Seat belts, motorcycle helmets... now PFDs?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Alan

*pop LOOKS to me *pop

..like the vast majority of sailors are LIBATERIANS...like me. Big brother can keep his nose out of my boat!! After the country is running soooth, MAYBE I'll think about letting him onboard. But while big brother has this country in such a MESS, he's not going to have any weight on my boat!!!
 
Feb 26, 2004
22,780
Catalina 34 224 Maple Bay, BC, Canada
All This Energy is Going Nowhere

Phil Is there any way to get this dialog to anyone who will listen? 1. Copy and send to agencies, Congress-people, and other organizations. 2. BOAT/US? 3. What can WE do? Don't have to be a sailor to be a libertarian, and vice-versa. Stu
 
T

Tom S

Ralph (and everyone else) Please remember

wearing a PFD doesn't negate the fact that someone "might have to try to rescue you" It just means that it will be a lot easier for that person to stay afloat if and when someone can pull them back out of the water. If everyone cares so much about worrying about the "safety of that other person who might have to try to rescue you" then you should push for people wearing a harness at all times..... .... just something to think about.
 

Phil Herring

Alien
Mar 25, 1997
4,918
- - Bainbridge Island
Look for the 'Send to a friend' form

In in different places on the screen depending on your forum preferences. That will send the _entire_ thread in a text format via email to any email address you enter. USCG, legislators, newspapers, etc. I sent a copy of it through the USCG comments form. There's a lot you can do with the information and this is the perfect time to do it, with an election in November. ph.
 
R

Randal Orton

The Wallet Trick

I took my brother-in-law out sailing one day. He scoffed when I offered him a PFD. Then he saw me pull my wallet out of my back pocket and put it in the galley drawer - told him I did not want to get it wet if I went over, like last time. Helps them focus a bit. For the record, I would not support a law for mandatory PFD use. But I always wear mine out of courtesy to the coasties, as it might save your bacon and at worst it helps them locate the body. Rule 1 is stay on board: harness, tether, jacklines, well-placed handholds and non-skid decks go a long way. And if you must piss overboard, for god's sake just use the cockpit scuppers. Rule 2 - Liquor and the Beaufort beer scale. Force 0-1 - Beer cans get opened. Force 2-3 - Beer cans get opened, but fall over if not watched. Force 4-5 - Beer cans get opened, but half gets blown away as foam. Force 6-7 - Beer cans get badly dented, drinkable but worthless crew can't keep it down. Force 8-9 - Skipper looking forward to something much stronger than beer about now. Force 10+ - Unsecured beer explodes in lockers.
 
Mar 21, 2004
343
Hunter 25.5 Carlyle, IL
Maybe the real point

is that the government is trying to create some kind of liability shift. This might provide the opportunity for the coast guard to write someone a ticket for not wearing a PFD after they have drowned. This might make a big difference in a court of law if the insurance companies can point to an illegal act as contributing to a death.
 
T

Tom S

Yeah, but Bill, They couldn't shift the liability

of multiple drownings by some *very* questionable seamanship of one skipper that was ill prepared and made many mistakes on Dec. 27 1997 - remember the "Morning Dew" http://www.boatus.com/Seaworthy/swdew.asp http://www.usps.org/localusps/d12/page8.htm Yes its a tragic story, and yes the USCG should have been a bit more aggresive after 1st hearing a quick static distress call, but legslation does not stop people from doing questionable things, getting into trouble and then STILL suing the government and winning. All legislation creates is more laws, they can still get sued......happens all the time and typically from the people who have no common sense in the first place. The 2 Questions are 1) "Do we legislate for the far left side of the bell curve even at the detriment of the other 90% of the population?" and 2) "Even if we do legislate to protect the 'darwin candidates' out there, will they even be bright enough to follow the legislation?"
 
Feb 26, 2004
121
Hunter 356 Alameda
Ticket

Bill, Interesting point, but I wonder what the lawyer sailors on here think of this. Writing a ticket to a dead person produces some interesting questions. I'm not sure, but I think a person generally signs for a ticket as proof of service. If you don't sign, I suppose they would arrest you, and being dead would be an impediment to signing. Signing does not admit guilt, so you still have a right to appear in court and plead not guilty, have a trial, etc. I would think that the legal process would be difficult to conduct. The attorney client priviledge would probably not be a problem. I suppose that the defense attorney would call the defendent to the stand, because death prior to the issuance of the ticket might be a defence, and the defendent isn't liable to say anything under cross examination that will be a problem. If they arrested you for not signing, do they then book you? I know that they will often take custody of a body, but that is usually for forensic purposes, or I suppose just to clean up the street. Do they put you into the regular jail population and make sure you get to your court hearing? Pitty the poor cellmate, but what ever fifth amendment right he was holding on to will probably be soon forgotten. If they send you to the morge, those guys aren't to experienced in getting their charges to court hearings. If you miss your hearing, are you in contempt of court? Opps, more jail time, in fact, you will literally rot in prison. Well enough humor. I think the liability is already shifted. The Coast Guard has been fishing bodies out of the water since they have been in existence. The question of liability is pretty much off them and on to either the person who drowned, or those who have control and should provide advice and counsel. Immediately to mind are those in control of minor children or the "captain". The only liability issue I recall in the last number of years for the Coast Guard had to do with failure to answer a distress call. They paid for that one. Dan Jonas (S/V Feije II)
 
Mar 21, 2004
343
Hunter 25.5 Carlyle, IL
Legal liability shift

not to or from the Coast Guard, but to the captain of the vessel. Wouldn't then the family of the drowning victim be able to sue the captain? What kind of impact would that have on our insurance? Would an insurance company refuse a liability claim if a captain was operating outside of the law? This changes the equation from "acting stupidly" to "acting illegally" with the possible changes in consequences.
 
Dec 6, 2003
295
Macgregor 26D Pollock Pines, Ca.
Hey Stu, that's a great idea...

as it does seem like a waste to have all of this commentary going on amongst ourselves, and yet those who really need to see it obviously aren't on this BBS. Wouldn't it be nice if someone in a position of authority from the CG had posted the question 'What do you think about the mandatory use of PFDs?' and then based their policies on the responses? But that would require the government to care about what we the people think, and we all know that's never gonna happen!
 
R

Rich Dolan

Seatbelts on motorcycles!

Don't be so shocked, that was an actual topic that was introduced by our "protective" friends. God, protect me from my "friends" and let Darwin's Theory of Survival of The Fittest take care of the others! YOU - OUT OF THE GENE POOL!
 
C

Chuck Rieger

At least have the PFD's readily accessible

I have personally found a recovered a submerged dead man who was not wearing a PFD. It was a tragic incident for me as well as the victim. Later I found out he had just left a waterfront bar and had been drinking all day. He fell off or tipped over his kayak while close to heavy big boat wakes.He was not wearing a PFD and that was the unfortunate choice he made. That still does not change my opinion that it should be an individuals personal choice whether to wear a PFD.The law is fine the way it is and children should indeed have to wear them. If you feel your life is in danger or high risk of drowning then by all means put a PFD on!! Just make sure you have them onboard and easy to grab one for everyone before it is too late.PFD's can save you and your crews life in an unexpected event...I am sure you don't need me to tell you that.
 
Feb 26, 2004
121
Hunter 356 Alameda
Liability

Bill, I think the liability is already there and said so at the end of the post. If someone falls off my boat, is not wearing a PFD and drowns, I would be expecting the lawsuit. That is a deposition I do not want to be the focus of. You are right though, if PFD's are required by law, it would make a lawsuit or conviction easier. I just doubt that the Coast Guard is going to write any tickets to the dead guy. The response regarding the ticket was intended as humor. You referenced writing a ticket to a dead man. I thought that was pretty funny and could not resist. Dan Jonas (S/V Feije II)
 
T

Tom

Horsepower speed limits

If the government actually wanted to save lives they would restrict speed and horsepower!!!!! 200 hp on a 16' boat is a disaster waiting to happen. Fishing boats going flat out at night is a disaster waiting to happen. 60mph jet skis are a disaster waiting to happen. But instead of addressing the real problems of water safety they want a adult on a sailboat roaring around at 4kts to wear a PFD 24/7 this is insanity!!!!!! Anyone know the number of sailboat related drownings??? Almost every drowning I read about involves excessive speed and stupidity. Saw where two jetskiers drowned/died after hitting bridge supports. Two separate accidents. In one some friends were seeing who could splash water the highest on the support. How does that relate to me sailing on a 32' sailboat??? Even he was wearing a pfd but was knocked out and had internal injuries. I guess he landed face down. rational thought escapes the lawmakers. Like the stupid laws on wearing motorcycle helmets. they allow Honda etc to sell motorcycles that go 150+ mph and then to make them safe??? require a helmet. Why make cars that go 120 then make you wear a seatbelt.... If they want to save lives why not make it illegal to have cars/motocycles that go over 80 mph. Driving to work the speed limit is 70 , I go 80 and get passed by cars/SUVs going over a hundred...
 
R

Ross Terry

Natural selection at work

If you are dumb enough to not be wearing a pfd in adverse conditions or situations where they are appropriate, you probably need to be educated on when and where to use them. I don't want the government telling me what to do when it doesn't directly effect anyone else. Smoking kills thousands every year. There is no law against that. Remember, there are no lifeguards at the gene pool.
 
T

Tom

Natural selection works on total fitness

Natural selection works on the whole life of a person or animal. Being stupid in and of itself probably is not a negative. Risk taking behavior is probably what you would be selecting for with wearing a PFD. But as you may be aware in general risk takers do pretty well compared to timid people. In most situations it seems that confident, competent risk takers do better than the timid. If nothing else the girls provide more breeding for a competent risk taker than the timid soul no matter how many pfd's or helmets the timid wear. Probably the timid would be afraid of unprotected sex even if offered the chance to breed. Sorry I don't think that Darwin will save us from being an adventurous risk taking species.
 
B

Been there.

Mandatory wearing of PFD's

Having fallen in the water in November,(north Chesapeake) fully clad w/all the winter clothing, I was fortunate enough to have been wearing a life jacket..Otherwise, curtains..All the extra 'stuff' is a pain in the keester, but like cycle helmets (yes, I wear one of them, too) and seat belts, they save lives. Just do it.
 
T

Tom S

Been There, glad you're still here ;)

BTW, could you give the specifics of how you came to find yourself in the water? Just curious, but maybe your experience might help prevent one of us from finding ourselves in the "drink". Also how were you recovered, did the boat you were on do an immediate MOB drill? Did another boat pick you up? What was the water conditions (waves??) Did the people on the boat find it hard to "pull you back on?" or did you find it easy? Any info would be good for us to learn. I go out alone often and it gives me the "chills" thinking IMHO, Forget the PFD in this situation. I think a harness and jacklines would be the thing. (Though not infalable...I could be dragged through the water and then have to let the harness go) I think a small portable VHF would be the thing that would save my life if I went over . I often think of buying one and "strapping" in on me when I go out single handling.
 
T

Tony D

Good Idea!, USCG, NAVY TOO!

For your information EVERY person on board a CG or a CG Aux vessel does wear a PFD at all times.
 
T

Tom S

Tony D. Do you want to change your statement now?

I don't think so -- I would change the wording "at all times". There are LOTS of times when a navy personel and CG are on a ship and aren't wearing their PFD's. Navy & CG - How about while below deck in mess hall? I seem to recall when the President flew on deck of the carrier LOTS of navy personal didn't have PFD's on. Then again maybe they have special T-Shirt versions of the PFD's that we don't know about and aren't available to us "civies" ;) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/images/20030501-15_lincoln9-515h.jpg PS. I have lots of pictures of CG personel doing their jobs on boats without a PFD also. Of course not out in open inflatables running at 50 kts in NY harbor, but saying the words "EVERY person on board a CG or a CG Aux vessel does wear a PFD at all times" is wrong ! http://cgvi.uscg.mil/preserver/tmp/PLS/u/uscg/apuscg_CGC_ALEX_HALEY_053LV.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.