scottie
Well-Known Member
further to the post below ho long till we get regulation with regard to drinking and boating
SEA SNAKE DEATHS
- Thread starter scottie
- Start date
Alistairr
Well-Known Member
Drink played a major part into the many serious errors, the Skipper of the Trashman made, before that yacht was lost.
Al.
Al.
gjgm
Well-Known Member
well, first, they have to define a working law.... and that doesn t look too easy.I d guess it will also work retrospective to an incident, Run some boat over and be "drunk".. well....
random breath tests? I doubt it.
random breath tests? I doubt it.
Talbot
Well-Known Member
Everytime this comes up, some policeman explains that the laws as they stand now are more than adequate to deal with a drunk in charge of a boat, it is just a matter of their use. so how will additional law make any difference
Or are you so used to Governmental control, that you consider additional control at sea must be beneficial?
Or are you so used to Governmental control, that you consider additional control at sea must be beneficial?
spannerman
Well-Known Member
We have random breath tests on skippers here, mind you we need it with half the population of norway is drunk at any given time. We have at least 20-30 'incidents with commercial boats every year, from sleeping at the wheel, to being under the influence and being caught because they used 6-7 attempts to dock the ferry, and 6 mths later were found to be over the limit again while on the bridge. More recently a high speed car ferry hit an island as the captain and 1st mate sitting on the same bridge both told the inquiry board that they thought the other was 'in command'. The vessel was running on autopilot and they said they routinely turned the 'off course alarm' off so know one knew what was happening til they ran aground at 30 kts, tragically one of the crew on deck was killed by the impact.
We have an alchohol limit a little higher than the limit for driving a car, personally I think it should be zero, as although there is less to hit on the sea than on the roads often the competance behind the helm is less than the average car driver who at least had to pass a test to earn the right to use the roads.
Here comes a new debate me thinks.
We have an alchohol limit a little higher than the limit for driving a car, personally I think it should be zero, as although there is less to hit on the sea than on the roads often the competance behind the helm is less than the average car driver who at least had to pass a test to earn the right to use the roads.
Here comes a new debate me thinks.
Major Catastrophe
Well-Known Member
There are too many problems, which would lead to much court time wasted on pointless prosecutions.
If someone has an accident as a result of alcohol, then prosecute.
But, the problems start when you consider imposing limits and bans on drinking.
You are at anchor or berthed for the night, snuggled down enjoying your Fray Bentos pie and a bottle of red. You turn in to bed and later a squall hits. You get up and check your lines and discover that you are drifting. You start engine and motor to new position/berth and set lines/anchor again.
Police/MCG, or whoever has the correct hat that night, spots you and breathalises you.
Or, you are on passage outside territorial waters and enjoying a drink with meal whilst skipper drives. He falls down stairs and it is up to you to get boat into harbour. Or do you stay out in case hatted official nabs you?
You can go on and on with many such scenarios, which show up the differences between driving a car and driving a boat. Never in the 35 odd years have I had to move my car on public road because of waves/tide/wind.
It is easy to step out of a car, but very difficult to step out of a boat. There are very few boating deaths caused by drink, so the answer is to prosecute vigorously people who cause serious accidents whilst under the influence.
If someone has an accident as a result of alcohol, then prosecute.
But, the problems start when you consider imposing limits and bans on drinking.
You are at anchor or berthed for the night, snuggled down enjoying your Fray Bentos pie and a bottle of red. You turn in to bed and later a squall hits. You get up and check your lines and discover that you are drifting. You start engine and motor to new position/berth and set lines/anchor again.
Police/MCG, or whoever has the correct hat that night, spots you and breathalises you.
Or, you are on passage outside territorial waters and enjoying a drink with meal whilst skipper drives. He falls down stairs and it is up to you to get boat into harbour. Or do you stay out in case hatted official nabs you?
You can go on and on with many such scenarios, which show up the differences between driving a car and driving a boat. Never in the 35 odd years have I had to move my car on public road because of waves/tide/wind.
It is easy to step out of a car, but very difficult to step out of a boat. There are very few boating deaths caused by drink, so the answer is to prosecute vigorously people who cause serious accidents whilst under the influence.
bbg
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
There are very few boating deaths caused by drink, so the answer is to prosecute vigorously people who cause serious accidents whilst under the influence.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would add that those who are boating in a demonstrably unsafe manner should also be prosecuted BEFORE an accident happens - regardless of the amount of alcohol in their bloodstream. (Here I am thinking of, for example, runabouts or RIBs at high speed near swinners; someone so drunk/stoned that berthing the boat is dangerous to people or property etc.)
There are very few boating deaths caused by drink, so the answer is to prosecute vigorously people who cause serious accidents whilst under the influence.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would add that those who are boating in a demonstrably unsafe manner should also be prosecuted BEFORE an accident happens - regardless of the amount of alcohol in their bloodstream. (Here I am thinking of, for example, runabouts or RIBs at high speed near swinners; someone so drunk/stoned that berthing the boat is dangerous to people or property etc.)
rickp
Well-Known Member
Sheesh, neither you or MajorCatastrophe should go around talking sense like that. You'll be locked up!
Rick
Rick
Major Catastrophe
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I would add that those who are boating in a demonstrably unsafe manner should also be prosecuted BEFORE an accident happens
[/ QUOTE ]
Goes without saying.
I would add that those who are boating in a demonstrably unsafe manner should also be prosecuted BEFORE an accident happens
[/ QUOTE ]
Goes without saying.
Major Catastrophe
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Sheesh, neither you or MajorCatastrophe should go around talking sense like that. You'll be locked up!
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry. Think I should go and join the children squabbling in the "Response to TCM" thread and leave all common sense behind.
Sheesh, neither you or MajorCatastrophe should go around talking sense like that. You'll be locked up!
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry. Think I should go and join the children squabbling in the "Response to TCM" thread and leave all common sense behind.
Bergman
Well-Known Member
My understanding is that the proposal (if thats what it is) will be to apply the same law to pleasure boats as applies to comercial boats.
Whilst this may seem pointless (at least to me) it is unlikely to be as draconian as some fear.
One of the (few) joys of not drinking is to effect a complete indifference to this nonsense.
Not clear what the sentence will be - a professional can have his ticket suspended, but a leisure sailor can only be fined - cannot suspend a license if none required. Not sure if a ban can be applied in the absence of any such license.
Whilst this may seem pointless (at least to me) it is unlikely to be as draconian as some fear.
One of the (few) joys of not drinking is to effect a complete indifference to this nonsense.
Not clear what the sentence will be - a professional can have his ticket suspended, but a leisure sailor can only be fined - cannot suspend a license if none required. Not sure if a ban can be applied in the absence of any such license.
Major Catastrophe
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
but a leisure sailor can only be fined
[/ QUOTE ]
Which of course is what this country is all about now. Target the middle classes with more fines.
but a leisure sailor can only be fined
[/ QUOTE ]
Which of course is what this country is all about now. Target the middle classes with more fines.
RupertW
Well-Known Member
which class do you suggest?
Nautorius
Well-Known Member
Any Class except my class. I firmly believe in NIMBY!
It is like the Robin Hood all over again......
It is like the Robin Hood all over again......
Bergman
Well-Known Member
Well
I am generally as cynical as most but I hardly see this as a revenue generation, or indeed a class war exercise.
I oppose it basically because it is silly and pointless
Trouble is when people start overstating the case and turning it into an anti government crusade you lose credibility.
Arguably a fine may be a better option than other alternative means of dealing - for example an ASBO where the culprit is banned from getting on a leisure boat.
The likelyhood is that enforcement will be by MSA/Coastguard with police actually administering a breath test. Hopefully these people will have sufficient commonsense to avoid the extremes of silliness that people are raising as issues.
Trouble is we collectively have only ourselves to blame really.
Driving a fast and powerful boat at high speed in the dark with more than twice the permissable alcohol level is irresponsible, and to try to argue that it isn't makes no sense.
These people, together with the ones in Cornwall have given the safety mafia all the case they need and they will use it. Any counter argument will be on the back foot from the start and trying to use some of the sillier lines of argument that are appearing will only help them win the case.
I am generally as cynical as most but I hardly see this as a revenue generation, or indeed a class war exercise.
I oppose it basically because it is silly and pointless
Trouble is when people start overstating the case and turning it into an anti government crusade you lose credibility.
Arguably a fine may be a better option than other alternative means of dealing - for example an ASBO where the culprit is banned from getting on a leisure boat.
The likelyhood is that enforcement will be by MSA/Coastguard with police actually administering a breath test. Hopefully these people will have sufficient commonsense to avoid the extremes of silliness that people are raising as issues.
Trouble is we collectively have only ourselves to blame really.
Driving a fast and powerful boat at high speed in the dark with more than twice the permissable alcohol level is irresponsible, and to try to argue that it isn't makes no sense.
These people, together with the ones in Cornwall have given the safety mafia all the case they need and they will use it. Any counter argument will be on the back foot from the start and trying to use some of the sillier lines of argument that are appearing will only help them win the case.
