wheels 543 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4591190 ... cket-rules Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Even though the event they refer to the guy had a heart attack. Link to post Share on other sites
Murky 1 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 In my experience, "calling" for something usually means "I am going to punt up this idea and hope that someone else latches on and runs with it." But in line with Squid's comment above, it doesn't even seem that it was worth the time they spent on the inquest, let alone enough to justify a nationwide change in legislation re lifejackets: Mr Crerar said although Mr Croad was found face down with clenched arms and hands drawn in front of his chest, a classic drowning pose, he was compelled to conclude that he had suffered a medical or emotional "event" which had contributed to his death. That "event" had rendered Mr Croad incapable of self-rescue by swimming back to the boat or to the shore but with no evidence at the autopsy, it could not be taken further, Mr Crerar said. Link to post Share on other sites
Clipper 346 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I know its just an idea, but seems a stupid one. Does this mean to say we would need lifejackets to get and from the moored boat? The shore when away cruising? I think lifejacktes are great, wear them WHEN I THINK they need to be worn. I wont when I don't. More nanny state bullsh*t. Why are we so concerned with protecting the lives of idiots? everytime an idiot survives, then breeds, we are weakening the gene pool, dumbing down the population as a whole. Long term we (global population) would be better off with more dead idiots. Link to post Share on other sites
Murky 1 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Up this way, there was a guy who suffered some kind of heart attack while he was driving, broke through the railing of a bridge and ended up at the top of the Whangarei Falls. Applying the same logic to that situation would lead to all cars being built like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, with the ability to automatically detect when they should fly or float, and equipped with an on-board defibrillator or a cardiac specialist. Surely a coroner needs to have the ability to discern between the cause of death, and the environment that the person happened to be in at the time of their death. Link to post Share on other sites
markm 30 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I liked the bit about the one of the worst drowning rates in the developed world. Interesting people should conclude that's because we don't have compulsory life jacket rules as opposed too, say, having more water suitable for recreational activities than anyone else? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Of those 263 drownings took place during recreational activities and only 27 of those people had been wearing a lifejacket, Ms Barber said, the rest were engaging in oral sex in the bathtub and a lifejacket would have been of marginal use. Link to post Share on other sites
JK 28 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I wonder if the coronor knows there is a difference between life jackets and flotation devices? I know my kids would have difficulty in their Optis if they had to wear a full Cat1 lifejacket. Why stop at small boats, I think many more people would drown off the beach. There will be much less drama on "Piha Surf Rescue" - limited to the lifeguards spending their time ensuring everyone has an approved flotation device on before going in the water & providing a bobbing cork retrieval service as they drift off. It would seriously slow down the mid-week splash & dash guys as well... Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 When you drown its the finish.You are done.Thats it.Our limited resources should be directed to those situations where a screwup often involves innocent victims and the taxpayer has to pay and pay and bloody pay forever. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Aha, 6 m = 19.6850ft, and my boat is 20ft, I can relax. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Just thinking.He got in the water to clear a prop.So it wasnt a prop they could raise up.So how is he going to get down to the prop wearing a life jacket?Obviously need a law preventing owners doing underwater repairs.What about a recommendation that underwater repairers be secured to the vessel with a line? Naaaah.......too difficult Link to post Share on other sites
Changed 10 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I love the way the figures are lumped together to support the 'cause'. Wouldn't it be relevent to look at a break down of drownings, age, location, activity etc. Has the compulsary wearing of life jackets in some areas, in boats under 6m, changed the statistic? Why are persons fishing off the rocks not required to tether on and wear flotation devices? Why aren't trampers required to carry personal EPRIBs etc., etc. Lots of vested interests in this area too with the manufacturers and suppliers of equipment having direct influence over the governing bodies through sponsorship, I think. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Who knew we have or has every heard of the 'National Pleasure Boat Safety Forum'? We deal with lots of maritime outfits inc all the 'authorities' and had never heard of that outfit before. Having a quick suss they did something in 1999 and reviewed it in 2007, part from that it doesn't look like it's a highly active outfit. A lifejacket nearly killed what is now my Wa. 14fter capsize and the jacket got caught up in the vang. If I hadn't realised at the time I wouldn't have had some of the grief I've had in the years since, nor some of the shagging thinking about it. Hmmm.....knot sure which way to call that one now There are definitely situations lifejackets should be a must, should be highly recommended and there are a few, knot many, where they should be totally up to the person aboard. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I'm starting a campaign fo rfigure skaters to wear full body armour Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I was thinking the same thing about the stats being used TM. How many of those drownings were actually from boats? They don't go further into the 27 who were wearing jackets and still drowned either. Is the coroner now going to say that we need to wear lifejackets while driving a car just in case we drive off a bridge? Would the number of drownings reduce by more if lifejackets were worn while swimming as well? Link to post Share on other sites
Murky 1 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I'm starting a campaign fo rfigure skaters to wear full body armour Rightly so too. And if any of us should ever find ourselves at a birthday party where a stripper jumps out of the cake and the guy, overcome with joy, has a heart attack and falls forward into her cleavage, an immediate cover-up will be required. Assuming we are all agreed that strippers, cleavage and cake should remain part of this proud nation's future and I think we can take that as a given. Pitch the body into a broccoli patch and do us all a favour. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 With all the flooding a lifejacket, epirb, flares, vhf etc will be needed on land soon. Link to post Share on other sites
wheels 543 Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 the rest were engaging in oral sex in the bathtub and a lifejacket would have been of marginal use. I dunno, with some of the discussions of one or two of the young guys at RC&A this week, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a floatation was used for at lest some part of their "Personal Activities" I have a friend that has a Pool. It required Fencin of course. But their property is right beside a river and That doesn't need fencing. I said it not so long ago. Many of the comments or reccomendations seem to come from Coroners. I don't see how they should be allowed to make those comments. They are supposed to find and report time and reason of Death, not what safety changes need to be made to a recreation. The incidence of this particular issue is a prime example. The guy was in the water to do a job. He could not wear a PFD doing that. So it goes to show that the Coroner is not experienced enough to be making such statements. Yet because they are a Medical Proffesional dealing with deaths, they get listened to. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 A lifejacket nearly killed what is now my Wa. 14fter capsize and the jacket got caught up in the vang. If I hadn't realised at the time I wouldn't have had some of the grief I've had in the years since, nor some of the shagging thinking about it. Hmmm.....knot sure which way to call that one now You really are one fearless mother fucker to pu that in print Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 This just appeared in my inbox via KM I noticed the drowning thread on crew.org.nz and comments about the lack of data as to where the drownings occurred. I don’t know David’s email address to send the following to so maybe you could use them or pass them on if of any interest. I am not a member of the forum. The provisional statistics for 2010 are available at http://www.watersafety.org.nz/assets/ne ... sional.pdf . The breakdown is not nearly as detailed as they used to be and the latest detailed one I have is for 1985 to 2003. What is very obvious but never mentioned is that the number of drownings off recreational decked sail boats and decked power boats is virtually non existent and the big majority of drownings are rivers, beaches, etc. The 1985 to 2003 gives a better idea of these as well as things such as car accidents, suicides, etc. Makes a mockery of all the claims that people on boats, certainly decked boats, should wear lifejackets all the time. There was a name and contact details, but don't know if he wanted them printed Drowning Statistics Media_Release_8_Aug_03.pdf Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.