Capt. Neal® wrote:

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

Capt. Neal® wrote:


Rule 13 cannot take priority over the sailing rules. It has no
standing to do so.


What do you mean by this? "No standing"??? Are you claiming that
your boat does not qualify as "all vessels"?


I'm claiming my sailboat is obligated to follow the sailing rules which
cover all eventualities, yes even overtaking and that makes Rule 13
superfluous. Superfluous means it has no standing.

So what does "no standing" mean?


When one follows the sailing rules then Rule 13 never has a chance to
even come into play. It is not needed so how can it take priority?


What do you mean by this? These is nothing in the rules that say that
they are randomly applied.


Exactly, sailboats are to follow the sailing rules.

No, sailboats follow ALL of the rules. There is nothing that exempts
them from that obligation.


When they do,
overtaking
situations are covered by the sailing rules.

Oh really, then why are you having so much trouble telling us which
sailboat is giveway in an overtaking situation?

This makes Rule 13
superfluous.
If one also tries to apply rule 13 along with the sailing rules one runs
into
situations where the sailng rules says vessel A is the stand on vessel
while
Rule 13 says it is the give way vessel. You can't have it both ways. You
have
to ask yourself at what point rule 13 applies.

It ALWAYS applies. In fact, it even says "notwithstanding" any other
rule. This isn't a vague inference; it explicitly says it take priority.

You say it applies at all
times.
This tells me there are situations where Rule 13 would negate the sailing
rules. You cannot have one rule conflicting with another.

Sure you can. Why not? The are a variety of such cases in the rules.
A powerboat shall keep out of the way of a sailboat, except when various
rules say otherwise. What's the big deal?



In order to follow rule 13 one would have to abandon the sailing rules.


Well sort of. In the sense that Rule 13 starts with "Notwithstanding
anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II". This
means that Rule 13 has priority over Rule 12. Why is this a problem?


It does not mean Rule 13 has priority over Rule 12. How can a rule that
contradicts another have priority?

Why not? What's your problem?

You either follow the sailing rules
or you ignore them. As captain, I'll make the choice of which rules
I will follow and since I sail, I will follow the sailing rules which
make Rule 13 unnecessary and superfluous. I will not be put in a
position to be liable for a poor set of rules that contradict each other
by embracing the contradictions.

Should we forward this to your local Marine Safety Office?




One would be put in the uncomfortable situation of having to choose at
what point to abandon one rule in order to follow another.


Why is this a problem? The rules are very explicit and precise. They
even give guidance as to what to do when in doubt.

You know as well as I do that that's bullcrap!


What? That the rules are optional? So how much did you pay someone
to take the test for you? Its clear you never could have passed it on
your own.


That's the point. The sailing rules are NOT optional. Your precious
Rule 13 attempts to make them optional. This alone makes rule 13
something real sailors should ignore.

It isn't "my rule," its the rule that you agreed to abide by when you
got your license. This claim of yours that you don't feel obliged to
abide by the rules might come back to haunt you in court. However, its
virtually impossible that you will ever be in the position of overtaking
another vessel.




As long as one follows the sailing
rules one is operating entirely legally. As soon as one deviates from
the sailing rules one is acting entirely illegally.


Negatory pseudo-Cap. The rule apply in their entirety, not
selectively. Rule 1 says "These Rules shall apply to all vessels" not
"Some of these rules..."


How can two rules that contradict each other apply at the same time.
It is not possible.

That's why they explicitly say which take precedence.




Rule 2 says "Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the
owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to
comply with these Rules". It is clear that all of the rules must be
followed, not selectively applied.


But, you are suggesting selective following. You are saying at some point
one must abandon one set of rules in favor of another rule.

They are very explicit when that point is. Further, the overtaking rule
normally comes into play when the vessels are some distance apart. This
is not a case where the standon/giveway relationship suddenly changes.



Rule 13 specifically take priority over rule 12. They could have
written "except for rule 12," but they didn't. Sorry Neal - are you
sure you want this blunder on the permanent record?


You are looking at this wrong, yourself. You are a typical confused
thinker who actually believes two rules that countermand each other
in certain situations can be applied together. It's simply not possible
in real life situations.

It would seem that two rules are too many for you to understand.