Here we go..

The guy in the picture has clearly had a few. He is standing upside down on his jet ski. He should be sent for some training.
 
I've never understood why jet skis in all their incarnations aren't considered to be a powered vessel. Logically it should be, especially as they have extremely powerful engines.

In the case sited, why did the jet ski driver get off? Sounds like the law was 'faulty', so in this light the DoT/DfT seems to have a perfectly reasonable point to 'fix' that law.

All water users have a duty of care to all other water users, just like all road users.

Or maybe I'm being simplistic and ignoring the thin end of the wedge bearing down on me?
 
In the case sited, why did the jet ski driver get off? Sounds like the law was 'faulty', so in this light the DoT/DfT seems to have a perfectly reasonable point to 'fix' that law.
Click to expand...
I forget the minutiae, but it was to do with the legal definition of a ship. Iirc, it was something to do with the fact that a ship normally travels to a destination and that, as jet skis mostly go round in circles, ending up where they started, they don't meet the criteria and are therefore exempt from any legislation covering ships.

Not sure that there is any other solution to the problem than to change the law as they're proposing. Any attempt to define jet-skis and exclude other small craft will, imho, lead to further attempts to find loopholes which will, inevitably, be found. The problem, no doubt, will be that at some point officialdom will abuse the powers given to them by the new legislation in the same way as Poole Council used anti-terrorism laws to monitor dustbin use......
 
dukes4monny said:
It's about time they did something similar with cyclists too..........grrrrr
Click to expand...

Duke,

In principle, I agree. However they are already subject to the same highway code and traffic statutes as any other road user. (Yes, I know they don't pay Road Tax nor do they have to be insured.)

Definitely though, it's time to control these wild kids who don't know, (or care) that the statutes apply to them too.

It's a long time since, but I did ride a bike once upon a time! :)

But everything is under control and we are doing very nicely in Far Flung Places too! So I don't think there will be any new Statutes on that yet awhile!:)
 
Thank you for hiring the pedaloe, now just before you go this is your instructor Guy and here's a pen for the short test.

Have a nice day.


They just keep thinking them up in there little tank, don't they :(
 
jhr said:
I forget the minutiae, but it was to do with the legal definition of a ship. Iirc, it was something to do with the fact that a ship normally travels to a destination and that, as jet skis mostly go round in circles, ending up where they started, they don't meet the criteria and are therefore exempt from any legislation covering ships.
Click to expand...

The world would be so much better if it were run on common sense.

Would be so simple to say: does it have an engine**?
Yes=ship (to include yachts with auxiliary power)
If no, does it use wind power?
Yes=sailing vessel (to include windsurfers, dinghys, etc.)
If no, then some other regulations for lilos, peddalos, canoes, tenders, etc.

But then, IANAL, I am an engineer.

** engine meaning anything that creates motive power; fuel powered, electrical, hamster turning a wheel, whatever...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

S
Not a lot happening here.
Replies
2
Views
837
The Q
T
S
Amiable demands for money!
Replies
15
Views
837
penberth3
P

Share this page

Top