Consulting? Who should be exempt from booze law?

[Peppermint]

Re: I\'m affraid it\'s easy to enforce.

They'll use best practise from industry. A bit like corporate responsibility. So you can get the driver and the owner.

If I had to enforce it I'd

Photograph the boat and crew before making myself known.

Stop the vessel and breathalize the helm and the owner.

In road traffic they're trying to make the breath test the deciding factor in prosecution. So no doctor required for blood or urine tests.

They won't need to do many of these to get people on the soft drinks.

If you want to get around it it's simple. Only drink and sail in atrocious weather. Motorist have known for years that, speed cameras excepted, you can go as fast as you like if it's pissing down with rain. Coppers don't like getting wet.

I still think your unlikely to get involved with a breath test unless you have an accident.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[boatless]

Steve

I understood, from HMCG's post, that there is no existing law? Now I'm confused.

John

ps. I have a son too, although in 10 years he'll be someone to avoid crossing!

<hr width=100% size=1>my opinion is complete rubbish, probably.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by boatless on 31/03/2004 14:40 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[jimi]

There is a law .. or else how could the pissed conductor stranded on Calshot Spit recently have been prosecuted?

<hr width=100% size=1>I Have The Body Of A God... Buddha

 

[steve_cronin]

Yes, as I said, where there need to be regulation, it exists already.

Steve Cronin

<hr width=100% size=1>The above is, like any other post here, only a personal opinion

 

[ubuysa]

Re: I\'m affraid it\'s easy to enforce.

<font size=1>Photograph the boat and crew before making myself known</font size=1>

It's not easy to identify whose actually helming when the cockpit of a small boat is full of bodies. In any case you couldn't prove that the person apparently standing at the wheel or whose hand appears to be on the tiller in your photograph was actually steering the boat and not someone else who is sitting down and can't be seen in the photograph. In most larger motorboats you probably can't even see whose helming from the fast RIB you'll probably be in.

<font size=1>Stop the vessel and breathalize the helm and the owner</font size=1>

Suppose the afforementioned 10 and 11-year old sons are helming and the owner is not aboard?

I'm not a lawyer (can't you tell /forums/images/icons/wink.gif) but I'm certain any half-decent lawyer would be able to create enough uncertainty as to render any prosecution under the proposed terms impossible.

Just my opinion....Tony C.

<hr width=100% size=1>There are 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't.

 

[ubuysa]

<font size=1>There is a law .. or else how could the pissed conductor stranded on Calshot Spit recently have been prosecuted?</font size=1>

Simple. He was on his own.

Rule #1: Always have somebody else to blame!

Tony C.

<hr width=100% size=1>There are 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't.

 

[Andrew_Bray]

Re: Consulting? Who should be exempt from booze la

Maybe this point has already been made but in many places around the UK coast drink sail laws are already effectively in force via local bye laws where, in the event of an incident or accident the person in charge of a boat can be prosecuted if found to be inebriated. What the level is I do not know.

But I have heard of virtually no sailing (ie not motor boating) incidents that have occured where alcohol was a primary cause. And I agree wholeheartedly with the view that there's no point looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist.

A good proportion of people I know run dry ships at sea and moderation is the word for the rest. Things do change a bit, though, for the run ashore when they arrive after a hard passage.

Strange isn't it that this question should elicit so many mainly sensible replies in such a short time. The Shipping Minister David Jamieson should take note.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[dieselhead]

Re: Consulting? Who should be exempt from booze la

Interesting to note that there is no evidence or statistics available to justify a major new control on our freedoms.

I remember before the road drink/drive rules came into force in the 1960’s there was a wealth of data on alcohol-related road accidents available.

How come the Minister (David Jamieson) said on TV last night (Meridian 30/03/04) that “this is not a big problem” while Jeremy Smart, Chief Enforcement Officer for the MCA described drunkenness at the helm as “a huge problem” in the Sunday Times “(28/03/04)? Which is the official line?

Surely if it is a huge problem, it is worth trying to collect some data to justify the new rules? Or is it just that “nanny knows best”?

Now here’s a funny thing. In 1998 the Government Review of Coastal Byelaws was published. The working party responsible for this included all interested Government Departments including the Home Office and DETR Ports Division and Local Government Division plus many others. For two years they had looked at all the powers enjoyed by harbours, local councils (for beach safety) and the other agencies with an interest in coastal safety. One of the questions they asked was “what additional powers are needed?” Result? 59 recommendations, but not one reference to alcohol in the entire report!


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bigmart]

Re: It is

blatantly obvious to us, the sector of society that are about to have our freedom curtailed, that there is no need for legislation to enforce restirctions in this matter because the existing laws/Bylaws are effective & sufficient. Strange isn't it that all the bodies that are lining up to legislate us into submision on this & other subjects have a vested interest in aquiring more funding to swell their dwindling budgets.

It seems to me that if we attack these organisations at source rather than being swept into playing their pathetic little games that will end up with us being controlled as a matter of course with lip service being paid to our legitimate concerns.

Government consultation is a joke. We should be aiming our inquisition at the Coast Guard & Police with regard to drink/ licensing legislation & to Trinity House in respect of Licensing/Light Dues.

I like a good rant too.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[DeeGee]

Re: It is

pershonally.... hic... I have problem not with thissy rporosal. I find slways that i drive baetater hqerh I hagv gad a driggkk or tow or thraer.
#
Is it a qreai\ tion of speeeed or asias is sta it a queiratr aoin of judgemtna?

i reaekneon that atevea cbaronnin musta gbe ab abigg drinadkare and thatahsss whaty he watnas no morear reagulaation.,

<hr width=100% size=1>Black Sugar - the sweetest of all

 

[qsiv]

Re: Swimming whilst incapable ...

One better - locally a man thought he might have had too much, so unlocked car, popped keys in boot, shut boot, climbed into drivers seat to sleep off effects.

Plod sees him in car, questions asked, breath tested, charged, prosecuted and convicted.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Sybarite]

Re: Swimming whilst incapable ...

I remember the case of a fellow student, who, knowing that he had had too much at a do, decided to walk home. On the way he was "done" 'for being drunk in possession' because he had his car keys with him.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rowana]

Unfortunate accident at Leverton Marina

The accident to the 2 guys at Leverton marina (see post further down) will only give fuel to the beauraprats wanting to impose regulation upon us.

My sympathies go to the families of both men, of course, and I'm sure many of us can say "There but for the grace of God . . . " Unfortunately, the said beauraprats latch on to such incidents, and use them as an excuse to impose their laws upon us.

There are far, far more pressing issues that they should be tackling . . . . .
No, I'm not going to rant here, but I feel a letter to my MP, MEP, MSP coming on . . .

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[halcyon]

See the motor boat boys have picked up this thread, at there normal level.

Brian

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[sailorman]

Re: So you\'re in favour then?

GO FOR IT STEVE,
I CANT STAND FACELESS BA****DS.
WHY NOT STAND-UP LIKE A MAN & BE COUNTED Mr M.C.A or r u another bloody
EMPIRE BUILDER
roger winter

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[[2068]]

And your point is, despite your poor use of English ?

>
> at THERE normal level
>


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tome]

Re: So you\'re in favour then?

Spare us the hystrionics. MCA was putting a calm perspective, you're wound up tighter than a drum.

Shouting doesn't really move any sensible discussion forward.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

There was a sailing incident

a few years back.

In the W Isles a lady crew member put out a MAYDAY and was rescued, I think, by the MCA Helicopter and the lifeboat. The skipper was alleged to be drunk and was causing her considerably concern. If I remember correctly an RNLI crew was put aboard and the vessel taken to harbour. I also believe that the skipper was prosecuted (maybe we have better laws in Scotland) and convicted.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[billmacfarlane]

If ypou have a total of 5 people on board a boat who defines who is the navigator ? Come to think of it who defines who is the skipper ? The reason I ask is I usually sail with my wife and we both do the nav, sometimes on the same trip so if the booze limit applies to the navigator or maybe the skipper just who is that person on board. Is it the owner for example , or has the owner appointed someone else to do the nav work and yet another person to do the skippering. Seems to me there's a whole level of just exactly defining who is who aboard a pleasure craft to be done before they can go any further. It sounds as if they are trying yet again to treat the leisure market as they would the commercial one and it sounds as if they haven't got much of an idea of how leisure sailors actually sail. They might need educating. Over to you RYA ???

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rowana]

<They might need educating. Over to you RYA>

I wouldn't hold by breath if I were you.

<hr width=100% size=1>