wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 08:55:34 -0800, "Dan"

The Colregs do not specify exactly what you have to do to maintain a
proper watch at all times. That is purposely left for a court to
adjucate on a case by case basis.

In that case there must be some prior cases.

I'm not disagreeing. I just want some evidence.

Dan wrote:
wrote:

On 8 Feb 2005 08:55:34 -0800, "Dan"


The Colregs do not specify exactly what you have to do to maintain a
proper watch at all times. That is purposely left for a court to
adjucate on a case by case basis.


In that case there must be some prior cases.

I'm not disagreeing. I just want some evidence.

There have been numerous cases that involved the issue of a proper
lookout. Many court decisions have set precedents, and many textbooks
have written on it.

However, the fundamental concept they focus on the question of whether a
better lookout could have prevented a particular incident. For
instance, and early ruling says that a proper lookout is so designated,
and this must be his primary duty. However, a later decision allowed
that a lookout could also sound a fog horn. However, a lookout can't
also be a navigator.

But if you apply decisions based on large ships, you end up requiring an
impossibly large crew for a small boat. The courts don't require the
same level of "lookout" on a small boat. Further, failure to have a
proper lookout (or failure to comply with any rule) is not penalized
unless it contributes to an accident.

However, if you're looking for a court decision relevant to this
situation, the ruling that I posted (again below) involves David Scully,
who was sailing the single hand racing boat Coyote (an Open 60?), which
he had chartered from the widow of Mike Plant. (Actually, I don't think
they were married before Mike disappeared when the keel fell off in the
mid-Atlantic). Scully was sleeping during a qualifying run from the
Azores to Newport when Coyote hit a fishing boat off Nova Scotia. Its
interesting reading - the original decision apparently cited the "vessel
moving should avoid vessel stationary" concept, but the appeal court
agreed with Scully that the fishing boat was not really "stationary"
according to the law, since it was not anchored. But the court held
that the lack of a lookout was the primary cause of the incident. The
fact that Coyote was not running its radar, lights, or radios didn't help.

http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961209.P.pdf

One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a lookout
is "illegal." As far as I know, there is no "law" that says you must
follow the ColRegs in international water. That is, there is no penalty
for failing to comply, unless that failure leads to an accident. In
inland waters, that is not the case - you can be penalized for not
having proper lights, etc.

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a lookout
is "illegal." As far as I know, there is no "law" that says you must
follow the ColRegs in international water. That is, there is no penalty
for failing to comply, unless that failure leads to an accident. In
inland waters, that is not the case - you can be penalized for not
having proper lights, etc.



Bwahahahahhahahahahhahaha!

Did you know the Coast Guard can, does and will write a
citation for not displaying an anchor light if anchored
in international waters? (outside of a few designated
anchorages, that is.)

Jeff, before you play the lawyer perhaps you should
seek out a law school and matriculate.

CN

Capt. Neal® wrote:

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a
lookout is "illegal." As far as I know, there is no "law" that says
you must follow the ColRegs in international water. That is, there is
no penalty for failing to comply, unless that failure leads to an
accident. In inland waters, that is not the case - you can be
penalized for not having proper lights, etc.



Bwahahahahhahahahahhahaha!
Did you know the Coast Guard can, does and will write a
citation for not displaying an anchor light if anchored
in international waters? (outside of a few designated anchorages, that is.)


No, they don't. They may do it outside the Colregs line, but not in
international waters.

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a lookout
is "illegal." As far as I know, there is no "law" that says you must
follow the ColRegs in international water. That is, there is no penalty
for failing to comply, unless that failure leads to an accident. In
inland waters, that is not the case - you can be penalized for not having
proper lights, etc.



Bwahahahahhahahahahhahaha!
Did you know the Coast Guard can, does and will write a
citation for not displaying an anchor light if anchored
in international waters? (outside of a few designated anchorages, that
is.)

Jeff, before you play the lawyer perhaps you should seek out a law school
and matriculate.

CN

Can someone explain how this boating thread is any better than the worst of
the OT political threads often complained about by some here at rec.boats?

"JimH" wrote in message

Can someone explain how this boating thread is any better than the worst
of the OT political threads often complained about by some here at
rec.boats?

Geez jimmy... it has to do with boats...
Are all you guys at rec.boats such whiners or is it that jimmy boy is the
group weenie?

CM

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
news:r3aOd.14517$K54.2604@edtnps84...

"JimH" wrote in message

Can someone explain how this boating thread is any better than the worst
of the OT political threads often complained about by some here at
rec.boats?

Geez jimmy... it has to do with boats...
Are all you guys at rec.boats such whiners or is it that jimmy boy is the
group weenie?

CM



*ploink* Another asshole joins Krause in the bozo bin.

in message , Capt. Neal®
') wrote:

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a
lookout
is "illegal." As far as I know, there is no "law" that says you must
follow the ColRegs in international water. That is, there is no
penalty
for failing to comply, unless that failure leads to an accident. In
inland waters, that is not the case - you can be penalized for not
having proper lights, etc.

Did you know the Coast Guard can, does and will write a
citation for not displaying an anchor light if anchored
in international waters? (outside of a few designated
anchorages, that is.)

Do you know that the Coast Guard (UK, US or whoevers else you like) has
absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever in international waters, so they
can write as many citations as they like?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

I'm fed up with Life 1.0. I never liked it much and now it's getting
me down. I think I'll upgrade to MSLife 97 -- you know, the one that
comes in a flash new box and within weeks you're crawling with bugs.

in message , Jeff Morris
') wrote:

One more point - although Neal keeps claiming that not having a
lookout is "illegal."Â*Â*AsÂ*farÂ*asÂ*IÂ*know,Â*thereÂ*isÂ*no Â*"law"Â*thatÂ*says
youÂ*must follow the ColRegs in international water.Â*

That's a bit definitional. There _is_ a law, it's the ColRegs, which are
established by international treaty, and it does, as Neal says, require
'a proper lookout at all times'. The fact that there aren't nautical
traffic cops lurking behind every iceberg in the southern ocean doesn't
mean the law doesn't apply. Technically, I think single handing
probably is illegal, and in boats as large, heavy and fast as
B&Q/Castorama, I think it does raise some ethical issues - you really
could be putting other people's lives at risk.

But do you want to live in a world without great solo achievements?
Everything in life involves some degree of risk, and a one and a half
ton motor car travelling at 64 mph has the same kinetic energy - and
the same ability to kill - as a six ton trimaran travelling at 16 mph.
And the southern ocean isn't exactly crowded these days.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

---===*** This space to let! ***===---
Yes! You, too, can SPAM in the Famous Brooke Rotating .sig!
---===*** Only $300 per line ***===---