"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct. The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for
the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no
such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and
too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking
situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

Again, Mr. DSK, you are correct. On my trips on Lake Huron, from
Bayfield to Tobermory, I travel off shore. There have been several
occasions when I have been passed by large cruisers who do not seem to want
to alter their course and they pass too close to me. I am not within
sight of land and there is the whole lake out there and they have to pass
close by. What are they thinking? I don't understand why they don't
alter their course to pass at a distance from me. They seem to delight in
how much they can rock my boat. "The Boat" is a 27 foot twin engine power
boat, which I sold this past summer.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

JimC,
Ignorance of ColRegs is not limited to either a sailboater or a powerboater,
sort of like ignorance in rec.boats is not limited to any political party.
; )


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the
collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for
the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no
such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case
it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and
too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking
situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

Again, Mr. DSK, you are correct. On my trips on Lake Huron, from
Bayfield to Tobermory, I travel off shore. There have been several
occasions when I have been passed by large cruisers who do not seem to
want
to alter their course and they pass too close to me. I am not within
sight of land and there is the whole lake out there and they have to pass
close by. What are they thinking? I don't understand why they don't
alter their course to pass at a distance from me. They seem to delight
in
how much they can rock my boat. "The Boat" is a 27 foot twin engine
power
boat, which I sold this past summer.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
JimC,
Ignorance of ColRegs is not limited to either a sailboater or a
powerboater,
sort of like ignorance in rec.boats is not limited to any political party.
; )


Dr. Smithers, you are correct.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation. My point
is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels with strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to avoid
a collision under all conditions. It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations where a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of each
other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy, see
things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he can't
read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in order and
3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility or
accountability.

DSK

Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.


???

Do you really have ANY concept of how big the oceans are?

DSK

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.


???

Do you really have ANY concept of how big the oceans are?

DSK

Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

DSK

Doug,
I am able to manage my boat and go slow enough to avoid boat traffic, no
matter what the other boats do, but many ships are not. The ColRegs are not
written to regulate my actions but for all boat/ship traffic. I was
highlighting the obvious error you made when you said if any boat/ship is
involved in an accident, they are at fault. This is not correct.


"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

DSK

In article ,
DSK wrote:
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

Don't know about St. Lawrence, but were we sail, the channel can be
less than 30 ft. wide in spots.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com