurt on my accord,
especially if while doing something just for the fun and exercise. I
would feel equally bad though if a hard working boater was charged with
any wrongdoing or carelessness on my part.

Just assigning blame is not even an issue. Accepting personal
responsibility is the main concern of the responsible boating, paddling
public. This thread illustrates that there are some though who do not
accept personal responsibility, and try to solve their difficulties
with bluster and guns!

That means that carrying a light might meet a legal obligation
but if the light is not sufficient enough to prevent a near collision, most
rational people would conclude that having a brighter light (or maybe just
not paddling at night in certain waterways) will going further in preventing
a future incident than getting a bunch of people to support you in assigning
blame.

John, I think you nailed this one. Hopefully the rest of us will be
sure that our lights are on. I am concerned that one in particular may
be running with less than full charge in their Energizer." TnT