"Rick" wrote in message
k.net...
Jeff Morris wrote:

I can answer. That doesn't mean I have to.

Yeah, because it doesn't suit your agenda.


You've regularly snipped the majority of of my comments because you refused to address them. You
even snipped my answer to this question so you could make your lame point.You're a real piece of
work, Rick!

The kayak was designed for small lakes and rivers, not waters covered by the
ColRegs. This is, in fact, an aspect of this that could be argued under rule 2.

What a load of crap. Kayaks were designed and built for
travel in the open waters of the Bering Sea and Gulf of
Alaska. Kayaks regularly travel the open waters of the North
Pacific from Vancouver Island to Alaska and the Aleutians.


Finally a relevant point. Of course, the Bering Sea is not quite the Dover Straights, and the
tourons that bought their kayak at LL Bean last week are not in the same league as the
Native-American paddlers, but you do have a point.

And since when does the designer of a boat determine its legality?

Designer? I don't think who designed it matters to anyone.
If you meant the design, then you're the one who said it
made a kayak illegal, not me.

When did I say it was illegal? I said "they had no business out there." THat's an opinion that
they should be there. You keep claiming I don't have a right to an opinion, and that no except the
courts and you have the right to comment on the law.


If a boat can hold only one person that person is the total
crew required to fulfill any and all regulatory requirements.


That's the law? I'd certainly like to see that one! Its not in the ColRegs.



Tautology? You are the one arguing ad nauseum that paddling
a kayak in fog is illegal.

No, I didn't say that. You're the one saying that I claim my opinion has the force of law. Its my
opinion, and its shared by almost everyone, including you. But it isn't the law.