We've all seen some really dumb and unsafe things out on the water: the overloaded boat; the recklessly handled boat; the boater who didn't know the collregs or how to read a chart; who didn't know how to anchor properly, who didn't know when conditions were too severe, who didn't know what to do if caught out. If we're honest with ourselves, we've probably all done some dumb stuff in the learning process, too. What's the answer? Would boating safety be improved if all boaters had to take courses and go through a licensing process? Should all boats go through mandatory inspections to make sure they have required safety gear and don't represent a safety hazard to their occupants? On the other hand, you can't legislate common sense, and despite the fact that nearly all automobile drivers have licenses, there's no end to dumb and unsafe driving practices out on the highways. Would regulation help, or would strict rules just take some of the freedom that we all enjoy about boating? Share your views here and then vote in the Quick Quiz at the bottom of the home page. (Quiz cointributed by Gary Wyngarden)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
Cam Whetstone
Legislting Common Sense
I don't believe you can legislate common sense. There should be some control. e.g., If the weather is too bad, there should be small boat warnings. I would probably obey them. However my boat is strong and I could probably survive, but my choice as Captain is to stay in the slip. Ignoring such warnings would not be suficient in themselves, but would contribute to a charge of negligence if the Captain got into trouble. Too many negligence charges and you don't get insurance anymore. I believe in allowing anyone the freedom of their actions, but putting the responsibility directly where it belongs if they screw up.
I don't believe you can legislate common sense. There should be some control. e.g., If the weather is too bad, there should be small boat warnings. I would probably obey them. However my boat is strong and I could probably survive, but my choice as Captain is to stay in the slip. Ignoring such warnings would not be suficient in themselves, but would contribute to a charge of negligence if the Captain got into trouble. Too many negligence charges and you don't get insurance anymore. I believe in allowing anyone the freedom of their actions, but putting the responsibility directly where it belongs if they screw up.
W
Willem de Graaf
Educated Fools?
In Queensland Australia you require a licence to operate power boats with planing hulls. You do not require a licence for sailing boats used for private purposes. Watching the parade of people who need to be saved by the coast gaurd or attract the attention of the water police certainly does not indicate that the licensing process works. Educated fools are still fools.
In Queensland Australia you require a licence to operate power boats with planing hulls. You do not require a licence for sailing boats used for private purposes. Watching the parade of people who need to be saved by the coast gaurd or attract the attention of the water police certainly does not indicate that the licensing process works. Educated fools are still fools.
N
Norman Brokaw
Fewer regulations, not more.
No, there should not be licensing or more regulation. 1) Licensing is general but boating situations are specific. As indispensible as such knowledge may be for cruising, one does not have to read charts or know how to anchor to safely sail where I sail (Grand Traverse Bay, inland lakes). Indeed, I think the current requirements about life jackets are stupid for the same reason; why should I be required to have PFDs aboard a canoe on a calm day 10 ft from shore in shallow water with 50 people on the beach watching and everyone knows how to swim? On the other hand, in rough water in Lake Michigan I may insist my passengers wear their PFDs. The law can't distinguish between these very different situations. I can. 2) Licensing and regulations will not teach judgment or common sense. When conditions are "too severe" depends on many factors such as the boat, the skill of the Captain, the distance from harbor, etc. knowledge of which licensing will never be able to capture. Besides, I would guess that the major factor in most boating fatalities is excess alcohol, which is already illegal and which no amount of licensing will prevent.
No, there should not be licensing or more regulation. 1) Licensing is general but boating situations are specific. As indispensible as such knowledge may be for cruising, one does not have to read charts or know how to anchor to safely sail where I sail (Grand Traverse Bay, inland lakes). Indeed, I think the current requirements about life jackets are stupid for the same reason; why should I be required to have PFDs aboard a canoe on a calm day 10 ft from shore in shallow water with 50 people on the beach watching and everyone knows how to swim? On the other hand, in rough water in Lake Michigan I may insist my passengers wear their PFDs. The law can't distinguish between these very different situations. I can. 2) Licensing and regulations will not teach judgment or common sense. When conditions are "too severe" depends on many factors such as the boat, the skill of the Captain, the distance from harbor, etc. knowledge of which licensing will never be able to capture. Besides, I would guess that the major factor in most boating fatalities is excess alcohol, which is already illegal and which no amount of licensing will prevent.
R
Ray Oberg
It's the 80/20 rule
Most boaters, I'll include power boaters in this definition, have the common sense and experience to navigate safely but it's the old 80/20 rule, i.e. 20% of the boats on the water are skippered by yahoos which in turn create 80% of the problems out there. It's amazing how this 80/20 rule works in most aspects of life, business, etc.
Most boaters, I'll include power boaters in this definition, have the common sense and experience to navigate safely but it's the old 80/20 rule, i.e. 20% of the boats on the water are skippered by yahoos which in turn create 80% of the problems out there. It's amazing how this 80/20 rule works in most aspects of life, business, etc.
M
Matt Colie
Government Help? - Right!!
I can not imagine how government interference might improve the situation. Right now, the only thing you need to run a boat is a credit rating. A lot could be improved if the insurance carriers required something along the safe boating course line. But, judging from the questions on the state exams that I have taken for other things, I can not imagine that would make it better.
I can not imagine how government interference might improve the situation. Right now, the only thing you need to run a boat is a credit rating. A lot could be improved if the insurance carriers required something along the safe boating course line. But, judging from the questions on the state exams that I have taken for other things, I can not imagine that would make it better.
C
Charles Hall
Fools educating Fools
Right on Ray. I have seen PS instructor tell a class that they should ignore a rule of the road (colregs) because in his opinion it was unsafe. He was incapable of seeing the bigger picture because of his limited expereience. I have seen this in land courses for driving automobiles. An instructor tell folks to keep your foot lightly on the brake pedal so you can stop faster. No thought to the person behind you who can't tell when your really stopping cause the brake lights are always on. There are just not enough qualified boaters with instructor abilities to be able to handle this requirement of general licensing and do it right. We would just end up with more misinformed boaters than we already have who were taught by instructors that were not qualified.
Right on Ray. I have seen PS instructor tell a class that they should ignore a rule of the road (colregs) because in his opinion it was unsafe. He was incapable of seeing the bigger picture because of his limited expereience. I have seen this in land courses for driving automobiles. An instructor tell folks to keep your foot lightly on the brake pedal so you can stop faster. No thought to the person behind you who can't tell when your really stopping cause the brake lights are always on. There are just not enough qualified boaters with instructor abilities to be able to handle this requirement of general licensing and do it right. We would just end up with more misinformed boaters than we already have who were taught by instructors that were not qualified.
B
Brad Newell
"Common sense?"
Many years ago I probably would have voted NOT to have any mandatory licensing. Experience teaches one that boating is a far more complex activity than first glance would indicate. Now I believe that some kind of mandatory education is necessary. When we bought our first sailboat, my wife and I enrolled in a series of Power Squadron courses - of course, I didn't really need them; I was a fighter pilot and knew everything necessary...riiight. (I think we actually did go down the Columbia River once with a road map.) Looking back, we were assisted many times by other boaters, when we had problems that "common sense" should have told us to avoid. These days we belong to the Coast Guard Auxiliary and try to impart some of what we have learned to others. Like flying, when you think you know it all, it's time to quit, and I seem to keep taking classes. The Auxiliary, the Power Squadron and yacht clubs are good sources of knowlege. It's far better to learn some things from others' experiences. The world is far too dangerous to learn everything first-hand. While I have the podium, the Coast Guard has commented recently that a cellphone is not a good replacement for the marine VHF. A few days ago, a small crabber sank almost in the harbor at Blaine, WA - after dark. A gal on board had presence of mind enough to make a phone call to the C.G. - you could actually hear them sink. It took the C.G. thirty minutes to find them, fortunately unharmed, but cold. A call on VHF would have alerted EVERYONE in the area - there could well have been someone on the water that might have reached them a little sooner. I note that others have found fault with some of the instructors. Is that something new in the world? The texts used by the Auxiliary and the Power Squadron ensure that folks have at least been exposed to commentary on the basic skills. I'm all in favor of damn fools having the right to "off" themselves in any manner they desire. ("Darwin Awards" to all of them.) The problem is that far too often they take some unsuspecting bystander with them.
Many years ago I probably would have voted NOT to have any mandatory licensing. Experience teaches one that boating is a far more complex activity than first glance would indicate. Now I believe that some kind of mandatory education is necessary. When we bought our first sailboat, my wife and I enrolled in a series of Power Squadron courses - of course, I didn't really need them; I was a fighter pilot and knew everything necessary...riiight. (I think we actually did go down the Columbia River once with a road map.) Looking back, we were assisted many times by other boaters, when we had problems that "common sense" should have told us to avoid. These days we belong to the Coast Guard Auxiliary and try to impart some of what we have learned to others. Like flying, when you think you know it all, it's time to quit, and I seem to keep taking classes. The Auxiliary, the Power Squadron and yacht clubs are good sources of knowlege. It's far better to learn some things from others' experiences. The world is far too dangerous to learn everything first-hand. While I have the podium, the Coast Guard has commented recently that a cellphone is not a good replacement for the marine VHF. A few days ago, a small crabber sank almost in the harbor at Blaine, WA - after dark. A gal on board had presence of mind enough to make a phone call to the C.G. - you could actually hear them sink. It took the C.G. thirty minutes to find them, fortunately unharmed, but cold. A call on VHF would have alerted EVERYONE in the area - there could well have been someone on the water that might have reached them a little sooner. I note that others have found fault with some of the instructors. Is that something new in the world? The texts used by the Auxiliary and the Power Squadron ensure that folks have at least been exposed to commentary on the basic skills. I'm all in favor of damn fools having the right to "off" themselves in any manner they desire. ("Darwin Awards" to all of them.) The problem is that far too often they take some unsuspecting bystander with them.
P
Pierre Catala
Boating Safety Classes
Surely if a license (and thus exam)is required to drive a car, a license should also be required to drive a boat especially since substantially more complex situations can occur on the water. I definitely believe that mandatory boating safety classes and exam should be the norm.
Surely if a license (and thus exam)is required to drive a car, a license should also be required to drive a boat especially since substantially more complex situations can occur on the water. I definitely believe that mandatory boating safety classes and exam should be the norm.
R
Richie Mahoney
Natural Selection
I beleive it is the responsability of the boat owner for educating themselves. We all put up with "Road Ragers", Drunk Drivers, and people talking on cell phones while on the road and driver education is pushed and regulated. Yet people are killed every day, and people still do stupid things. So my suggestion, the educated BEWARE and know there are morons out there. We can all make them feel at home when they bust thru a No Wake Zone (Finger Gestures often work), or try to help when they run aground outside the daymarks. Plus, seeing these people in strange/stupid situations always makes great "Happy Hour" conversations on your docks! Cheers! Richie Mahoney s/v ComeMonday
I beleive it is the responsability of the boat owner for educating themselves. We all put up with "Road Ragers", Drunk Drivers, and people talking on cell phones while on the road and driver education is pushed and regulated. Yet people are killed every day, and people still do stupid things. So my suggestion, the educated BEWARE and know there are morons out there. We can all make them feel at home when they bust thru a No Wake Zone (Finger Gestures often work), or try to help when they run aground outside the daymarks. Plus, seeing these people in strange/stupid situations always makes great "Happy Hour" conversations on your docks! Cheers! Richie Mahoney s/v ComeMonday
R
Ron
Complex question
As always, this is a complex question with many consequences relative to the solutions selected AND the methods by which they are executed. No, we cannot legislate common sense (and no, it isn't always that "common" either). We can, however, legislate requirements for basic competency, and consequences for inappropriate actions taken that result in damage to persons or property. All nations have done so. The salient question becomes: "does the public need to ensure that operators of motorized (and sailing) vessels meet certain common standards of knowledge or competency?" My vote is "yes." There is an immediate and compelling parallel -- operation of motorized vehicles. All civilized countries have some sort of motor vehicle licensing based upon proving competency. Most have different knowledge/skill requirements for different classes of vehicles (e.g., passenger, motorcycle, commercial, school bus). Most exclude motor vehicles below a certain size/displacement, but generally impose use restrictions (e.g., motor scooters, off-road vehicles). The subordinate question gets to juristiction of licensing. The USCG runs the equivalent of the "commercial" licensing process already. That makes sense because this type of service generally involves offshore or interstate or international operations. Our constitution gives the states the authority to regulate local matters affecting public safety and security, as they do for licensing drivers & vehicles. Clearly, they don't all have uniform rules and procedures in doing so but there still is some fairly good consistency between them on the basics. So, it would be up to the states to establish the non-commercial operator examination and licensing. I think there are enough practices and standards among the U.S. Power Squadron, USCG Auxilliary, boating schools, charter operators, and the insurance underwriters to establish some fairly universal standards, all centered around the COLREGs and Admiralty Law. Enforcement of existing operation and safety laws is already spread between the USCG, state, and local law enforcement agencies. That won't change much. And, yes, we'll still have fools who will flaunt the rules, violate the rights of others, or worse. Perhaps we can get them off the water faster if they risked losing their license (and insurance). --Ron
As always, this is a complex question with many consequences relative to the solutions selected AND the methods by which they are executed. No, we cannot legislate common sense (and no, it isn't always that "common" either). We can, however, legislate requirements for basic competency, and consequences for inappropriate actions taken that result in damage to persons or property. All nations have done so. The salient question becomes: "does the public need to ensure that operators of motorized (and sailing) vessels meet certain common standards of knowledge or competency?" My vote is "yes." There is an immediate and compelling parallel -- operation of motorized vehicles. All civilized countries have some sort of motor vehicle licensing based upon proving competency. Most have different knowledge/skill requirements for different classes of vehicles (e.g., passenger, motorcycle, commercial, school bus). Most exclude motor vehicles below a certain size/displacement, but generally impose use restrictions (e.g., motor scooters, off-road vehicles). The subordinate question gets to juristiction of licensing. The USCG runs the equivalent of the "commercial" licensing process already. That makes sense because this type of service generally involves offshore or interstate or international operations. Our constitution gives the states the authority to regulate local matters affecting public safety and security, as they do for licensing drivers & vehicles. Clearly, they don't all have uniform rules and procedures in doing so but there still is some fairly good consistency between them on the basics. So, it would be up to the states to establish the non-commercial operator examination and licensing. I think there are enough practices and standards among the U.S. Power Squadron, USCG Auxilliary, boating schools, charter operators, and the insurance underwriters to establish some fairly universal standards, all centered around the COLREGs and Admiralty Law. Enforcement of existing operation and safety laws is already spread between the USCG, state, and local law enforcement agencies. That won't change much. And, yes, we'll still have fools who will flaunt the rules, violate the rights of others, or worse. Perhaps we can get them off the water faster if they risked losing their license (and insurance). --Ron
W
Wayne
necessary dumbness
As to the licensing of boat operators, I don't know how succesful that has been in states where it has been tried in decreasing loss of life & property. Personally, I am against any form of mandatory regulations imposed by any governing body.
As to the licensing of boat operators, I don't know how succesful that has been in states where it has been tried in decreasing loss of life & property. Personally, I am against any form of mandatory regulations imposed by any governing body.
V
Vic Suben
Safe Boating
The requirements for road and written tests, and licensing, and patrolling by law enforcement officers has not stopped people from driving in unsafe manners or from having accidents. I don't think licensing or boat inspections will be any more effective on the water than they are on land. I believe the answer is education. Courses such as those given by the CG Auxiliary or the U. S. Power Squadron are great. Unfortunately, many people with more money than brains do not realize that sailing or boating is inherently more hazardous than driving on the highway. Weather conditions, underwater hazards, boats can suffer failures of through hull fittings, engine and electronics failures, etc., and you cannot pull over to the side of the waterway to wait for a tow. People who buy boats should be cautioned that before going out for their first sail they should get instruction about rules of the road, boating safety, and the basic operational characteristics of the boat they are buying.
The requirements for road and written tests, and licensing, and patrolling by law enforcement officers has not stopped people from driving in unsafe manners or from having accidents. I don't think licensing or boat inspections will be any more effective on the water than they are on land. I believe the answer is education. Courses such as those given by the CG Auxiliary or the U. S. Power Squadron are great. Unfortunately, many people with more money than brains do not realize that sailing or boating is inherently more hazardous than driving on the highway. Weather conditions, underwater hazards, boats can suffer failures of through hull fittings, engine and electronics failures, etc., and you cannot pull over to the side of the waterway to wait for a tow. People who buy boats should be cautioned that before going out for their first sail they should get instruction about rules of the road, boating safety, and the basic operational characteristics of the boat they are buying.
M
Mike Checa
safety and licensing
Orville Wright flew for more than a few decades without a license!. Did the Government take the freedom away from flyers?, or protect them and others (us all)from harm?. Do we need less ability or knowledge than a car driver or can we risk the lives of our Coast Guard sailors when they have to come to our rescue?. I think that a little bit of seamanship and rules of the road won't hurt...
Orville Wright flew for more than a few decades without a license!. Did the Government take the freedom away from flyers?, or protect them and others (us all)from harm?. Do we need less ability or knowledge than a car driver or can we risk the lives of our Coast Guard sailors when they have to come to our rescue?. I think that a little bit of seamanship and rules of the road won't hurt...
T
Thomas H. George
Boating Safety
In Germany I had to get a Windsurfer License. There was a written exam covering parts of the boat, rules of the road and environmental issues and a proficiency exam which required sailing twice around a triangular course. How do the water safety statistics of the US and Germany compare>
In Germany I had to get a Windsurfer License. There was a written exam covering parts of the boat, rules of the road and environmental issues and a proficiency exam which required sailing twice around a triangular course. How do the water safety statistics of the US and Germany compare>
B
BILL ROBB
MORE IS BETTER
I voluntarily request an annual Coast Guard Auxilliary safety inspection. Not only do they inspect the boat and make friendly reccommendations for improvement, etc. they check to see if you've attended a boating safety course in the last few years. I would make this a mandatory event if I had some assurance that the examiners were competant to do the inspection without becoming overly critical. I've had inspectors look at the boat who - in my opinion - overstep their bounds as "courtesy" inspectors. So - this "problem" works both ways.
I voluntarily request an annual Coast Guard Auxilliary safety inspection. Not only do they inspect the boat and make friendly reccommendations for improvement, etc. they check to see if you've attended a boating safety course in the last few years. I would make this a mandatory event if I had some assurance that the examiners were competant to do the inspection without becoming overly critical. I've had inspectors look at the boat who - in my opinion - overstep their bounds as "courtesy" inspectors. So - this "problem" works both ways.
B
Ben There
Common Sense
I think all the replies have merit. I have found the Internet to be very helpful. As a novice sailor I can ask a question in a forum and get as many different answers as there are replies. I can then decide on my own which will work for me. Therefore, if a person wants to be responsible and knowledgeable in operating a boat s/he will. There are many entities out there that will help. As the bumper sign says, "You Can't Fix Stupid."
I think all the replies have merit. I have found the Internet to be very helpful. As a novice sailor I can ask a question in a forum and get as many different answers as there are replies. I can then decide on my own which will work for me. Therefore, if a person wants to be responsible and knowledgeable in operating a boat s/he will. There are many entities out there that will help. As the bumper sign says, "You Can't Fix Stupid."
R
Ron
Safety & Licensing - 2
Mike makes a good point -- When there were only a handful of very small, wood & fabric aircraft flying in largely unpopulated rural areas, there was no need to go to legislated measures to protect people & property. Once more & more people started flying, and in bigger, more powerful machines, and nearer population centers there clearly was a reason to impose licensing and safety standards. Same applies to boating. Our society has always sacrificed certain extremes of personal freedoms for the public good. We'd have total anarchy if we didn't. ..... And, by the way, I don't believe that anyone will ever collect meaningful statistics comparing the relative effects of licensing vs. not. Way to many variables in that equation. The real effect of licensing is to ensure a level playing field of operator knowledge & competency, and to provide a legal basis for getting the fools off the water.
Mike makes a good point -- When there were only a handful of very small, wood & fabric aircraft flying in largely unpopulated rural areas, there was no need to go to legislated measures to protect people & property. Once more & more people started flying, and in bigger, more powerful machines, and nearer population centers there clearly was a reason to impose licensing and safety standards. Same applies to boating. Our society has always sacrificed certain extremes of personal freedoms for the public good. We'd have total anarchy if we didn't. ..... And, by the way, I don't believe that anyone will ever collect meaningful statistics comparing the relative effects of licensing vs. not. Way to many variables in that equation. The real effect of licensing is to ensure a level playing field of operator knowledge & competency, and to provide a legal basis for getting the fools off the water.
L
Lee
Not More Red Tape...
I feel that there is ample resources available for the interested boater - note I write, "interested" because the uninterested boaters will not care about safety even if you cramp it down their throats. So folks are just too stupid to operate a boat no matter how much the Government regulates it. I would not add more red tape to boat ownership. Unfortunately the laws of nature cannot be broken and the result is often tragic, but almost always avoidable if the owner/operator had used common sense. I like what Ray posted, but would go farther - I think its more like 90/10...
I feel that there is ample resources available for the interested boater - note I write, "interested" because the uninterested boaters will not care about safety even if you cramp it down their throats. So folks are just too stupid to operate a boat no matter how much the Government regulates it. I would not add more red tape to boat ownership. Unfortunately the laws of nature cannot be broken and the result is often tragic, but almost always avoidable if the owner/operator had used common sense. I like what Ray posted, but would go farther - I think its more like 90/10...
C
Chris Edmonson
Not either or
Most boat manufacturers give an indication of the carrying capacity of their craft. We still see overloading. There are no wake zones and we still see boats operating too fast in these areas. There are rules for every situation out on the water... rules that carry penalties. We still see all manner of disregard for these rules. Government is less and less able to solve problems of every day living wihtout pulling away more and more freedom. The lawyers fix for everything has been to put another sign on everything to warn us of unsafe conditions. Now we live in a world cluttered by idiotic signs. Why is the initial question posed as an "either/or" focus? In learning to sail I took every class available to learn as much as I could. It was not that I had not owned or operated a boat before... I had been a fisherman on inland lakes for a long time after all. When I stepped onto a sailboat I understood that my control was different than on a bass boat. There were more parallels to driving on a bass boat than on a sailboat in my experience inventory. The places to fish were mostly (at that time) deserted and the launch ramp uncrowded. Learning to sail was different. My learning started on the lakes I had fished but soon progressed to the crowded places (San Diego Bay, etc.)that have all sorts of situations occuring every day that need more awareness. I now work in a boating related job and when someone buys a boat from us that we suspect does not know the rules there is a consensus that we won't go to the lake the day he/she first launches. We point out that there are rules, we point out that there courses available. What experience tells us though is that an unsafe operator will be an unsafe operator until they see the light about safety. Creating the false sense of security by having the state issue licenses cures nothing for any of us. Creating the false sense of urgency for a legislative agenda gives us the short sighted supposition that it is an "either/or" question that will force us to conclude that we need licenses. It was not rules that sent me cruising for nearly a year -- it was the disire to see if getting away from the excess of rules would improve life in general. It did. When you license an idiot all you get is a licensed idiot. Even demanding that an idiot takes the boating safety course does not mean that an idiot will remember any critical information at the critical time. There are good and solid rules for safe boating developed from the experience of human beings on the water for a few thousand years... the physics of boating haven't changed in their essentials for any of that time. It solves nothing to try to codify those rules... only employment for the lawyers. If you think that today there are no laws relating to boating then I suggest you ask the Arizona Game & Fish for a copy of the states regulations. In the driest state there are plenty of stautes to be enforced now. In the wetter states there are even more laws. Adding licensure to these rules will not fix anything.
Most boat manufacturers give an indication of the carrying capacity of their craft. We still see overloading. There are no wake zones and we still see boats operating too fast in these areas. There are rules for every situation out on the water... rules that carry penalties. We still see all manner of disregard for these rules. Government is less and less able to solve problems of every day living wihtout pulling away more and more freedom. The lawyers fix for everything has been to put another sign on everything to warn us of unsafe conditions. Now we live in a world cluttered by idiotic signs. Why is the initial question posed as an "either/or" focus? In learning to sail I took every class available to learn as much as I could. It was not that I had not owned or operated a boat before... I had been a fisherman on inland lakes for a long time after all. When I stepped onto a sailboat I understood that my control was different than on a bass boat. There were more parallels to driving on a bass boat than on a sailboat in my experience inventory. The places to fish were mostly (at that time) deserted and the launch ramp uncrowded. Learning to sail was different. My learning started on the lakes I had fished but soon progressed to the crowded places (San Diego Bay, etc.)that have all sorts of situations occuring every day that need more awareness. I now work in a boating related job and when someone buys a boat from us that we suspect does not know the rules there is a consensus that we won't go to the lake the day he/she first launches. We point out that there are rules, we point out that there courses available. What experience tells us though is that an unsafe operator will be an unsafe operator until they see the light about safety. Creating the false sense of security by having the state issue licenses cures nothing for any of us. Creating the false sense of urgency for a legislative agenda gives us the short sighted supposition that it is an "either/or" question that will force us to conclude that we need licenses. It was not rules that sent me cruising for nearly a year -- it was the disire to see if getting away from the excess of rules would improve life in general. It did. When you license an idiot all you get is a licensed idiot. Even demanding that an idiot takes the boating safety course does not mean that an idiot will remember any critical information at the critical time. There are good and solid rules for safe boating developed from the experience of human beings on the water for a few thousand years... the physics of boating haven't changed in their essentials for any of that time. It solves nothing to try to codify those rules... only employment for the lawyers. If you think that today there are no laws relating to boating then I suggest you ask the Arizona Game & Fish for a copy of the states regulations. In the driest state there are plenty of stautes to be enforced now. In the wetter states there are even more laws. Adding licensure to these rules will not fix anything.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.