Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

The NTSB in their bureaucratic wisdom is proposing a rule to require ALL
people on recreational boats to WEAR PFD's ALL the time. Here is a link to
the site, and the e-mail address to send your comments to. Since boating has
continually gotten safer, I certainly see no need for this. I do support the
PFD laws for kids and small boats like canoes, kayaks, and PWCs. If you
don't want to end up wearing a life jacket all the time, send it your
comments!
____________________________
http://www.ntsb.gov/academy/CourseInfo/MS701_200408.htm
This site is the NTSB.
They are considering this month a rule to require all on board to wear PFD's
ALL THE TIME.

Check out the site and then e mail

Holloway, Keith (NTSB)


with whatever comments you have. Be nice!

--


Keith
__
"Great spirits have always encountered
violent opposition from mediocre minds."
... Albert Einstein

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Keith" wrote in message
...
The NTSB in their bureaucratic wisdom is proposing a rule to require ALL
people on recreational boats to WEAR PFD's ALL the time. Here is a link to
the site, and the e-mail address to send your comments to. Since boating
has
continually gotten safer, I certainly see no need for this. I do support
the
PFD laws for kids and small boats like canoes, kayaks, and PWCs. If you
don't want to end up wearing a life jacket all the time, send it your
comments!
____________________________
http://www.ntsb.gov/academy/CourseInfo/MS701_200408.htm
This site is the NTSB.
They are considering this month a rule to require all on board to wear
PFD's
ALL THE TIME.

Check out the site and then e mail

Holloway, Keith (NTSB)


with whatever comments you have. Be nice!

--


Keith
__
"Great spirits have always encountered
violent opposition from mediocre minds."
... Albert Einstein

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Nobody stood up when the Gestapo came for the Gypsys. Nobody stood up when
the Gestapo came for the Jews. Now they are coming for me ...."

Nobody stood up when the Safety Nazis made motorcyclists wear helmets.
Nobody stood up when the Safety Nazis made us all wear seat belts. Now they
are coming for us ....

"Keith" wrote in message
...
The NTSB in their bureaucratic wisdom is proposing a rule to require ALL
people on recreational boats to WEAR PFD's ALL the time.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Nobody stood up when the Gestapo came for the Gypsys. Nobody stood up
when
the Gestapo came for the Jews. Now they are coming for me ...."

Nobody stood up when the Safety Nazis made motorcyclists wear helmets.
Nobody stood up when the Safety Nazis made us all wear seat belts. Now
they
are coming for us ....


And about time too! It is a shame that gov't has to legislate 'common
sense' but what can you do?

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:23:21 GMT, "Don White"

wrote:

And about time too! It is a shame that gov't has to legislate 'common
sense' but what can you do?



I hope you are kidding.


Nope! I firmly believe that the gov't (or someone else ) has to protect a
certain percentage of the population from themselves,
.....and yes...you are your brother's keeper!

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Don White" wrote
Nope! I firmly believe that the gov't (or someone else ) has to protect a
certain percentage of the population from themselves,

The good Germans who elected Hitler thought the same thing.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

I can certainly appreciate your concern for my well being, but I prefer
a less "protective" government that you apparently do. Where do you
draw the line? We must certainly disarm everybody (this has got to mean
knives and clubs to be effective - no baseball bats allowed), prevent
them from participating in hazardous sports (boating, rock climbing,
etc.). Criminalize alcohol, smoking, high school football, hot coffee
at McDonalds drive throughs and obesity.

The problem is that once you start protecting me, there is no end of
things that you will want to protect me from.

No thanks!

Don White wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:23:21 GMT, "Don White"



wrote:


And about time too! It is a shame that gov't has to legislate 'common
sense' but what can you do?



I hope you are kidding.



Nope! I firmly believe that the gov't (or someone else ) has to protect a
certain percentage of the population from themselves,
....and yes...you are your brother's keeper!



--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Dave wrote:
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:53:35 GMT, "Don White"
said:


and yes...you are your brother's keeper!


Nothing wrong with that in principle. But who made the guvmint everybody's
keeper?

Did I miss something or don't you American types elect your
representatives? Oh wait, I didn't, Gore really did win didn't he.
Hmmm...maybe you're right.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

That will make sleeping and showering a challenge. Can I at least
take off the PFD to take off the rest of my clothes?

Doug

"Keith" wrote in message
...
The NTSB in their bureaucratic wisdom is proposing a rule to require ALL
people on recreational boats to WEAR PFD's ALL the time. Here is a link to
the site, and the e-mail address to send your comments to. Since boating
has
continually gotten safer, I certainly see no need for this. I do support
the
PFD laws for kids and small boats like canoes, kayaks, and PWCs. If you
don't want to end up wearing a life jacket all the time, send it your
comments!
____________________________
http://www.ntsb.gov/academy/CourseInfo/MS701_200408.htm
This site is the NTSB.
They are considering this month a rule to require all on board to wear
PFD's
ALL THE TIME.

Check out the site and then e mail

Holloway, Keith (NTSB)


with whatever comments you have. Be nice!

--


Keith
__
"Great spirits have always encountered
violent opposition from mediocre minds."
... Albert Einstein

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Then what good is natural selection?
"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:22:57 -0400, "Gene Kearns"
said:

I hope you are kidding.

The sad part is that he isn't.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Dan, Frankly my desire for some regulations originates from my own
desire for independence and my unwillingness to pay for your or others'
poor choices.

When folks don't wear seat belts, life jackets or wear motor cycle
helmets, if there are injuries for which insurance, society, or someone
who is sued pays (e.g., in those cases the families cannot afford the
care), then the rest of us pay.

I empathize with your right to chose -- I refuse to pay for it. In my
state, VT, I proposed an alternative to our seat belt law to our House
Majority Leader. Folks could wear helmets or seat belts or not but
insurance companies could refuse to pay for care and folks who were sued
could avoid paying legal damages if that choice contributed to the
extent of injury.

Not only was I laughed out of town, but he asked me about the hidden
costs -- for example the emergency workers who had to pick up the pieces
of avoidable disasters. Why should their work be made any harder.

We will always disagree as a society about regulations that are stupid
and intrusive -- but life jackets, helmets, and seat belts seem very
justifiable by the above criteria to me.

harlan

In article ,
Dan Best wrote:

I can certainly appreciate your concern for my well being, but I prefer
a less "protective" government that you apparently do. Where do you
draw the line? We must certainly disarm everybody (this has got to mean
knives and clubs to be effective - no baseball bats allowed), prevent
them from participating in hazardous sports (boating, rock climbing,
etc.). Criminalize alcohol, smoking, high school football, hot coffee
at McDonalds drive throughs and obesity.

The problem is that once you start protecting me, there is no end of
things that you will want to protect me from.

No thanks!

Don White wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:23:21 GMT, "Don White"



wrote:


And about time too! It is a shame that gov't has to legislate 'common
sense' but what can you do?



I hope you are kidding.



Nope! I firmly believe that the gov't (or someone else ) has to protect a
certain percentage of the population from themselves,
....and yes...you are your brother's keeper!



--
To respond, obviously drop the "nospan"?

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Harlan,
We're getting a little OT here, so to bring the topic back to boating
and hopefully to inspire some to write their own letters, I've quoted
the email I sent the NTSB below.

It seems that in many ways, we agree. I have long been a proponent of
just such regulation as you describe ever since California first enacted
their seat belt and helmet laws. I would even extend it (if some
enforcement mechanism could be found) to different insurance rates for
those who do/don't wear them. BTW, this is not a personal issue, as I
wear them without fail. I just do not like laws that say I must wear them.

I certainly appreciate your position, that an individual's irresponsible
behabior imposes a cost on the rest of us. I would hope that you can
also appreciate mine, which is that as much as possible, the
responsibility for an individual's behavior should rest with the
individual, not society at large. Further, that once you start down
such a path, it's hard to stop since there will always be people who
wish to protect you from more "irresponsible" behaviors. Perhaps we can
then agree to disagree as I seriously doubt that either of us will ever
change the other's mind.

I do find it interesting though that you use the cost issue to justify
mandatory PFDs. Short of the cost of recovering the body, the financial
cost of non-use is minimal. As an aside, I believe way too much money
and effort goes into body recovery. If the family really wants it back,
let them pay for the recovery effort.

Fair winds - Dan

Harlan Lachman wrote:
Dan, Frankly my desire for some regulations originates from my own
desire for independence and my unwillingness to pay for your or others'
poor choices.

When folks don't wear seat belts, life jackets or wear motor cycle
helmets, if there are injuries for which insurance, society, or someone
who is sued pays (e.g., in those cases the families cannot afford the
care), then the rest of us pay.

I empathize with your right to chose -- I refuse to pay for it. In my
state, VT, I proposed an alternative to our seat belt law to our House
Majority Leader. Folks could wear helmets or seat belts or not but
insurance companies could refuse to pay for care and folks who were sued
could avoid paying legal damages if that choice contributed to the
extent of injury.

Not only was I laughed out of town, but he asked me about the hidden
costs -- for example the emergency workers who had to pick up the pieces
of avoidable disasters. Why should their work be made any harder.

We will always disagree as a society about regulations that are stupid
and intrusive -- but life jackets, helmets, and seat belts seem very
justifiable by the above criteria to me.

harlan


Dear Mr. Holloway,
Your efforts to promote safe boating are greatly appreciated, but I encourage you to be very careful when proposing new regulations making things mandatory or forbidden. Especially in the usage of absolute words such as "all" or "every".

As a long time boater, I take my responsibility to keep myself and my passengers safe very seriously. As such, children and adults aboard my boat have worn PFDs since long before California made it a requirement. However, as the responsible skipper, I am able to temper my safety rules with rationality. For instance, I would not require anybody staying below decks to wear a PFD except in the most extreme conditions. It makes no sense to me to require that an infant taking a nap in the V-berth wear one. Nor, do I require that my passengers wear one when we are sitting in a quiet anchorage.

As the skipper on the scene, I can base my safety decisions on many factors.
- Are we underway, at anchor or at a dock?
- What are the conditions? (smooth sailing, motoring, darkness, large seas, etc.).
- What are the people doing? (sitting quietly in the cockpit, sitting down to dinner, going up to the foredeck, etc.).

As such, I feel that I am able to maximize both the safety of all aboard as well as their enjoyment of the boating experience. I can't conceive of how you could word any new regulations mandating the use of PFDs that could do as well. At best, you would criminalize many perfectly safe boating practices, resulting in a regulation htat would be often ignored. Unfortunately, such a thing degrades the respect people have for all laws, not just the poor one.

I suspect that if you look at the statistics, there may be other criteria that the majority of the deaths have in common. Alcohol use, boats with a horsepower to displacement ration above a certain point, etc.. Perhaps new regulations targeting these behaviors or conditions may be even more effective at saving lives than a blanket one requiring the wearing of PFDs at all times.

Thank you for taking the time to consider these issues.

In article ,
Dan Best wrote:


I can certainly appreciate your concern for my well being, but I prefer
a less "protective" government that you apparently do. Where do you
draw the line? We must certainly disarm everybody (this has got to mean
knives and clubs to be effective - no baseball bats allowed), prevent
them from participating in hazardous sports (boating, rock climbing,
etc.). Criminalize alcohol, smoking, high school football, hot coffee
at McDonalds drive throughs and obesity.

The problem is that once you start protecting me, there is no end of
things that you will want to protect me from.

No thanks!

Don White wrote:

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...


On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:23:21 GMT, "Don White"



wrote:



And about time too! It is a shame that gov't has to legislate 'common
sense' but what can you do?



I hope you are kidding.



Nope! I firmly believe that the gov't (or someone else ) has to protect a
certain percentage of the population from themselves,
....and yes...you are your brother's keeper!





--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Harlan Lachman" wrote
Dan, Frankly my desire for some regulations originates from my own
desire for independence and my unwillingness to pay for your or others'
poor choices. ......

Frankly, that's a rationalizeation. Your compulsion to keep others from
having "too much fun" began soon after you were finally allowed to drive
yomama's station wagon and offered that cheerleader a ride. Your
over-protective mama had made you promise to buckle up so Sally Goodbody had
to buckle up too. So she promptly flirted down that handsome helmetless
biker you'd secretly lusted for, hopped onto his P-pad and waggled her tush
at you as they sped off. You've been trying to prevent everybody for
enjoying life ever since by making the things you fear as uncomfortable as
you can. Seat belts to drive, helmets to ride, PFDs to sail, all three to
have sex? Yeah, we heard you'd tried it and fell off ...

"unwillingness to pay for others' poor choices"?? Yeah, sure. Bwahahahaha.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"George H Jamieson" wrote in message
news:7gZRc.19984$ih.18786@fed1read07...
Then what good is natural selection?


Aren't we, as human beings, supposed to be above that
law?
In this area we legislate bicycle drivers to wear a helmet for obvious
reasons. (our medical system paid by gov't from our taxes)

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...

Frankly, that's a rationalizeation. Your compulsion to keep others from
having "too much fun" began soon after you were finally allowed to drive
yomama's station wagon and offered that cheerleader a ride. Your
over-protective mama had made you promise to buckle up so Sally Goodbody
had
to buckle up too. So she promptly flirted down that handsome helmetless
biker you'd secretly lusted for, hopped onto his P-pad and waggled her
tush
at you as they sped off. You've been trying to prevent everybody for
enjoying life ever since by making the things you fear as uncomfortable as
you can. Seat belts to drive, helmets to ride, PFDs to sail, all three to
have sex? Yeah, we heard you'd tried it and fell off ...

"unwillingness to pay for others' poor choices"?? Yeah, sure.
Bwahahahaha.


**I'd ease up on the porno sites & movies if I was you. You've lost touch
with reality.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...

Don has trouble thinking for himself, like many these days.


Wally...I know when to put on a PFD and have no trouble doing so. I guess
I'm willing to 'be told' when to buckle up if it will save lives of others
not quite so safety conscious. To me, it's the same as numerous other laws,
such as seat belts, helmets for motorcycle and bicycle riders. hard hats at
a construction site etc. etc. Reasonable people have a duty to save you
'free thinkers' from yourselves.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Keith" :

The NTSB in their bureaucratic wisdom is proposing a rule to require ALL
people on recreational boats to WEAR PFD's ALL the time. Here is a link to
the site, and the e-mail address to send your comments to. Since boating
has
continually gotten safer, I certainly see no need for this. I do support
the
PFD laws for kids and small boats like canoes, kayaks, and PWCs. If you
don't want to end up wearing a life jacket all the time, send it your
comments!

The problem is there are just too many accidents/drownings where the life
jackets are missing. Because of this the people who having to do the resuces
and/or pull out the bodies start pushing such laws.

Reading my local paper Lake Simcoe (a non-great lake in Ontario) in the last
few weeks has had the following.

Boat found, man still missing lifejackets in boat. Assumed drowned, still
looking.

Boat capsize, one man drown no lifejacket. Two men resecued holding on to a
single lifejacket.

Woman diver in training killed by boat not avoiding area defined by a diver's
flag. It is believe the boat driver (not found yet) did not even know what
the flag meant.

There were some more too. The problem is not that some people don't like to
use the safety equipment, it so many don't bother without even a good reason
not to. Example PFD too hot to wear? Get an inflatable.

Earl Colby Pottinger
--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Earl,
2 of the 3 examples you cited were SMALL boat operators/passengers and
the third was struck by a boat. Believe it or not, not all boats are
this small. I'd venture to guess that most of the boats owned by
readers of this newsgroup don't fall into this category. It would make
almost as much sense to require PFDs to be worn by all citizens at all
times everywhere as to require them on all recreational boats at all times.

Trying to write an intelligent law that would mandate the wearing of
PFDs only when it would be reasonable rapidly becomes an excercise in
futile complexity as you list all the possible conditions and
exceptions. There are as many conditions/situations where wearing a PFD
on a recreational boat is rediculous as when it makes good sense. Ya
gonna list them all?

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:

The problem is there are just too many accidents/drownings where the life
jackets are missing. Because of this the people who having to do the resuces
and/or pull out the bodies start pushing such laws.

Reading my local paper Lake Simcoe (a non-great lake in Ontario) in the last
few weeks has had the following.

Boat found, man still missing lifejackets in boat. Assumed drowned, still
looking.

Boat capsize, one man drown no lifejacket. Two men resecued holding on to a
single lifejacket.

Woman diver in training killed by boat not avoiding area defined by a diver's
flag. It is believe the boat driver (not found yet) did not even know what
the flag meant.

There were some more too. The problem is not that some people don't like to
use the safety equipment, it so many don't bother without even a good reason
not to. Example PFD too hot to wear? Get an inflatable.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

It would make about as much sense to require ALL persons in any building
higher than one floor to wear a safety tether at all times, since people
seem to succumb to gravity on a fairly regular basis. Down stairwells, off
of balconies and rooftops... The percentage of people who never fall out of
buildings is irrelevant, using the same logic as the NTSB is applying to
boaters.

--
Karin Conover-Lewis
Fair and Balanced since 1959
klc dot lewis at centurytel dot net


"Dan Best" wrote in message
news:IhjSc.128667$eM2.104869@attbi_s51...
Earl,
2 of the 3 examples you cited were SMALL boat operators/passengers and
the third was struck by a boat. Believe it or not, not all boats are
this small. I'd venture to guess that most of the boats owned by
readers of this newsgroup don't fall into this category. It would make
almost as much sense to require PFDs to be worn by all citizens at all
times everywhere as to require them on all recreational boats at all
times.

Trying to write an intelligent law that would mandate the wearing of
PFDs only when it would be reasonable rapidly becomes an excercise in
futile complexity as you list all the possible conditions and
exceptions. There are as many conditions/situations where wearing a PFD
on a recreational boat is rediculous as when it makes good sense. Ya
gonna list them all?

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:

The problem is there are just too many accidents/drownings where the
life
jackets are missing. Because of this the people who having to do the
resuces
and/or pull out the bodies start pushing such laws.

Reading my local paper Lake Simcoe (a non-great lake in Ontario) in the
last
few weeks has had the following.

Boat found, man still missing lifejackets in boat. Assumed drowned,
still
looking.

Boat capsize, one man drown no lifejacket. Two men resecued holding on
to a
single lifejacket.

Woman diver in training killed by boat not avoiding area defined by a
diver's
flag. It is believe the boat driver (not found yet) did not even know
what
the flag meant.

There were some more too. The problem is not that some people don't
like to
use the safety equipment, it so many don't bother without even a good
reason
not to. Example PFD too hot to wear? Get an inflatable.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"WaIIy" wrote in
You are typical of both the elitists pseudo-elite class and also the
sheeple-nanny state group.

"We" know what's best for you.


** Yes we do...even if you don't!

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
snip...

Wow...hyperbole is alive & well south of the border!

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
You've made a good point. Now, suppose that you are diving. You are
at one of the popular dive spots... a defunct NOAA tower 30 miles off
shore from Cape Fear, in the Atlantic Ocean. How would you mark your
boat to show that there were divers in the water? If you feel that a
flag is an appropriate warning, (1) is the flag, alone, sufficient and
(2) what would it look like?

--


** Ah.....the old commercial diver blue/white(official?) flag vs the
recreational (familiar) red flag with the white stripe.
Out at sea I'd use the blue/white version assuming mostly 'real' sailors
would be that far out.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Don White" wrote
In this area we legislate bicycle drivers to wear a helmet for obvious
reasons. (our medical system paid by gov't from our taxes)

Hate to bust your bubble Don but we don't have a tax funded medical system
in the USA. If I need medical care my private insurer won't cover and I
can't afford then I die.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Don White" wrote
In this area we legislate bicycle drivers to wear a helmet for obvious
reasons. (our medical system paid by gov't from our taxes)

Hate to bust your bubble Don but we don't have a tax funded medical system
in the USA. If I need medical care my private insurer won't cover and I
can't afford then I die.

Well..you'd better do your best to get Hillary elected to an influential
position. She'll bring some sense to the madness.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote in message ...

The problem is there are just too many accidents/drownings where the life
jackets are missing.

snip

Woman diver in training killed by boat not avoiding area defined by a diver's
flag.

The way to avoid an oncoming boat is to duck under it, not float
around on surface like a bobber. So, wear a PFD in this scenario is a
death sentence.

Also, aren't a good percentage of "drownings" the result of
hypothermia? I say the heck with "half-measures", like PFDs. I think a
+-$2000 custom fitted drysuit should be required to be worn, at all
times, by all persons boating in waters cooler than 65F.

You see, I'm just trying to "save" people, and that makes me "feel" oh
so good about myself.

Of course, since I'm in Fla this prudent "safety" requirement would
not pertain to me.
--
SJM

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

You have a good point. Florida leads the country in boating fatalities (over
the last 5 years), but is lagging behind in drownings. However, you make up the
difference by having the largest number of non-drowning boating fatalities,
caused by leading the way (by a huge margin) in collisions with fixed objects.

Clearly, while Florida may deserve an exemption for PFD's, they should be
required to build all bridges out of foam rubber.

http://www.uscgboating.org/statistic...stics_2002.pdf

"Scott McFadden" wrote in message
om...
....
Also, aren't a good percentage of "drownings" the result of
hypothermia? I say the heck with "half-measures", like PFDs. I think a
+-$2000 custom fitted drysuit should be required to be worn, at all
times, by all persons boating in waters cooler than 65F.

You see, I'm just trying to "save" people, and that makes me "feel" oh
so good about myself.

Of course, since I'm in Fla this prudent "safety" requirement would
not pertain to me.
--
SJM

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Scott McFadden" wrote in message
snip

Also, aren't a good percentage of "drownings" the result of
hypothermia? I say the heck with "half-measures", like PFDs. I think a
+-$2000 custom fitted drysuit should be required to be worn, at all
times, by all persons boating in waters cooler than 65F.

You see, I'm just trying to "save" people, and that makes me "feel" oh
so good about myself.

Of course, since I'm in Fla this prudent "safety" requirement would
not pertain to me.
--
SJM

Not as crazy as you think. lots of people up here would like to see the
fishermen wear something like that ...especially during the winter season.
Water gets damn cold. Why just last week the lifeguards posted the water
temperature at 8 C at a very popular local surfing beach.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:01:18 -0400, "Vito" wrote:

"Don White" wrote
In this area we legislate bicycle drivers to wear a helmet for obvious
reasons. (our medical system paid by gov't from our taxes)

Hate to bust your bubble Don but we don't have a tax funded medical system
in the USA. If I need medical care my private insurer won't cover and I
can't afford then I die.

It's true; that's what many of us think. In fact, we have an expensive
public health care system provided by County Hospitals, who provide
indigent care. The expended costs are staggering.

Brian W

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Wrong again.......all hospitals are required to provide emergency care,
regardless of financial condition or citizenship (part of CA's problem). The
hospital can hound you for payment, turn your account over to a collection
agency, and charge everyone else more (including those who wear their PFD's)
but they can't refuse to provide emergency care.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

Well done, old fellow and esteemed captain, you have earned yourself a
gold star and provided safety and solace to those divers that dive
past the COLREGS....


Why..thank you, thank you very much.
Those Canadian Power & Sail Squadron courses keep paying for themselves.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
How would you draft a "Federal" law, then. to cover all eventualities?
Locally the water temperature is well over 80 degrees Fahrenheit....
some days higher than the air temperature. Would you then require
both flotation and (properly buoyed) bottled water to prevent the
inevitable dehydration? Water, water, everywhere and not a drop to
drink????

Not to mention a combination satellite phone/VHF/GPS/EPIRB.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...

You have a good point. Florida leads the country in boating fatalities (over
the last 5 years), but is lagging behind in drownings. However, you make up
the difference by having the largest number of non-drowning boating fatalities,
caused by leading the way (by a huge margin) in collisions with fixed objects.

Clearly, while Florida may deserve an exemption for PFD's, they should be
required to build all bridges out of foam rubber.

I believe a realistic first step would be to prohibit the consumption
of alcoholic beverages by the operator of a power boat. (It is legal
to do so in Fla)

Do that, see if it doesn't effect the accident stats, and get back to
me on this mandatory PFD wearing crap. (+-5yrs)

I was both a Red Cross and Ocean Rescue lifeguard and I didn't need no
freaking PFD for either of them.

So, it is real simple, people going out in boats should know how to
swim. Contact your local YMCA or Red Cross for lessons. There really
is no excuse for failing to do so as even little, teeny, tiny children
are taught.

Perhaps we should make that bit of common sense "mandatory".
--
SJM

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Don White" wrote in message ...

Not as crazy as you think. lots of people up here would like to see the
fishermen wear something like that ...especially during the winter season.
Water gets damn cold. Why just last week the lifeguards posted the water
temperature at 8 C at a very popular local surfing beach.

While my big $$, drysuit, "safety requirement" was intended to be
hyperbole, I have both a 3mil full, and a 2mil shorty wetsuit
(primarily for scuba). I would not hesitate to bring one, the other,
or both along if boating in the cold. Also, wetsuits will keep you on
the surface due to the buoyancy of the material and fulfill the
"function" of a PFD as well.

I think I paid $150 for the 3mil and +- $100 for the 2. Just look for
scuba/surf shop sales or google up some online dealers/factor directs
if you're interested.
--
SJM

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Brian Whatcott" wrote
It's true; that's what many of us think. In fact, we have an expensive
public health care system provided by County Hospitals, who provide
indigent care. The expended costs are staggering.

Only for the indigent. A friend's kid wrecked his bike and was taken to one
of these hospitals. They may or may not have saved his life (he might well
have lived without them) but he lost the sight in one eye for lack of proper
care. They billed him over $40,000 for this service. He paid only a
fraction of it because he is indigent and somebody had stolen his wallet
while there but had I done the same I'd have to pay or loose my houses,
boats, and other property. BTW he was wearing a helmet.

The costs are staggering only because all medical care in the US is a rip
off.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"DUINK" wrote in message
...
Wrong again.......all hospitals are required to provide emergency care,
regardless of financial condition or citizenship (part of CA's problem).
The
hospital can hound you for payment, turn your account over to a collection
agency, and charge everyone else more (including those who wear their
PFD's)
but they can't refuse to provide emergency care.

True, but you ignore the obvious - that this care is paid for by taxpayers
ONLY if the victim is penniless. If a who person can afford a $20,000
motorcycle has an accident he'd have pay for it himself - helmet or no
helmet.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Lots more drownings in swimming pools yearly. Why not require all people in
swimming pools, both public and private to wear PFD's while in or around
pools? Stupid stupid stupid.

--


Keith
__
I'm still hot. It just comes in flashes.
"Karin Conover-Lewis" wrote in message
...
It would make about as much sense to require ALL persons in any building
higher than one floor to wear a safety tether at all times, since people
seem to succumb to gravity on a fairly regular basis. Down stairwells, off
of balconies and rooftops... The percentage of people who never fall out
of
buildings is irrelevant, using the same logic as the NTSB is applying to
boaters.

--
Karin Conover-Lewis
Fair and Balanced since 1959
klc dot lewis at centurytel dot net


"Dan Best" wrote in message
news:IhjSc.128667$eM2.104869@attbi_s51...
Earl,
2 of the 3 examples you cited were SMALL boat operators/passengers and
the third was struck by a boat. Believe it or not, not all boats are
this small. I'd venture to guess that most of the boats owned by
readers of this newsgroup don't fall into this category. It would make
almost as much sense to require PFDs to be worn by all citizens at all
times everywhere as to require them on all recreational boats at all
times.

Trying to write an intelligent law that would mandate the wearing of
PFDs only when it would be reasonable rapidly becomes an excercise in
futile complexity as you list all the possible conditions and
exceptions. There are as many conditions/situations where wearing a PFD
on a recreational boat is rediculous as when it makes good sense. Ya
gonna list them all?

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:

The problem is there are just too many accidents/drownings where the
life
jackets are missing. Because of this the people who having to do the
resuces
and/or pull out the bodies start pushing such laws.

Reading my local paper Lake Simcoe (a non-great lake in Ontario) in
the
last
few weeks has had the following.

Boat found, man still missing lifejackets in boat. Assumed drowned,
still
looking.

Boat capsize, one man drown no lifejacket. Two men resecued holding
on
to a
single lifejacket.

Woman diver in training killed by boat not avoiding area defined by a
diver's
flag. It is believe the boat driver (not found yet) did not even know
what
the flag meant.

There were some more too. The problem is not that some people don't
like to
use the safety equipment, it so many don't bother without even a good
reason
not to. Example PFD too hot to wear? Get an inflatable.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Both!

--


Keith
__
If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried.
"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
You've made a good point. Now, suppose that you are diving. You are
at one of the popular dive spots... a defunct NOAA tower 30 miles off
shore from Cape Fear, in the Atlantic Ocean. How would you mark your
boat to show that there were divers in the water? If you feel that a
flag is an appropriate warning, (1) is the flag, alone, sufficient and
(2) what would it look like?

--


** Ah.....the old commercial diver blue/white(official?) flag vs the
recreational (familiar) red flag with the white stripe.
Out at sea I'd use the blue/white version assuming mostly 'real' sailors
would be that far out.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On 12 Aug 2004 06:14:32 -0700, (Scott McFadden) said:

I believe a realistic first step would be to prohibit the consumption
of alcoholic beverages by the operator of a power boat. (It is legal
to do so in Fla)

But not a sail boat, of course :)

Just had a case this last weekend, off Tybee Island, GA, where a 25' boat
ran into an anchored shrimp boat at night. Four on boat the small boat. Two
with injuries and two lost overboard and later found by the Marine Rescue
Squad in a recovery. The operator was sited for operating while intoxicated
and further charges pending. Here in South Carolina if you cause a death on
the water due to intoxication, it is an automatic manslaughter for a start.

Leanne

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:51:18 -0400, "Vito" said:


The costs are staggering only because all medical care in the US is a rip
off.


Shouldn't be any surprise, but calling the high costs a "rip off" is just
plain simple-minded.

I call bull****. More to follow I'm sure...

The costs are staggering because for some 60 years this
country has adopted a series of policies that remove the usual market
incentives from this sector of the economy.

AH the mantra...the market knows best...the market knows best...
You poor suckers. You've been sold to the insurance companies and
you're so blinded by all this free-market horse**** propaganda that you
Americans get pounded over the head with from the day you're born that
you can't see it.


First, by making medical
expenses tax deductible we insured that doctors and hospitals would have a
built-in subsidy not available to most other providers of services.

It's not a service Dave, it's called "health care" We're not talking
about flogging burritos here.


Then
during WWII we exempted employer-provided health coverage from wage
controls. There followed a rapid expansion of this form of compensation and
period when unions negotiated more and more coverage at less and less cost
to the employee--eventually removing from the employee most of the cost of
buying this service by increasing coverage and reducing deductibles.
Coverage for salaried employees, of course, followed the union-negotiated
coverage.

I was waiting for it, and you delivered! Those goddamn unions eh Dave?
We should just line all those *******s up against a wall and...Oh wait
a minute, didn't we fight against some Austrian corporal who did just
that? Hmmm...

Then we added government paid health coverage for the poor--again
with virtually no economic incentives to prevent overuse.

"Overuse"? What have you been smoking there bub? Who the hell wants to
go to the doctor? SICK PEOPLE DO Dave. Jeezus

Now we've added a
further subsidy for prescription drugs. And to make matters worse, many
countries have price controls on prescription drugs, which requires US users
to bear a disproportionate part of the cost of developing new drugs.

Do you really think that the US is the only place in the world where
research is conducted into the development of new drugs? Ah I forget,
you're American, and America is the centre of the friggin' Universe
isn't it?

The effect of all these subsidies and controls is just what you'd expect.
The decision to seek medical care has little or no cost to vast numbers of
people,

That's a good thing Dave, but then you're so blinded by ideology that
you can't see it. People shouldn't lose their homes or savings or their
lives because they can't pay cash for medical care. Quite frankly your
system is inhumane.

so you get overuse

simplistic flawed conclusion from faulty premises

resulting at vast sums of money being thrown to
doctors, hospitals and employees of both.

which of course would be the normal course of events considering that
health care is a people intensive enterprise


People will go see a doctor for a
hang-nail because it doesn't cost them anything. There was an article not
long ago recounting how the major activity for many Florida retirees is
going from one doctor to another to the point where the doctor's office is a
major center for socializing.

Okay, my mistake. I shouldn't have responded at all. You've been
drinking haven't you.

And of course when you have vast sums of money being thrown at a single
service the cost of that service rises.

The only way these costs are going to be limited is by giving the patient
some incentive to limit use.

OR we could just ask tax-whiners such as yourself to stop whinging

And in the current environment I don't see that
happening at any time soon. With the baby boomer generation reaching
retirement age the demand for more medical freebees paid for by the other
taxpayers will only increase. So we can look forward to a continued
environment in which most of the Mercedes and Rollses in the parking lot
have MD plates on them.

So you resent the fact that someone who spent perhaps a dozen years in
University and many many dollars learning an art and a science that
saves people's lives, gets remunerated at a level commensurate with
their skills.

Go sail your boat whinge-boy and bitch about how hard done by you are.

Proposed mandatory PFD law
 

Work on your sentence structure, eh!

"prodigal1" wrote in part:

Go sail your boat whinge-boy and bitch about how hard done by you are.