"Larry" wrote in message
...
Peter wrote in news:1178668142.994836.113080
@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

Obviously, when we are given the freedom of choice, some
people will, unfortunately, make the wrong choices.


Those are the ones who need "direction". Not sure about NZ or Trinidad,
but in America, you can be a complete idiot, buy a 60' yacht with 2000HP
engines and just drive it away, no questions asked.....and not break any
laws if it has a fire extinguisher, taxes paid and everyone has a
lifejacket.........even if the driver is blind.

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Maybe you should have paid your bills, and the bill collector won't call.

On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:17:21 -0700, Alan Gomes wrote:

I don't recall just now, but how old was Sir Francis Chichester when he
circled the world in Gypsy Moth?

In his early sixties, but when he was 70, he did 4,000 miles in 20
days missing the record by one day.

A very interesting man was Sir. Francis.

wrote:
...
I don't recall just now, but how old was Sir Francis Chichester when
he circled the world in Gypsy Moth?

--Alan Gomes

I think he was 65 and suffering from cancer and chronic injuries...

Then there was Dr David Lewis, who sailed to the Antarctica in his late 50's
(solo, of course) and continued sailing mostly solo until his death a few
years ago at the age of 83.

Larry wrote:

"KLC Lewis" wrote in news:wMadnSkQm-
:

My God, this is so antithetical to America that I
can't believe you're posting it.

You don't FLY without a pilot's license, medical exam,
certification....before you fly over my house and endanger the public.

What's the difference in a boat on the ICW or harbor or shipping lane?

You are equating offshore with a boat to being on the ICW or in a
harbor or shipping lane.

They are not the same.

Someone of whatever age who watches the weather in a well found boat
is much less likely to endanger anyone (rescuer or innocent bystander)
when offshore than an ignorant person (young or old) in the ICW harbor
or shipping lane. And God knows there are plenty of them out there.

Why is that different than a Cessna 150? Any fool can fly a Cessna 150!
Hell, it flies itself unless you force it not to!

Larry

The reason older people 'get away with' sailing after your cut-off age
is that they have the knowledge and experience. They know their
limitations, and set their boat up and schedule their trips with that
in mind. Muscle won't substitute for brains.

On May 9, 2:26 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Larry" wrote in message

...





Peter wrote in news:1178668142.994836.113080
@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

Obviously, when we are given the freedom of choice, some
people will, unfortunately, make the wrong choices.

Those are the ones who need "direction". Not sure about NZ or Trinidad,
but in America, you can be a complete idiot, buy a 60' yacht with 2000HP
engines and just drive it away, no questions asked.....and not break any
laws if it has a fire extinguisher, taxes paid and everyone has a
lifejacket.........even if the driver is blind.

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Maybe you should have paid your bills, and the bill collector won't call.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Damn, your stupidity is showing once again, and as usual! Where in the
hell did he say that he owed a bill collector? Does the statement
"They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested...." have
ANY meaning to you?

Larry wrote:



IN THEIR 70'S?! COME ON! How stupid is that, offshore 200 miles with NO
YOUNG, STRONG BACKS ABOARD?!!

As long as rich stupids like these are buying boats, I still say
LICENSING should be mandatory. You want to sail...fine. You take the
course, TAKE THE PHYSICAL TO SEE IF YOU REALLY BELONG OUT THERE (no
matter what YOU think), then, if you pass all the REQUIREMENTS....then,
we issue you a LICENSE, we can revoke when you are too old, to PREVENT
YOU from endangering the lives of young rescue swimmers, helo crews and
boat crews just because you are too stupid and pig headed to see you are
too old to go "out there" without enough MUSCLE and ENDURANCE for that
worst case scenario you should be REQUIRED to be prepared for.

NOONE IN THEIR 70'S NEED APPLY! They should be PASSENGERS of ABLE
SEAMEN!


Larry

Hi Larry,

I know this is kind of a late reply, but I had to
let myself cool down for a few days to think about
what I really wanted to say here.

When I was 34 I was playing competitive
racquetball at the YMCA twice a week with a bunch
of guys I worked with. To give you an idea of the
level of play, our group included the 1st _and_
2nd place winners of the Austin TX open
racquetball tournament, and a couple of other
players who placed in the top ten. On any given
day, there were five or six of us who could give
the top two a run for their money.

There was one fellow who was 70 years old that
year who use to come and play with us regularly,
and he was quite competitive. He beat me quite a
few times, and he also would beat the top two
players sometimes. My point is that age is a poor
indicator of strength or fitness. I've seen
plenty of 18 year olds that would have had a heart
attack if they'd try to keep up with this guy, and
he would have beat them at arm wrestling also.

BTW, although that big Amel 54' may take a lot of
muscle to handle the sheets, there are plenty of
boats that do not. Hell, there are even boats
with (gasp) power winches, and power capstans.

Regarding the cost of rescues, and the risk to
rescue crews: Those resources are fixed cost, and
we taxpayers pay for them whether they are used or
not. If there are no real rescues, the crews have
to fly practice ones to stay proficient. I have
an aquaintance who is a USCG rescue swimmer, and
they _love_ to go out on real rescues. It breaks
up the boredom, and makes them feel like they are
doing something worthwhile.

What they do looks dangerous, but they are trained
and equipped for it. The USCG doesn't commit to a
rescue if they believe that the conditions are
dangerous for their crews and equipment. Of
course, what looks dangerous to us is routine for
them.

With your avowed distrust of the US government,
why would you want to give them more power to run
our lives than they've already got?

I say government should stay out of peoples lives
unless there is a compelling reason not to. I'm
really opposed to the idea that government should
become our mommies and save us from ourselves.

rant mode off

Sorry... I feel much better now ;-)

Don W.

Don W wrote in news:YZK0i.1163
:

I say government should stay out of peoples lives
unless there is a compelling reason not to. I'm
really opposed to the idea that government should
become our mommies and save us from ourselves.



Everyone has presented exceptional examples of just wonderful 70-year-
old, physically fit sailors they know, some famous, some not. This is
great. If I were advocating licensing of airplane pilots, and there were
no licensing or testing or physical exams of airplane pilots, everyone
would be pointing out Chuck Yeagar and a host of airplane pilot heros,
for the same reasons....they don't need to be examined, obviously.

Those are NOT the people walking the docks to play captain where I have
been, or whom I have met. THESE are the people who need to be told when
enough is enough, just like airplane pilots are told, now. These people
walking the docks are sure they can handle any situation. Just ask them
or point out to them that they are walking a little slower than they were
10 years ago, or have trouble getting aboard, or are a little out of
breath from the walk from the parking lot, and you'll be told how
wonderful shape they are in. In their minds, just like everyone on this
newsgroup who have gotten all excited and mad at me, they are 27 and
strong as an ox....just with white hair...well, some white hair.

But, with increasing frequency lately, we find them offshore, in heavy
weather and in trouble...beaten and exhausted to the point a rescue
swimmer must be deployed to get them into the helo harness...endangering
the lives of the Coasties and everyone else who comes near the abandoned
vessel left behind.

Their inflated egos have gotten them in trouble and endangered others.
I'm not concerned with themselves. It's the "others" that continues to
bother me.

At what point does government impose the same requirements on boaters it
requires, rightfully so, of all other modes of transportation to protect
the "others", passengers, other boaters, commercial traffic and those
boys in the helos?

Larry
--
I think we should do away with all testing and licensing of airline
pilots. Anyone who can fly a Hatteras 60 ought to be able to get a job
as a Delta 777 captain without taking a test or physical, right?!

....
At what point does government impose the same requirements on boaters it
requires, rightfully so, of all other modes of transportation to protect
the "others", passengers, other boaters, commercial traffic and those
boys in the helos?
....

When the cost is worth the benefit. Also, governments don't license
all modes of transportation. Bicycles are popular and dangerous and
rarely licensed. Ultra-light planes, roller skates, scooters, swim
fins, pogo sticks, skis, Segways, motorized shopping carts, high
powered propeller beanies, horses, donkeys, really big prehistoric
carnivorous ducks and many, many more modes of transport may be
operated unlicensed in most countries. I'm not against licensing as
such. I have two boating licenses, one of which is commercial. But,
unless you are willing to make the licensing bar very high and require
COI's for all vessels I don't think you will prevent many accidents
offshore. The costs of such a program would be great and the loss of
freedom real and the benefits negligible. I think the argument for
licensing for very fast boats used in populated areas is much easer to
make than the one for offshore boaters.

-- Tom.

On 10 May 2007 22:40:44 -0700, "
wrote:

I think the argument for
licensing for very fast boats used in populated areas is much easer to
make than the one for offshore boaters.

Not to mention a little drug and alcohol testing.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 10 May 2007 22:40:44 -0700, "
wrote:

I think the argument for
licensing for very fast boats used in populated areas is much easer to
make than the one for offshore boaters.

Not to mention a little drug and alcohol testing.

very difficult to enforce though.....