This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


Wilbur Hubbard




Not a problem, Will.

With all the sharks migrating through your area who would want
to float for long anyway???

--

Richard Lamb
email me:
web site: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb

On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:11:12 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:



This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


Wilbur Hubbard


Yes, there speaks the voice of experience .... sitting in the armchair
reading a book.

Willie, you will never have to wear a life jacket. Anchored there in
the bay the only thing you have to worry about is a loud band playing
on the shore.

Cheers,

Bruce

On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:59:06 -0600, CaveLamb
wrote:

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


Wilbur Hubbard




Not a problem, Will.

With all the sharks migrating through your area who would want
to float for long anyway???


Willie-boy doesn't have to worry about sharks. They don't like
bull****.

Cheers,

Bruce

In article s.com,
llid says...

This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

That would seem nonsensical in at least one way: If the boat isn't
underway, you wouldn't have to wear the jacket, but stepping from
your boat to your dinghy while at anchor might be when a PFD is
most needed. Ah, well, government regulations don't always make
sense. (Sometimes they do, though---like driving on the right
side of the road.)

The next question to ask, is when does a vessel transition from
"boat" to "ship". If there is no difference, I can see a
big opportunity in stylish flotation gear for the cruise ship
industry! ;-)



And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

The most effective way to get people to wear PFDs might be a simple
regulation that if you get rescued and aren't wearing one, you
pay all the costs of the rescue.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


Mark Borgerson

"Mark Borgerson" wrote in message
...
In article s.com,
llid says...

This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats
underway.

That would seem nonsensical in at least one way: If the boat isn't
underway, you wouldn't have to wear the jacket, but stepping from
your boat to your dinghy while at anchor might be when a PFD is
most needed. Ah, well, government regulations don't always make
sense. (Sometimes they do, though---like driving on the right
side of the road.)

The next question to ask, is when does a vessel transition from
"boat" to "ship". If there is no difference, I can see a
big opportunity in stylish flotation gear for the cruise ship
industry! ;-)



And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

The most effective way to get people to wear PFDs might be a simple
regulation that if you get rescued and aren't wearing one, you
pay all the costs of the rescue.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother
mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.


You, Sir, make a whole lot of sense. Your response is helpful and rational;
a marked difference from the rest who had nothing other than ad hominems to
add.

Wilbur Hubbard

On Feb 19, 7:35*pm, Mark Borgerson wrote:
In article s.com,
says...


This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

Here again Jessibur shows his lack of understaning of the most
fundamental maritime concepts.
There is a difference betwen UNDERWAY and MAKING WAY. Test question 1:
what conditions suggests a vessel underway and not making way? What
COLREGS cover a vessel UNDERWAY and not making way?


That would seem nonsensical in at least one way: *If the boat isn't
underway, you wouldn't have to wear the jacket, *but stepping from
your boat to your dinghy while at anchor might be when a PFD is
most needed.

absotlty agred This comes under the heading of personell transfers.


The next question to ask, is when does a vessel transition from
"boat" to "ship". * If there is no difference, *I can see a
big opportunity in stylish flotation gear for the cruise ship
industry! * ;-)

USCG does not make a distinction between boat or ship. However there
are several conditions the uscg uses to regulate vessel operation:
1) area of operation,,, Ocean Near Coast Inland
2) size??? Gross Registerd Tons and/or Length.
3) Type of servise as in Coast Wise (fishing-cargo-passanger) Oil and
Mineral (OSV/DSV/etc)Then you have different sub catigories of those
ie Chapter T Passenger Vessels.


And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

Jessibur how do swallow the fact you hae to register your boat and GOD
FORBID not shhit in the bay or dump your oil in the water either? That
mut be a TERRIBLE infrigment of your personal freedoms ! ! !

You see... Republicans are nothing more than SPOILED CHILDREN.. Its
all, WAAAA WAAAA me me me dont tell me what to do ITS MY BOAT wa wa
waaaa.


The most effective way to get people to wear PFDs might be a simple
regulation that if you get rescued and aren't wearing one, *you
pay all the costs of the rescue.

THis is a very good idea....! I think... hum ill have to think more
about the imlications.
bob

"Bob" wrote in message
...
On Feb 19, 7:35 pm, Mark Borgerson wrote:
In article s.com,
says...


This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats
underway.

::Here again Jessibur shows his lack of understaning of the most
::fundamental maritime concepts.
::There is a difference betwen UNDERWAY and MAKING WAY. Test question 1:
::what conditions suggests a vessel underway and not making way? What
::COLREGS cover a vessel UNDERWAY and not making way?


Who said anything about making way? I typed 'underway' for a reason.
Underway also includes underway but not making way. You are the one
displaying your lack of understanding, not me. For, example, a vessel
anchored or made fast to a dock is not underway.


That would seem nonsensical in at least one way: If the boat isn't
underway, you wouldn't have to wear the jacket, but stepping from
your boat to your dinghy while at anchor might be when a PFD is
most needed.

:: absotlty agred This comes under the heading of personell transfers.

Moron - personnel transfer rules don't apply to recreational vessels.


The next question to ask, is when does a vessel transition from
"boat" to "ship". If there is no difference, I can see a
big opportunity in stylish flotation gear for the cruise ship
industry! ;-)

::USCG does not make a distinction between boat or ship. However there
::are several conditions the uscg uses to regulate vessel operation:
::1) area of operation,,, Ocean Near Coast Inland
::2) size??? Gross Registerd Tons and/or Length.
::3) Type of servise as in Coast Wise (fishing-cargo-passanger) Oil and
::Mineral (OSV/DSV/etc)Then you have different sub catigories of those
::ie Chapter T Passenger Vessels.


And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

::Jessibur how do swallow the fact you ha(v)e to register your boat and GOD
::FORBID not shhit (sic) in the bay or dump your oil in the water either?
That
::mu(s)t be a TERRIBLE infrigment of your personal freedoms ! ! !

It is, indeed. Only a communist or a liberal would abide them happily.

:: You see... Republicans are nothing more than SPOILED CHILDREN.. Its
::all, WAAAA WAAAA me me me dont tell me what to do ITS MY BOAT wa wa
:: waaaa.

Republicans are but *******ized Democrats in that Republicans also sell
their souls. I am a conservative which means I believe wholeheartedly in the
Constitution and the rights it confers upon citizens. I say to hell with ALL
those who would water down or otherwise compromise our God-given rights.

The most effective way to get people to wear PFDs might be a simple
regulation that if you get rescued and aren't wearing one, you
pay all the costs of the rescue.

::THis is a very good idea....! I think... hum ill have to think more
:: about the imlications.


It is, indeed, a good idea. It puts wearing life jackets where it belongs -
in the realm of a personal choice. Allowing any government to legislate
personal choice is not a good idea and always results in infringement upon
personal rights and freedoms.


Wilbur Hubbard

On Feb 21, 8:59*am, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message

...
On Feb 19, 7:35 pm, Mark Borgerson wrote:

In article s.com,
says...
This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats
underway.

::Here again Jessibur shows his lack of understaning of the most
::fundamental maritime concepts.
::There is a difference betwen UNDERWAY and MAKING WAY. Test question 1:
::what conditions suggests a vessel underway and not making way? What
::COLREGS cover a vessel UNDERWAY *and not making way?

Who said anything about making way? I typed 'underway' for a reason.
Underway also includes underway but not making way. You are the one
displaying your lack of understanding, not me. For, example, a vessel
anchored or made fast to a dock is not underway.

That would seem nonsensical in at least one way: If the boat isn't
underway, you wouldn't have to wear the jacket, but stepping from
your boat to your dinghy while at anchor might be when a PFD is
most needed.

:: absotlty agred This comes under the heading of personell transfers.

Moron - personnel transfer rules don't apply to recreational vessels.

The next question to ask, is when does a vessel transition from
"boat" to "ship". If there is no difference, I can see a
big opportunity in stylish flotation gear for the cruise ship
industry! ;-)

::USCG does not make a distinction between boat or ship. However there
::are several conditions the uscg uses to regulate vessel operation:
::1) area of operation,,, Ocean Near Coast Inland
::2) size??? Gross Registerd Tons and/or Length.
::3) Type of servise as in Coast Wise (fishing-cargo-passanger) Oil and
::Mineral (OSV/DSV/etc)Then you have different sub catigories of those
::ie Chapter T Passenger Vessels.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.
It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

::Jessibur how do swallow the fact you ha(v)e to register your boat and GOD
::FORBID not shhit (sic) in the bay or dump your oil in the water either?
That
::mu(s)t be a TERRIBLE infrigment of your personal freedoms ! ! !

It is, indeed. Only a communist or a liberal would abide them happily.

:: You see... Republicans are nothing more than SPOILED CHILDREN.. Its
::all, WAAAA WAAAA me me me dont tell me what to do ITS MY BOAT wa wa
:: waaaa.

Republicans are but *******ized Democrats in that Republicans also sell
their souls. I am a conservative which means I believe wholeheartedly in the
Constitution and the rights it confers upon citizens. I say to hell with ALL
those who would water down or otherwise compromise our God-given rights.

The most effective way to get people to wear PFDs might be a simple
regulation that if you get rescued and aren't wearing one, you
pay all the costs of the rescue.

::THis is a very good idea....! I think... hum ill have to think more
:: about the imlications.

It is, indeed, a good idea. It puts wearing life jackets where it belongs -
in the realm of a personal choice. Allowing any government to legislate
personal choice is not a good idea and always results in infringement upon
personal rights and freedoms.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbr Hubbard, Aka Crap'n Neil, aka Ellen McCahrthur, etc's not
wearing a life jacket problem is the type of problem that eventually
solves itself. I maintain he is doing us all a favor and hope he
continues not wearing one. Of course when his boat never ventures
beyond 4' depths, he mostly does not need a pfd.

On 2/19/2011 12:11 PM, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
This is my prediction: Within ten years states and then the federal
government will mandate the wearing of life jackets on all boats underway.

And, those of you who post that you wear them as a general practice when
aboard your boat and that you don't mind doing so only encourage more
infringement by government upon our personal freedoms.

It will be a cold day in hell when I wear a life jacket because it's
mandated by law.

There are certain conditions when I will voluntarily wear one because I
value my own life but it is unacceptable to me to have Big Brother mandate
such wearing. **** them! Ain't none of their business.

Muddy thinking. What you are advocating is cutting off your nose to
spite your face. If we feel safer and okay with wearing them all the
time we're supposed avoid wearing them because of something the
government wants? You are hoisting yourself on your own petard and being
controlled by the very Big Brother you are trying to avoid.

Stephen