Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... "Rick" , sounding more like Jax every day, wrote: Jeff Morris wrote: Be careful, its a trick question - doing anything in accordance with the law is legal. That doesn't mean you should do it. Ooops! I'm not permitted to say that, am I? Still have a few reading issues, Jeff. Can't or won't answer the question, there are no tricks to it. Either you can answer it or you can't. I can answer. That doesn't mean I have to. But I already agreed: Yes, in all cases where one is compliant with a law, one is compliant with the law. But trying to prove something with a tautology just makes you look like a fool. So Rick, what if the kayak is not in accordance with the ColRegs, such as not having a dedicated lookout? Then is it legal? If the vessel is designed for and crewed by one person then that person has the lookout duties. COLREGS or VTS don't mandate crew size. The kayak was designed for small lakes and rivers, not waters covered by the ColRegs. It isn't my usual style to respond like this, but I feel that in this instance it is necessary to let you know my true feelings. "Awww for F*cks sake!!" The CollRegs do not discuss suitability! This is, in fact, an aspect of this that could be argued under rule 2. Rubbish. And since when does the designer of a boat determine its legality? If I design a boat to go 100 knots, does that make 100 knots a safe speed? Read the CollRegs. It is covered. And while the ColRegs don't specifically mandate crew size, it is the role of the courts to interpret the meaning of a "proper lookout." The have stated in many opinions, that in the fog, lookouts must be dedicated seamen, so that they can "exercise vigilance which is continuous and unbroken." They have specifically stated that in the fog, the lookout duties cannot be shared with the helmsman. You are the person who started this by thinking that a Radar watch was sufficient. And while small boats are given some leeway in good visibility, or close to shore, they are not exempt in the fog. Please quote an instance where the courts have suggested that a kayak needed somebody standing on the bow to keep a lookout. I suspect that you have really gone off the deep end in your attempts to keep your ludicrous position alive. And as you know, the opinions of the courts effectively become part of the law, and it is the duty of a master to be familiar with them. Or did that go over your head? As I have already asked - please provide specific references. Perhaps it is time that you took me up on my offer to let you off the hook??? Trolling, or ignorant??? Regards Donal -- |