On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:34:56 GMT, John Fereira
wrote:

(snipped a bit)
Legally, a motor vehicle must stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk, and if
I'm in a cross walk and am run over by a motor vehicle the fault would be
attributed to the driver of the motor vehicle. Pragmatically, when a
collision involving a 2 ton motorized vehicle and a human occurs, the human
suffers the greatest amount of damage. Subsequently assigning blame isn't
as much an issue as who might be living the rest of their life crippled or
have their life ended right there. Similarly, in a collision between a
large power boat and a small paddle craft the operator of the paddlecraft is
going to suffer the greatest damage. While maritime right-of-way laws might
give the right of way to the paddle craft, those that take responsibility
for their own safety take whatever precautions are necessary to ensure their
safety rather than assume the rules of the road are going offer complete
protection.

Indeed. My rules of the road when I'm walking or paddling are to let
anything that's bigger, faster, dumber, or in more of a hurry have the
right of way. It's worked so far, with only a couple of close calls.
One of which involved the excuse, "It's been real hot out and there's
been beer." But that was in a location I found (later) was notorious
for bad power boating with beer or other beverages.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

And John, if a person jumps into the crosswalk, and crashes into the
side of the truck already passing on the road, no one would hold the
truck driver responsible. Especially if it is dark such that the driver
could not reasonably be expected to see the pedestrian running in an
erratic fashion toward the crossing! A paddled boat, cannot maneuver
itself to take the right of way, and assume the right of way, by
placing itself in jeopardy.

Seems to me that a vessel turning, in the dark, without a required
forward watch, and then crashes into another larger vessel, probably
has little claim to right of way, if I read the story correctly. Yes it
is sad to lose someone, especially someone as full of life as to get up
early and go for an invigorating paddle. However it sounds like the
four paddlers took their activity for granted, and possibly became too
familiar. I read nowhere of any of these paddlers having a PFD on, or
even available. Does a sculling team need to abide by other standing
regulations, or do they just go do their thing, and the rest of us have
to stay out of their way. I doubt it!

Now I don't mean to assign blame, so much as to learn a lesson for
myself. I find it easy to get overly familar with what I am doing, and
then expose myself and others to unnecessary danger and injury. I of
course would feel really bad about someone being hurt on my accord,
especially if while doing something just for the fun and exercise. I
would feel equally bad though if a hard working boater was charged with
any wrongdoing or carelessness on my part.

Just assigning blame is not even an issue. Accepting personal
responsibility is the main concern of the responsible boating, paddling
public. This thread illustrates that there are some though who do not
accept personal responsibility, and try to solve their difficulties
with bluster and guns!

That means that carrying a light might meet a legal obligation
but if the light is not sufficient enough to prevent a near collision, most
rational people would conclude that having a brighter light (or maybe just
not paddling at night in certain waterways) will going further in preventing
a future incident than getting a bunch of people to support you in assigning
blame.

John, I think you nailed this one. Hopefully the rest of us will be
sure that our lights are on. I am concerned that one in particular may
be running with less than full charge in their Energizer." TnT

"A hero is one who would question the gods and thus arouses devils to
challenge his vision."



Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
O thank you, NYC XYZ! It's been so boring around here since our last
crackpot got wrapped up in the sleeveless jacket and taken off to the
house with the rubber-walled rooms. Thanks for stepping in and filling
the vacancy! Life on r.b.p is becoming interesting again.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--

================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================


NYC XYZ wrote:
I mean, even though it's broad ****ing daylight, if you paddle and you
get capsized by a powercraft, IT'S YOUR GODDAMNED FAULT -- right, speed
bumps?


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

John Fereira wrote:


I believe on of the site I read indicated that the incident occurred between
5:45 and 6:00am. I don't live all that far from New York City and leave for
work around 7:00am and it's still quite dark.

I don't recall that morning being "quite dark." It was rainy, sure,
and thus not the broad daylight I'd originally imagined.

Certainly visibility was an issue. Just think the powercraft should be
a heck of a lot more careful. If you're behind an engine, I think it
should be AUTOMATICALLY ENCUMBENT upon you to watch out and not get
into an accident.

What's so controversial about that???

Why is it necessary to assign blame?

If you have rules, and you have an accident, you investigate who
followed the rules. Either the rules aren't good enough if they were
followed, or someone didn't follow the rules.

What's so controversial about that???

The way I remember the previous
episode was that the fellow paddlers here were not claiming that the police
patrol boat was not at fault, but that ultimately that we are all
responsible for our own safety.

You recall incorrectly, then.

"Responsibilities" imply "rights"...my responsibility to my safety on
the water thus implies the right to hug the shoreline such that I do
all I can to avoid motor-boats. Once that responsibility has been met,
it's incumbent upon the power-boaters to STAY AWAY from the shoreline.

My responsibility to my safety in the dark means having a light with
me. Once that responsibility has been met, it's incumbent upon the
power-boaters to PAY ATTENTION for lights on the water.

Legally, a motor vehicle must stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk, and if
I'm in a cross walk and am run over by a motor vehicle the fault would be
attributed to the driver of the motor vehicle.

Exactly.

Pragmatically, when a
collision involving a 2 ton motorized vehicle and a human occurs, the human
suffers the greatest amount of damage.

Yeah, and practically speaking, none of you paddlers should be out on
the water in the first place! Why not just reduce the risk to
0%...doh!

Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.

Subsequently assigning blame isn't
as much an issue as who might be living the rest of their life crippled or
have their life ended right there.

Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.

Similarly, in a collision between a
large power boat and a small paddle craft the operator of the paddlecraft is
going to suffer the greatest damage. While maritime right-of-way laws might
give the right of way to the paddle craft, those that take responsibility
for their own safety take whatever precautions are necessary to ensure their
safety rather than assume the rules of the road are going offer complete
protection.

Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.

That means that carrying a light might meet a legal obligation
but if the light is not sufficient enough to prevent a near collision, most
rational people would conclude that having a brighter light (or maybe just
not paddling at night in certain waterways) will going further in preventing
a future incident than getting a bunch of people to support you in assigning
blame.

Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.

Nice try at a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, but this isn't what I was arguing in
the first place, ever. It's really pitiful that you continue to bark
up the wrong tree.



Tinkerntom wrote:
And John, if a person jumps into the crosswalk, and crashes into the
side of the truck already passing on the road, no one would hold the
truck driver responsible. Especially if it is dark such that the driver
could not reasonably be expected to see the pedestrian running in an
erratic fashion toward the crossing! A paddled boat, cannot maneuver
itself to take the right of way, and assume the right of way, by
placing itself in jeopardy.

Seems to me that a vessel turning, in the dark, without a required
forward watch, and then crashes into another larger vessel, probably
has little claim to right of way, if I read the story correctly. Yes it
is sad to lose someone, especially someone as full of life as to get up
early and go for an invigorating paddle. However it sounds like the
four paddlers took their activity for granted, and possibly became too
familiar. I read nowhere of any of these paddlers having a PFD on, or
even available. Does a sculling team need to abide by other standing
regulations, or do they just go do their thing, and the rest of us have
to stay out of their way. I doubt it!

Now I don't mean to assign blame, so much as to learn a lesson for
myself. I find it easy to get overly familar with what I am doing, and
then expose myself and others to unnecessary danger and injury. I of
course would feel really bad about someone being hurt on my accord,
especially if while doing something just for the fun and exercise. I
would feel equally bad though if a hard working boater was charged with
any wrongdoing or carelessness on my part.

Just assigning blame is not even an issue. Accepting personal
responsibility is the main concern of the responsible boating, paddling
public. This thread illustrates that there are some though who do not
accept personal responsibility, and try to solve their difficulties
with bluster and guns!

That means that carrying a light might meet a legal obligation
but if the light is not sufficient enough to prevent a near collision, most
rational people would conclude that having a brighter light (or maybe just
not paddling at night in certain waterways) will going further in preventing
a future incident than getting a bunch of people to support you in assigning
blame.

John, I think you nailed this one. Hopefully the rest of us will be
sure that our lights are on. I am concerned that one in particular may
be running with less than full charge in their Energizer." TnT

Again, this is a STRAW MAN ARGUMENT -- not at all what I was on about.

I asked about rules, but the water-logged airheads here keep going on
about "practical" considerations...no ****ing ****, Sherlocks!



Cyli wrote:

Indeed. My rules of the road when I'm walking or paddling are to let
anything that's bigger, faster, dumber, or in more of a hurry have the
right of way. It's worked so far, with only a couple of close calls.
One of which involved the excuse, "It's been real hot out and there's
been beer." But that was in a location I found (later) was notorious
for bad power boating with beer or other beverages.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

"NYC XYZ" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tinkerntom wrote:
I was out sailing the other day, capsized and unable to recover, and a
powerboater towed me to shore! A week later, I was paddling, and I saw
a PWC go aground, and suck up rocks into the jet! I stopped and
provided aid, and with some tools that I had in my car, we were able to
get the PWC running again!

If only most folks were "Church of Latter-Day Saints" commercials like
yourself! =)

Oh geezus, don't mention Tinkerntom and religion...that's like a match to
gasoline. Or introducing Satan to a group of lawyers.

Hi Kman, I'm back!!!!!!!

Actually I'm back and mellow. I got to do enough paddling this summer
to work out some of my "hostility." Now I have read some of your trip
revues, though that was earlier in the year, and it now sounds like you
may need to go do a few more before the water turns too hard.

I might even suggest that you take NYC XYZ with you, and you could
spend some professional time with him, and work out some hostility on
both your parts. Ha, you may even save "Merica" then, and we would all
be so grateful! I know how much you like to go to NYC, here is a good
excuse!

Speaking about gasoline, I did manage to mount a small gas two stroke
motor on my Folbot as an experiment, without blowing up things, or
setting anything on fire. So I demonstrated that I can handle gasoline
without making it into the news! I also decided that it was not
necessary or advantageous to have a small gas motor on a kayak, so I
spent most of my time sailing my Folbot, and paddling a Klepper AEII
that I recently received!

One of my sailing buddies motto:
" The pessimist complains about the wind.
The optimist believes it will change.
The realist changes the sails!"

My new motto:
"Life is about each moment of breath,
living about each breathless moment!

Take a deep breath, and savor each moment! "

TnT



KMAN wrote:
"NYC XYZ" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tinkerntom wrote:
I was out sailing the other day, capsized and unable to recover, and a
powerboater towed me to shore! A week later, I was paddling, and I saw
a PWC go aground, and suck up rocks into the jet! I stopped and
provided aid, and with some tools that I had in my car, we were able to
get the PWC running again!

If only most folks were "Church of Latter-Day Saints" commercials like
yourself! =)

Oh geezus, don't mention Tinkerntom and religion...that's like a match to
gasoline. Or introducing Satan to a group of lawyers.

KMAN wrote:


Oh geezus, don't mention Tinkerntom and religion...that's like a match to
gasoline. Or introducing Satan to a group of lawyers.



Well, it was all in the context of introducing paddleboats to
motorboats. I say firearms are the perfect ice-breaker.

"Tinkerntom" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi Kman, I'm back!!!!!!!

Actually I'm back and mellow. I got to do enough paddling this summer
to work out some of my "hostility." Now I have read some of your trip
revues, though that was earlier in the year, and it now sounds like you
may need to go do a few more before the water turns too hard.

You still sound pretty hostile to me Tinkerntom! But keep fooling yourself
:-)