Bobo

You obviously haven't thought this matter through carefully.

As a 100 day/year kayaker for 10 years over N CA and OR waters, I can assure
you that I always had an emergency life raft mounted just behind the bow
grab loop and a member of the Plaintiff's Bar (the lowest form of lawyer)
bound carefully with a bow knot just ahead of the stern grab loop. When a
rafter threatened to run me over, I turned my stern to the raft and my
lawyer would serve a complaint on the rafting company.

My standard equipage also helped to secure equal surfing rights on
attractive waves.

As platoons (nay, divisions) of lawyers depart with their diplomas from law
schools over our nation each year, only the kayakers can successfully
prevent this wave of flotsam from swamping our society. A well chosen
delayed roll-up from a nice deep hole permits one to dispose neatly of the
attached lawyer with a light pull on the bow knot lawyer binding.

I am sure that any kayak manufacturer can easily attach with duct tape a
small life raft to each kayak sold. With a attached disclaimer of liability
if the owner of the boat detaches the raft. See any member of the
Plaintiff's Bar.

Prudent kayakers will, of course, padlock their emergency life rafts to
their boat, so they cannot be stolen.

Best wishes on the water,

John Adams.

"Bobo" wrote in message
...
This author believes canoe & kayak manufacturers are liable for the
"murder" of 1,000 paddlers because they don't install an "emergeny
life raft" on their crafts. What a bunch of BULL****! I can just
see a slew of class action lawsuits being filed and this guy being the
plaintiff attorney's "expert" witness against canoe & kayak
manufacturers, paddling schools, dealers, instructors, etc. Just like
those overweight plaintiffs who are trying to sue or "blackmail" fast
food companies to compensate them for making them fat.

I sometimes have to shake my head and scream at all this nonsense in
the USA about blaming someone else for their own stupidty. I read
somewhere that in Mexico, when you step in a hole, they call you
"stupid." In the USA, they call you a "millionaire." The personal
injury scam fueled by crooked attorneys in this country has just run
amuck.

Whatever you do, don't buy this guy's book.

************************************

Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1,000 Americans -- New Book Details
Ineffective Canoe and Kayak Safety Measures Perpetuated by
Manufacturers

PENETANGUISHENE, Ontario, Canada, July 29, 2003 (PRIMEZONE) -- The
waters of life are filled with financial sharks. The public is
generally protected against commercial scandals, however, author Tim
Ingram feels there is a very important scandal occurring that is going
unnoticed in the rushing waters filled with Enron scandals. In his
book, Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans: US Coast Guard
Studies Device to Save Victims (now available through 1stBooks),
Ingram discusses the inefficient safety measures and scam rescue
training that has cost many people their lives.

"This book specifically documents the murder of U.S. citizens in
canoes and kayaks through an instruction scam to make money and kill
innocent victims in the water. This book documents the method to lure
victims into cool waters from which they cannot escape," Ingram
states.

This book is an expose and a postulation of an easy remedy to right
the situation. According to Ingram, nearly 1,000 people have died in
the United States from canoe and kayak accidents. Most of the victims
died in the water from hypothermia because they could not get back in
the canoe or kayak.

"Canoes and kayaks are the deadliest boats in the world. They are
extremely vulnerable to capsize and flooding," Ingram says.

The fault, he notes, lies with the manufacturers. He feels they should
have an emergency life raft attached to the kayak or canoe. He details
how this device is easily and economically possible. Instead, he says,
companies offer a cornucopia of rescue classes, which he finds
ineffective and difficult. Many people are unable to perform these
rolls, he notes, and remain in the water until they succumb to
hypothermia, even in warm weather and wearing a lifejacket or other
floatation device.

"This book documents the selling of canoes and kayaks with reckless
disregard for human life. Canoe and kayak 'safety' is Enron-style
fraud, sold to make money for instructors and to sell all sorts of
paraphernalia that increase the risk of death. Enron did not kill
anyone," Ingram states.

Ingram was a YMCA camp counselor and canoeing instructor nearly 40
years ago and owned numerous boats, canoes and kayaks. He has a number
of U.S. patents for devices that effectively overcome hypothermia.
Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans is his first book.

Gee, Bobo, don't Timmy got to make a livin', too?

By calling him a lyar (liar is the preferred spelling in English), a
complete psycho, and beneath contempt is likely to cause your fellow boaters
to confuse him with a typical lawyer.

Or advertising copywriter. Not to mention used car salesmen. I'm sure you
wouldn't class such a sterling fellow as Timmy with those other guys.

John Adams



"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message
...


Bobo wrote:

big snip

I take it that this is your introduction to Timmy the Sponson Boy. He's
been spewing the same crap for years in an effort to scare people into
buying his worthless "inventions". Apparently, he's "invented" a life raft
now. He's a lyar, a complete psycho and beneath contempt. Fortunately,
he's also nothing but a windbag and no one takes him seriously.

Thanks a lot for advertising his book for him here. You've done him a
great service. Then again, perhaps that was your intent?

--
Regards

Brian

On 12-Aug-2003, Marsh Jones wrote:

I've never seen a kayak with
sponsons successfully complete an eskimo roll,

How many attempts have you seen?

Timmy's bags aren't that great and the increase in stabiilty isn't spectacular
(in spite of photos showing folks standing up in their kayaks with them).
I tested them years ago and tried rolling with them as well. I used a rented
Solstice GTS and found the difference in rolling with/without was similar to the
difference in rolling the same kayak loaded/unloaded.

Mike

John Q Adams wrote:

Gee, Bobo, don't Timmy got to make a livin', too?

By calling him a lyar (liar is the preferred spelling in English), a
complete psycho, and beneath contempt is likely to cause your fellow boaters
to confuse him with a typical lawyer.

Or advertising copywriter. Not to mention used car salesmen. I'm sure you
wouldn't class such a sterling fellow as Timmy with those other guys.

Of course not, as that would be an insult to lawyers, copywriters and used car
salesmen everywhere! Timmy would have to claw his way up the food chain a few
rungs to reach their level. ;-)

--
Regards

Brian

Michael Daly wrote:

On 12-Aug-2003, Marsh Jones wrote:


I've never seen a kayak with
sponsons successfully complete an eskimo roll,


How many attempts have you seen?

Timmy's bags aren't that great and the increase in stabiilty isn't spectacular
(in spite of photos showing folks standing up in their kayaks with them).
I tested them years ago and tried rolling with them as well. I used a rented
Solstice GTS and found the difference in rolling with/without was similar to the
difference in rolling the same kayak loaded/unloaded.

Mike
OK, smart guy:-)

I bit on the flame bait about bike helmets and probably overstated the
case. I'm still awed by folks that cool off by a quick roll anyway.
I'll stand on the point that learning to paddle is probably cheaper
than the product, and definitely better in the long run.
Since you've tried them, and *I've* only seen them and decided they were
something I didn't need to try, how did they work in a side wave? That
was my big fear - like taking a flat bottomed Grumman canoe out in a
squall. High initial stability, loss of secondary stability.

Marsh

On 13-Aug-2003, Marsh Jones wrote:

Since you've tried them, and *I've* only seen them and decided they were
something I didn't need to try, how did they work in a side wave? That
was my big fear - like taking a flat bottomed Grumman canoe out in a
squall. High initial stability, loss of secondary stability.

Increasing the stability on flat water means reducing the stability in waves.
Broaching in a breaking wave with sponsons means an almost certain
dump. Timmy, of course, refuses to acknowledge this.

Mike

....stuff deleted

I bit on the flame bait about bike helmets and probably overstated the
case. I'm still awed by folks that cool off by a quick roll anyway.
I'll stand on the point that learning to paddle is probably cheaper
than the product, and definitely better in the long run.
Since you've tried them, and *I've* only seen them and decided they were
something I didn't need to try, how did they work in a side wave? That
was my big fear - like taking a flat bottomed Grumman canoe out in a
squall. High initial stability, loss of secondary stability.


Marsh,

While you may feel that the bike helmet comment was flame bait, I lived
through that whole evolution from "bike helmets are useless" to "bike
helmets are mandatory" and seen how it works. When I was a kid, nobody,
absolutely nobody, wore helmets. The number of bike deaths/year was about
500 in the US (in a population of about 150 million - I guess that dates me,
eh?). The number of adults who cycled back then was, essentially, zero. The
US population has doubled, the number of cyclists is considerably greater,
and the death rate/cyclist is essentially unchanged. The same people
(children) die each year, not because they do or don't have helmets, but
because no helmet will protect them in a high speed crash with a motor
vehicle.

There is an economic safety infrastructure that has grown over a piece of
equipment that, like the sponson, has limited utility and may actually
induce as many severe injuries as it protects (read evidence on rotational
head injuries induced by the helmet increasing the circumference of the head
and providing greater torque on the neck). This is my concern. I've seen it
happen in one sport that had very light participation (especially amongst
adults), and it could happen in another.

The analogy is a solid one. We've already had a coast guard representative
ask us for comments on sponsons. Tim has also written his self-serving
diatribe, which, much as we like to deny it, will get some media play
(especially as he won't shut up). Someone with more savvy and people skills
could well take the ball and run with it. Unlike PFD's, which actually do
provide some utility, sponsons are essentially useless. Anyone who goes out
in conditions where sponsons might be deployed has already make the critical
judgement error that it was "safe" to go out on the water in those
conditions (probably because they had sponsons). Equpiment is no substitute
for skills and judgement. We all know this, but the media and those who have
economic motives don't want the lawmakers (few of which cycle) to realize
this. It isn't news and it isn't profitable.

Rick

Marsh,

While you may feel that the bike helmet comment was flame bait, I lived
through that whole evolution from "bike helmets are useless" to "bike
helmets are mandatory" and seen how it works. When I was a kid, nobody,
absolutely nobody, wore helmets. The number of bike deaths/year was about
500 in the US (in a population of about 150 million - I guess that dates me,
eh?). The number of adults who cycled back then was, essentially, zero. The
US population has doubled, the number of cyclists is considerably greater,
and the death rate/cyclist is essentially unchanged. The same people
(children) die each year, not because they do or don't have helmets, but
because no helmet will protect them in a high speed crash with a motor
vehicle.

I always like the statistics from the 1st world war. When the allies
introduced helmets for the soldiers in the trenches the number of head
injuries went up!






Previously there were more deaths from head wounds and so these were not
injuries.

Of no particular relevance I know but what the hell!

Snipped

Rick



--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

Tim Ingram wrote:
squall. High initial stability, loss of secondary stability.

Marsh



You might as well get this right:

http://www.1stBooks.com/bookview/16818

(paste in browser address bar if necessary)

As you will read in the described contents of the book: Sponsons are
not intentended for WW. WW is a special murder technique on its' own.
Most people do not die on WW. They die of hypothermia, wearing a PFD
or not.

The rate of US canoe and kayak deaths per exposure hour far exceeds
the worst vehicle scandals (Ford Firestone 15+), the fatalities in
19th century mining in Great Britain 1000+, and the current fatalities
in Iraq per exposure hour, in harm's way.

You have participated in the largest experiment in social psychology
since the Yale/Milgram experiments of the 60's. Goldhagen's "Hitler's
Willing Executioners", describes a similar group behavior to RBP, such
as the SS, basing execution on inferior "skills or other qualities".
This was a best-seller in Germany, as well as a 1994 Harvard
dissertation.

You have recently contributed to the murder of 2, eleven year old Girl
Guides.

Tim

....rising to bait... ...can't help myself... ...CTRLAlt... ...
oh, what the hell:

Since I don't do whitewater, but do a *lot* of fla****er canoeing and
kayaking, particularly in cooler climes, I'll call you on this one. Not
sponsons, dry suits, Mustang survival suits or anything else will
prevent underequipped, ill prepared, unskilled people from venturing out
in conditions above their ability. Any device that provides this sense
of false security has about the same utility as an out of date condom.

Just a simple stat, taken from:
http://198.66.37.82/issues/articles/DrowningFacts.html

"According to the United States Coast Guard, deaths associated with
recreational boating numbered 734 in the United States and its
territories. Drowning accounted for 517 of the deaths. The Coast Guard
estimates that about 450 boaters who drowned could have been saved by
wearing a life jacket. Alcohol was reported to be involved in 191 (26%)
of the deaths."

This covers all recreational boaters in the US, not just canoes and
kayaks for the year 1998. Most boating deaths reported in Minnesota
involve some combination of night, storm, no PFD, and alcohol, not
canoes or kayaks. In the past year, I cannot recall a single death
related to a kayak or canoe in this state,which has more registered
canoes and kayaks per 100,000 residents than any other. We have more
people die every year on snowmobiles than in all boats. (maybe a new
market - sponsons for snowmobiles)

As you have directly, and without warrant, called me an accessory to
murder, I'll take the unprecedented action for me and suggest you take
your sponsons, remove the arms so they don't get in the way, and put
them where the sun don't shine.

Marsh

"Lefty" ) writes:

On that subject, most people would suggest a drysuit to battle that
hypothermia, rather than a liferaft for your sea kayak.

how about a sea kayak for your liferaft?


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned