Jump to content

Compulsory lifejackets


Guest

Recommended Posts

it will be just like pushbike helmets, people will just stop going because they couldn't be bothered, too many rules.

 

really? no licensing no rego or any of that other rubbish and you think its over-regulated? I'm sure it could be much worse, lets hope we don't find out

Link to post
Share on other sites
*IF* (and it's a big IF) that is adopted as-written ("unless the skipper considers the safety risk is low")... then

(a) it's of no consequence to us and

(B) it will have absolutely NO effect on the actual target group

 

Doesn't the law just give them a chance to do something about the target group?

 

This is a bylaw in many places now anyway so the amount of enforcement is unlikely to change to what you have now, in my experience most places would rather educate than write tickets, they save those for the people who really want them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn't the law just give them a chance to do something about the target group?

Hehehe, what I was implying was that the target group (or at least my jaundiced view of them) is highly unlikely even to be aware of any new law; to take heed of it even if they were; and the skippers in question would probably consider twelve metre breaking seas "safe". i.e. at best it might more successfully enable prosecution after the drowning(s).

I'm in the "more education" camp on this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grant. its well known that lots of people stopped using their cycles when the helmet laws came along. Australia and New Zealand are the only places helmets are law on cycles. And I did not say it was over regulated thats your statement. I don't agree with thisa at all, we ought to be able to decide for ourselves, being grownups and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't actually know of anyone who has stopped cycling because of the helmet law (I may have to get out more). Personally I stopped cycling because I felt it was too dangerous, everyone I work with who cycles has been hit at some stage and just I didn't want to join them.

 

You can still decide for yourself, the same way you decide now if you will wear a seat belt, speed or drive drunk.

 

It's because people decide wrong that deaths occur and people generally want to stop that.

 

It's obvious it's not going to be the total solution, just like seatbelts or speed limits aren't but if it saves a couple of lives isn't it worth it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can still decide for yourself, the same way you decide now if you will wear a seat belt, speed or drive drunk.

 

It's because people decide wrong that deaths occur and people generally want to stop that.

 

It's obvious it's not going to be the total solution, just like seatbelts or speed limits aren't but if it saves a couple of lives isn't it worth it?

A very reasonable statement - wonder if it also needs to be pointed out that those who have misgivings about this approach, or the potential ways in which it might be implemented, aren't out to make more people die.

 

Within the examples you have given e.g speed and drink driving, there are all kinds of complementary strategies that I can think of - roadside stops for drivers on long weekends, police publicising lower tolerances for speeding (again ahead of a long weekend), creative TV ads, making it more acceptable to turn down a drink, billboards, the white crosses by the side of the road...the list goes on.

 

At the moment it seems that what is most visible in relation to lifejackets is the "stick" end of the equation, which can be disconcerting for people and can stretch their trust that there is more to it. Personally I am also unclear as to why education could not take place (or take place in a way that would deliver the desired results) within the existing legislation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't actually know of anyone who has stopped cycling because of the helmet law (I may have to get out more).

 

I mostly quit cycling as the helmet kept getting vandalised when chained to the bike when parked.

I had no place to safely store the helmet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk to the people who clean up the mess and you'll find the target group or groups, there seem to be 2, are pretty well defined, generally speaking.

 

One group is a potential disaster waiting to happen and need re-education as they come from a background of doing exactly what they do that kills them in the Gulf etc. A case of staying with the same methodology but in quite different environmental conditions. This lot are highly likely to never know there has been a law change, should there be one.

 

The other just needs to think a bit harder before just doing dumb sh*t or often allowing theirs to do dumb sh*t that can too easily go wrong. This is the sh*t happens group and as we all know all the laws and safety inspectors in the world will never stop sh*t happening. This group is likely to have heard something changed but won't change much as it'll never happen to them or theirs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(...)but if it saves a couple of lives isn't it worth it?

Simple answer, no it's not.

 

Because if you take that to its logical conclusion, you will fence off every river bank and the entire coastline to stop improperly parented toddlers drowning.

OK, I'm taking it to an absurdity but the logic is sound - how much do you incovenience a large number of people to ATTEMPT to stop a couple of Darwin Award candidates from doing what they'll probably find some other way of doing anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites
(...)but if it saves a couple of lives isn't it worth it?

Simple answer, no it's not.

 

Agree 100%.

 

Apparently those of us on small trailer yachts, who have been in the game for three decades or more, won Regional, National or in some cases even world titles, would be forced to wear lifejackets, just because some headcases can't find a better way to die.

 

Oh wait, we can decide if it's safe enough to not do so. Of course, we don't already make that decision everytime we launch the boat. :?

 

So what's changed? Well, we will have to prove our "superior judgement" over the local bobby when we come ashore :crazy:

 

What a waste of time, and potentially taxpayers money.

 

Natural selection - let the dimwits drown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow you are way more feisty than here in OZ.

Perhaps its our convict history where we are brought up with "the rules"

 

 

Natural selection - let the dimwits drown.

 

But that is the whole point....they are trying to stop the dick heads from drowning.

It would be easy if you you could apply perhaps a dickhead test...prior to taking to the water. (a mulitiple question test)..or perhaps , have a dicheadadometer meter, that you could test people and then fine them if they read over the legal limit.

Maybee dickhead probation, that is ...you have to use protection until you have done it enough times with out any consequences...

The tricky point is.....

Some few pricks stuff it up for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So what's changed? Well, we will have to prove our "superior judgement" over the local bobby when we come ashore :crazy:

Actually, I'm not sure we will.

The way I read that "unless the skipper considers the risk is low"... there's nothing in there about the actual objective risk; i.e. If you, as skipper, have considered the risk to be low, that's the end of it.

Discuss :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the government would be way better off establishing some guidelines to get dimwits some boating education.

 

It belies belief that some one with no experience can go buy a launch with no idea of how to use it, what the rules are what weather actually is........

 

That way they would at least know when they should be wearing their PFD's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What ?

education before legislation ?

:?:

I couldnt agree more.

But it has to be serious. A two page pamphlet seen by almost no one is just not going to make the change.

You have to really change attitudes.

People who are exposing themselves to obvious risks need to feel that they are not been cool and out there, but rather foolish and annoying to the wider boating community, friends and family.

An example of that is a recent add campaign done here about work safety, where the enphasiss was not on the importance of the job safety as such, but more on coming home alive for for your kids.

If you feel guilty about not putting your pfd on while going to shore, great. Because if you also havnt put the pfds in the dingy ......the trip back may just be under differant conditions.

I will give you another example why the habit is good.

In a bit of a blow I had to do stuff with anchors and lines....and do it quick.

My focus was speed. I was in the dingy and bouncing around in double short time.....

It was my loverly partner who had my pfd and a loud and unconpromising voice that delayed me by , maybee 15 seconds.

I thought about this later, if I had no positive bouyancy in the water temps ( and I did come close to losing the dingy a few times)...

My chances of saving my boat would have been slim.

This is very, very relevant as we get older !

The bravdo and memories do not translate to body strength.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they need to be re designed. They are useless as they are.....

John Harkin......"I asked John whether, using 20/20 hindsight there was anything he thought they could have done differently. He thought for a long while and said no. the only piece of equipment he did criticize was the inflatable life jacket, saying when they were inflated they were uncomfortable and restricted movement severely, to the extent that if you inflate one, realistically all you can expect to do is lie on your back and await rescue ( they had models both with and without crotch straps and noticed little difference).

 

His final comment to me was that he vividly recalls holding a line from the ship in one hand while his foot was hooked through a strap on his 16 year-old son's life jacket, a situation nobody ever wants to encounter."

From.....http://www.crew.org.nz/?start=1080

Well almost useless. They have too much buoyancy, way overkill and its a hindrance. They rely on a gas bottle which may or may not work. With modern closed cell foams and just the correct amount of buoyancy designed for the weight of the person I think they would be much more reliable and allow some swimming.

I recently sat on the cord and it went off while offshore so that situation would be not happening with closed cell foam.

The bag that inflates is extremely thin and does not give confidence, easily punctured.

People about float without any help so why not have jackets that are less bulky with just enough floatation rather than the ability to float the HULK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of the problem with the "you must all wear lifejackets all the time" is that not all lifejackets are created equal.

 

Yes, there's the argument that inflatable lifejackets are available these days so there's no excuse for not wearing one (uncomfortable and bulky being the main complaints about foam jackets), but a cheap inflatable jacket is not the same as a well-designed expensive inflatable jacket ....... and there's no way I'm leaving a premium inflatable lifejacket in an unattended dinghy. Cheap or expensive, well designed or not, a poorly maintained (or not maintained) inflatable lifejacket is unlikely to inflate properly (if at all) when needed, so this magic talisman of "wearing a lifejacket" isn't going to be the universal answer that the bureaucrats may think it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...