Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DSK wrote:
wrote: What is the downside of this? I'm all for it. Well, sure. You're already stuck having to take classs and get a license. .... Us PWC'ers have been the first segment of boating to be subject to mandatory education requirements over the last five or six years or so, we have been all for it from the beginning, Not all PWCers are "all for it" Well, the pwc'ing COMMUNITY at large is all for it and has been ever since I"ve been a part of that community for that last nine years or so. PWC rights advocacy groups and IMO all of us more responsible, informed, thinking riders, have advocated and supported, mandatory education and certification, for ALL boaters as long as I've been involved, and it seems like an excellent idea to me. and there are still a lot of jetski drivers who operate their boats dangerously & offensively. Yes, and operators of other size and shape power boats too. That is why it seems look a great idea to try to guarantee that anyone driving one has at least been instructed in the basics. Some do it even after taking classes & getting licensed, seems like they consider it part of the fun. The reason why PWC's were the first to be regulated & to have a license required was due to the large number of incidents wherein PWC drivers injured others. Injuring yourself is not the state's business IMHO. I don't follow your thinking at all. Power boaters with bigger boats than pwc's can certainly do lots of damage to others and the properties of others as well as to themselves, and often do. (And to their families and passengers.) .... it seems to me that it would suggest that it's not really any additional burden for sailors because they're probably getting educated and trained before they hit the water anyway. Yeah, let's just go ahead and have the gov't burden them with classes & licensing req'ments etc etc, after all they can't possibly harm anybody else at 5 knots. I don't really see what the big burden is. The class is 8 hours and free, here in New York State anyway. And you don't want people to get the idea that it's a free country. I don't know that the "it's a free country" platitude dissuades me from thinking that this is a good idea, especially when you look at accident and injury statistics in states that have done it already. I guess you're not in favor of automobile licensing either? After all, I suppose, it's anyone's free choice to get onto a crowded road they know is populated by tons of dangerous uneucated maniacs.....every man for himself, why would the government have any interest in stepping on my freedom by insisting that I learn to drive and get tested before I get behind the wheel? I guess I must be some kind of communist. Sounds to me like some people just think they're too good to take the course and just don't want to be bothered...tough. richforman |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You seem to be saying that the law should be administered on a
case-by-case wherein we decide in the case of every individual boater whether or not they have the pre-existing skills and experience to just get out of having the take the class. Seems ridiculous to me and I just don't see what the big deal is. You say the 8-hour course is "a burden on my time that I do not have now," but then describe yourself (stating the obvious) as a recreational sailor, so this would be the equivalent of one good day on the water you might have to give up. I still don't think the burden is that onerous. Maybe you're just saying that there should be a distinction made between sailors and power-boaters. I don't know that I disagree vehemently with that, I think the licensing is an excellent idea for pwc'ers and all other power-boaters, and the proof is in the pudding in the accident statistics states where these laws have already been booked. Lives have been saved, the water is safer overall in those places, I think it's well worth it. But in the spirit of taking one for the team, I still don't think it's terrible for the same rule to be in effect for ALL boaters, but maybe I would agree that blow-boats are in a different category; I don't think certification should be required for, say, kayakers. richforman richforman |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com,
wrote: You seem to be saying that the law should be administered on a case-by-case wherein we decide in the case of every individual boater whether or not they have the pre-existing skills and experience to just get out of having the take the class. Seems ridiculous to me and I just don't see what the big deal is. You say the 8-hour course is "a burden on my time that I do not have now," but then describe yourself (stating the obvious) as a recreational sailor, so this would be the equivalent of one good day on the water you might have to give up. I still don't think the burden is that onerous. Maybe you're just saying that there should be a distinction made between sailors and power-boaters. I don't know that I disagree vehemently with that, I think the licensing is an excellent idea for pwc'ers and all other power-boaters, and the proof is in the pudding in the accident statistics states where these laws have already been booked. Lives have been saved, the water is safer overall in those places, I think it's well worth it. If we just passed a law prohibiting any recreational power vessel from exceeding 10 knots, the problem (and PWC's) would go away. Accident stats would show a huge drop. Hey, Rich, if it saves one life, it's worth it...... BTW, did you ever figure out what kinetic energy was, and why a PWC was a lot more dangerous than a 16' sailing dinghy? No? PDW |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Peter Wiley wrote: In article .com, wrote: You seem to be saying that the law should be administered on a case-by-case wherein we decide in the case of every individual boater whether or not they have the pre-existing skills and experience to just get out of having the take the class. Seems ridiculous to me and I just don't see what the big deal is. You say the 8-hour course is "a burden on my time that I do not have now," but then describe yourself (stating the obvious) as a recreational sailor, so this would be the equivalent of one good day on the water you might have to give up. I still don't think the burden is that onerous. Maybe you're just saying that there should be a distinction made between sailors and power-boaters. I don't know that I disagree vehemently with that, I think the licensing is an excellent idea for pwc'ers and all other power-boaters, and the proof is in the pudding in the accident statistics states where these laws have already been booked. Lives have been saved, the water is safer overall in those places, I think it's well worth it. If we just passed a law prohibiting any recreational power vessel from exceeding 10 knots, the problem (and PWC's) would go away. Accident stats would show a huge drop. Hey, Rich, if it saves one life, it's worth it...... I don't really see this "slippery slope" type argument. Seems to me there is a difference between outlawing any activities (which you sarcastically suggest here), which no one is talking about here, and trying to assure that people who do them have been instructed in the basics of doing them safely for the benefit of everybody sharing the waters. BTW, did you ever figure out what kinetic energy was, and why a PWC was a lot more dangerous than a 16' sailing dinghy? No? What do you mean, I already conceded that sailboats are far less dangerous than power boats. Hey do any of you guys have anything against the pwc's that are frequently used as the vessel of choice by law enforcement deams in rescue operations, as in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and in many other cases. Anybody read the article in the last Boat US issue about pwcs' place in the boating world these days? Old prejudicial stereotypes against these types of boats and their operators are going to continue to go by the wayside fast. Park after national park are pulling back on restricitve bans against pwc as results from environmental impact analyses come in and confirm that pwc's are as clean and quiet and non-intrusive to the environment, as any other kind of powerboat being made, and more so than most; accident, violation and injury statistics will continue to fall as more areas insist on education new entrants to the sport (or recreational hobby) - and in areas where only pwc'ers have to get certified, well, they'll be among the most informed (and probably best-attituded) group among newbie boaters. I know it's all baloney and can't let myself get upset over the anti-pwc comments (although it's tough) because I know I'm on the water every weekend eight months of the year and encounter NONE of that nasty insulting attitude or comments except right here on usenet. richforman PDW |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter Wiley wrote:
If we just passed a law prohibiting any recreational power vessel from exceeding 10 knots, the problem (and PWC's) would go away. Accident stats would show a huge drop. Hey, Rich, if it saves one life, it's worth it...... .... New Hampshire considered and then rejected a bill that would set a 45 MPH daytime speed limit, 25 MPH at night. They would rather Live Free and Die. http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/p...3/1221/48HOURS |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|